AXA Premier VIP Trust

497 1 d497.htm AXA PREMIER VIP TRUST AXA Premier VIP Trust

LOGO

PROSPECTUS MAY 1, 2008

AXA PREMIER VIP TRUST

Multimanager Core Bond Portfolio

Multimanager Health Care Portfolio

Multimanager High Yield Portfolio

Multimanager International Equity Portfolio

Multimanager Large Cap Core Equity Portfolio

Multimanager Large Cap Growth Portfolio

Multimanager Large Cap Value Portfolio

Multimanager Mid Cap Growth Portfolio

Multimanager Mid Cap Value Portfolio

Multimanager Small Cap Growth Portfolio

Multimanager Small Cap Value Portfolio

Multimanager Technology Portfolio

The Securities and Exchange Commission has not approved any portfolio’s shares or determined whether this Prospectus is accurate or complete. Anyone who tells you otherwise is committing a crime.

(35923)

(VIP Ver 1A)

INTRODUCTION

AXA Premier VIP Trust (“Trust”) is comprised of twenty-two (22) distinct mutual funds, each with its own investment strategy and risk/reward profile. This prospectus describes Class B shares of twelve (12) of the Trust’s portfolios. The Trust has adopted a Distribution Plan pursuant to Rule 12b-1 under the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended (“1940 Act”), for the Trust’s Class B shares. Each portfolio is a diversified portfolio, except Multimanager Health Care Portfolio and Multimanager Technology Portfolio, which are non-diversified portfolios sometimes referred to as “sector portfolios.” Information on each portfolio, including its investment objective, investment strategies and investment risks, can be found on the pages following this introduction. In addition, a Glossary of Terms can also be found at the back of this prospectus. The investment objective and policies of a portfolio are not fundamental and may be changed without a shareholder vote, except where otherwise noted. Each portfolio has a policy to invest at least 80% of its net assets (plus borrowings for investment purposes) in the type of investment suggested by its name as more specifically set forth in the portfolio descriptions. These policies may not be changed without providing sixty (60) days’ written notice to shareholders of the relevant portfolio.

The Trust’s shares are currently sold only to insurance company separate accounts in connection with variable life insurance contracts and variable annuity certificates and contracts (“Contracts”) issued or to be issued by AXA Equitable Life Insurance Company (“AXA Equitable”) and other affiliated or unaffiliated insurance companies. Shares also may be sold to tax-qualified retirement plans, to other series of the Trust and to series of EQ Advisors Trust, a separate registered investment company managed by AXA Equitable. The Prospectus is designed to help you make informed decisions about the portfolios that are available under your Contract or under your retirement plan. You will find information about your Contract and how it works in the accompanying prospectus for the Contracts if you are a Contractholder or participant of a retirement plan under a Contract. Not all of the portfolios may be available under your Contract or under your retirement plan. In addition, certain of these portfolios may be available only as underlying investment portfolios of the AXA Allocation Portfolios and may not be available directly as an investment option under your Contract or under your retirement plan. You should consult your Contract prospectus or retirement plan documents to see which portfolios are available.

The investment manager to each portfolio is AXA Equitable (the “Manager”). The day-to-day management of each portfolio is provided by two or more investment sub-advisers. Information regarding AXA Equitable and the sub-advisers is included under “Management Team” in this prospectus. AXA Equitable may allocate a portfolio’s assets to additional sub-advisers subject to approval of the Trust’s board of trustees. In addition, AXA Equitable may, subject to the approval of the Trust’s board of trustees, appoint, dismiss and replace sub-advisers and amend sub-advisory agreements without obtaining shareholder approval. If a new sub-adviser is retained for a portfolio, shareholders would receive notice of such action. However, AXA Equitable may not enter into a sub-advisory agreement with an “affiliated person” of AXA Equitable (as that term is defined in Section 2(a)(3) of the 1940 Act) (“Affiliated Adviser”), such as AllianceBernstein L.P. or AXA Rosenberg Investment Management LLC, unless the sub-advisory agreement with the Affiliated Adviser is approved by the affected portfolio’s shareholders.

The co-distributors for each portfolio are AXA Advisors, LLC and AXA Distributors, LLC.

An investment in a portfolio is not a deposit of a bank and is not insured or guaranteed by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation or any other government agency. Because you could lose money by investing in these portfolios, be sure to read all risk disclosures carefully before investing.

Table of

CONTENTS


Goals, Strategies & Risks
Multimanager Core Bond Portfolio		1
Multimanager Health Care Portfolio		4
Multimanager High Yield Portfolio		6
Multimanager International Equity Portfolio		9
Multimanager Large Cap Core Equity Portfolio		11
Multimanager Large Cap Growth Portfolio		13
Multimanager Large Cap Value Portfolio		15
Multimanager Mid Cap Growth Portfolio		17
Multimanager Mid Cap Value Portfolio		19
Multimanager Small Cap Growth Portfolio		21
Multimanager Small Cap Value Portfolio		24
Multimanager Technology Portfolio		26

Portfolio Fees & Expenses		28

More About Investment Strategies & Risks
More About Investment Strategies & Risks		32

Management Team
The Manager and the Sub-advisers		36

Portfolio Services
Buying and Selling Shares		59
Restrictions on Buying and Selling Shares		59
How Portfolio Shares are Priced		60
Dividends and Other Distributions		61
Tax Consequences		62
Additional Information		62

Glossary of Terms		63

Description of Benchmarks		64

Financial Highlights		66

MULTIMANAGER CORE BOND PORTFOLIO


Manager:		AXA Equitable

Sub-advisers:		BlackRock Financial Management, Inc. Pacific Investment Management Company LLC

Key Term

•

Investment Grade Bonds — Bonds rated Baa or higher by Moody’s Investors Service, Inc. (“Moody’s”) or BBB or higher by Standard & Poor’s Ratings Service (“S&P”) and Fitch Ratings (“Fitch”).

Investment Goal

To seek a balance of a high current income and capital appreciation, consistent with a prudent level of risk.

Principal Investment Strategies

Under normal circumstances, the portfolio intends to invest at least 80% of its net assets, plus borrowings for investment purposes, in investment grade bonds. For purposes of this investment policy, a debt security is considered a “bond.” Debt securities represent an issuer’s obligation to repay a loan of money that generally pays interest to the holder. Bonds, notes and debentures are examples of debt securities. The portfolio focuses on U.S. government and corporate debt securities and mortgage- and asset-backed securities.

The portfolio may also invest, to a limited extent, in securities rated below investment grade (i.e., Ba or lower by Moody’s or BB or lower by S&P or Fitch) or, if unrated, determined by the sub-adviser to be of comparable quality (“junk bonds”). The portfolio may invest in securities denominated in foreign currencies and U.S. dollar-denominated securities of foreign issuers, including issuers located in emerging markets. Foreign currency exposure (from non-U.S. dollar-denominated securities or currencies) normally will be limited to 10% of the portfolio’s total assets. The portfolio also may invest, to a limited extent, in illiquid securities. The portfolio may engage in active and frequent trading to achieve its investment objective.

Utilizing a due diligence process covering a number of key factors, AXA Equitable selects sub-advisers to manage the portfolio’s assets. These key factors include, but are not limited to, the sub-adviser’s reputation, organizational stability, investment personnel, long-term performance, investment philosophy and style and correlation with other sub-advisers retained for other allocated portions of the portfolio. AXA Equitable normally allocates the portfolio’s assets to at least two or more sub-advisers. AXA Equitable monitors the sub-advisers and may dismiss, replace or appoint sub-advisers subject to the approval of the Trust’s board of trustees.

The portfolio’s sub-advisers evaluate several sectors of the bond market and individual securities within these sectors. The sub-advisers select bonds from several sectors including: U.S. Treasuries and agency securities, commercial and residential mortgage-backed securities, asset-backed securities, corporate bonds and bonds of foreign issuers. Securities are purchased for the portfolio when the sub-advisers determine that they have the potential for above-average total return. A sub-adviser may sell a security for a variety of reasons, such as to invest in a company believed by the sub-adviser to offer superior investment opportunities.

The portfolio may purchase bonds of any maturity, but generally the portfolio’s overall effective duration will be of an intermediate-term nature (similar to that of five- to seven-year U.S. Treasury notes) and have a comparable duration to that of the Lehman Brothers U.S. Aggregate Bond Index (currently approximately 4.45 years). Effective duration is a measure of the expected change in value from changes in interest rates. Typically, a bond with a low (short) duration means that its value is less sensitive to interest rate changes, while bonds with a high (long) duration are more sensitive.

The portfolio’s sub-advisers may, when consistent with the portfolio’s investment objective, use derivative securities. Derivative securities include futures and options contracts, options on futures contracts, foreign currencies, securities and bond indices, structured notes, swaps (including long and short credit default swaps and interest rate swaps) and indexed securities. The portfolio will typically use derivatives as a substitute for taking a position in the underlying asset and/or in an attempt to reduce risk to the portfolio as a whole (hedge), but they may also be used to maintain liquidity, commit cash pending investment or for speculation to increase returns. The portfolio may also enter into interest rate transactions as a hedging technique. In these transactions, the portfolio exchanges its right to pay or receive interest with another party for their right to pay or receive interest. Certain derivative securities may have the effect of creating financial leverage by multiplying a change in the value of the asset underlying the derivative to produce a greater change in the value of the derivative security. This creates an opportunity for increased return but, at the same time, creates the possibility for greater loss (including the likelihood of greater volatility in the net asset value of the shares of the portfolio).

the portfolio is invested in these instruments, the portfolio will not be pursuing its investment goal.

Principal Investment Risks

An investment in the portfolio is not guaranteed; you may lose money by investing in the portfolio. When you sell your shares of the portfolio, they could be worth more or less than what you paid for them.

The principal risks presented by the portfolio are:

•

Credit/Default Risk — The risk that the issuer of a security or the counter-party to a contract will default or otherwise become unable to honor a financial obligation. Securities rated below investment grade may involve a substantial risk of default. For more information see “Credit Quality Risk” in “More About Investment Strategies and Risks.”

•

Currency Risk — The risk that fluctuations in the exchange rates between the U.S. dollar and foreign currencies may negatively affect an investment. A change in the value of any such currency against the U.S. dollar will result in a change in the U.S. dollar value of a fund’s assets and income.

•

Derivatives Risk — Derivatives are financial contracts whose value is based on the value of an underlying asset, reference rate or index. The portfolio’s investment in derivatives may rise or fall more rapidly than other investments. These transactions are subject to changes in the underlying security on which such transactions are based. Even a small investment in derivative securities can have a significant impact on the portfolio’s exposure to stock market values, interest rates or currency exchange rates. Derivatives are subject to a number of risks such as liquidity risk, interest rate risk, market risk, credit/default risk and portfolio management risk depending on the type of underlying asset, reference rate or index. They also involve the risk of mispricing or improper valuation and the risk that changes in the value of a derivative may not correlate well with the underlying asset, reference rate or index. The possible lack of a liquid secondary market for derivatives and the resulting inability of the portfolio to sell or otherwise close a derivatives position could expose the portfolio to losses and could make derivatives more difficult for the portfolio to value accurately. These types of transactions will be used primarily as a substitute for taking a position in the underlying asset and/or for hedging purposes. When a derivative security is used as a hedge against an offsetting position that the portfolio also holds, any loss generated by the derivative security should be substantially offset by gains on the hedged instrument, and vice versa. To the extent that the portfolio uses a derivative security for purposes other than as a hedge, the portfolio is directly exposed to the risks of that derivative security and any loss generated by the derivative security will not be offset by a gain.

•

Foreign Investing and Emerging Markets Risk — The value of the portfolio’s investments in foreign securities may fall due to adverse political, social and economic developments abroad and due to decreases in foreign currency values relative to the U.S. dollar. Foreign markets also may be less liquid and more volatile than U.S. markets. These risks are greater generally for investments in emerging market issuers than for issuers in more developed countries.

•

Interest Rate Risk — The risk of market losses attributable to changes in interest rates. When interest rates decline, the value of the portfolio’s debt securities generally rises. Conversely, when interest rates rise, the value of the portfolio’s debt securities generally declines. The magnitude of the decline will often be greater for longer-term debt securities than shorter-term debt securities.

•

Investment Grade Securities Risk — Debt securities generally are rated by national bond rating agencies. Securities rated BBB and higher by S&P or Fitch and Baa or higher by Moody’s (or, if unrated, determined by the sub-adviser to be of comparable quality) are considered investment grade securities, but securities rated BBB or Baa (or, if unrated, determined by the sub-adviser to be of comparable quality) are somewhat riskier than higher rated obligations because they are regarded as having only an adequate capacity to pay principal and interest, and are considered to lack outstanding investment characteristics.

•

Issuer-Specific Risk — The value of an individual security or particular type of security can be more volatile than the market as a whole and can perform differently from the market as a whole. The portfolio could lose all of its investment in a company’s securities.

•

Leverage Risk — The risk associated with securities or practices (e.g. borrowing) that multiply small price movements into large changes in value.

•

Liquidity Risk — The risk that certain securities may be difficult or impossible to sell at the time and the price that the seller would like. This may result in a loss or may be costly to a portfolio.

•

Lower-Rated Securities Risk — Bonds rated below investment grade (i.e., BB or lower by S&P or Fitch or Ba or lower by Moody’s) are speculative in nature, involve greater risk of default by the issuing entity and may be subject to greater market fluctuations than higher rated fixed income securities. For more information, see “Lower-Rated Securities Risk” in “More About Investment Strategies & Risks.”

•

Mortgage-Backed and Asset-Backed Securities Risk — The risk that the principal on mortgage- or asset-backed securities may be prepaid at any time which will reduce the yield and market value. If interest rates fall, the rate of prepayments tends to increase as borrowers are motivated to pay off debt and refinance at new lower rates. Rising interest rates tend to extend the duration of mortgage-related securities, making them more sensitive to changes in interest rates. As a result, in a period of rising interest rates, a portfolio that holds mortgage-related securities may exhibit additional volatility. This is known as extension risk. For more information, see “Mortgage Backed and Asset-Backed Securities Risk” in “More About Investment Strategies & Risks.”

•

Portfolio Management Risk — The risk that the strategies used by a portfolio’s sub-advisers and their securities selections fail to produce the intended result.

•

Portfolio Turnover Risk — High portfolio turnover may result in increased transaction costs to a portfolio, which would reduce investment returns.

•

Sub-Adviser Selection Risk — The risk that AXA Equitable’s process for selecting or replacing a sub-adviser and its decision to select or replace a sub-adviser does not produce the intended result.

More information about the risks of an investment in the portfolio is provided below in “More About Investment Strategies & Risks.”

PORTFOLIO PERFORMANCE

The following information gives some indication of the risks of an investment in the portfolio by showing yearly changes in the portfolio’s performance and by comparing the portfolio’s performance with a broad measure of market performance. Both the bar chart and table below assume reinvestment of dividends and other distributions and include the effect of expense limitations that were in place during the period shown. The performance results presented below do not reflect any insurance and Contract-related fees and expenses, which would reduce the performance results. Since AXA Equitable may appoint, dismiss or replace the sub-advisers for a portfolio, the portfolio’s historical performance may cover periods when portions of the portfolio were advised by different sub-advisers. Past performance is not an indication of future performance.

The following bar chart illustrates the calendar year annual total returns for the periods indicated. The inception date for the portfolio is December 31, 2001.

Calendar Year Annual Total Returns — Class B

LOGO


Best quarter (% and time period)		Worst quarter (% and time period)
3.37% (2006 3rd Quarter)		–2.17% (2004 2nd Quarter)

The table below shows how the average annual total returns for the one-year, five-year and since-inception periods ended December 31, 2007 compare to those of a broad-based index.


Average Annual Total Returns
	One Year	Five Years	Since Inception
Multimanager Core Bond Portfolio — Class B	6.23%	3.87%	4.58%
Lehman Brothers U.S. Aggregate Bond Index*	6.97%	4.42%	5.37%

For more information on this index, see “Description of Benchmarks.”

MULTIMANAGER HEALTH CARE PORTFOLIO


Manager:		AXA Equitable

Sub-advisers:		Invesco Aim Capital Management, Inc. RCM Capital Management LLC Wellington Management Company, LLP

Key Term

•

Sector Portfolio — A portfolio that invests in only a subset of the overall equity market, in this case the Health Care Sector.

Investment Goal

Long-term growth of capital.

Principal Investment Strategies

Under normal circumstances, the portfolio intends to invest at least 80% of its net assets, plus borrowings for investment purposes, in equity securities of companies primarily engaged in the research, development, production or distribution of products or services related to health care, medicine or the life sciences (collectively termed “health sciences”). While the portfolio can invest in securities of U.S. and foreign companies of any size, the majority of portfolio assets are expected to be invested in securities of U.S. companies.

The health sciences sector consists of four main areas:

pharmaceutical, health care services companies, product and device providers and biotechnology firms. The portfolio’s allocation among these four areas will vary depending on the relative potential within each area and the outlook for the overall health sciences sector.

The sub-advisers select securities through fundamental analysis, such as an analysis of earnings, cash flows, competitive position and management’s abilities. The sub-advisers may sell a security for a variety of reasons, such as to invest in a company with more attractive growth prospects.

For temporary defensive purposes, the portfolio may invest, without limit, in cash, money market instruments or high quality short-term debt securities, including repurchase agreements. To the extent that the portfolio is invested in these instruments, the portfolio will not be pursuing its investment goal.

Principal Investment Risks

The principal risks presented by the portfolio are:

•

Equity Risk — Stocks and other equity securities generally fluctuate in value more than bonds and may decline in value over short or extended periods. The value of such securities will change based on changes in a company’s financial condition and in overall market and economic conditions.

•

Foreign Investing Risk — The value of the portfolio’s investments in foreign securities may fall due to adverse political, social and economic developments abroad and decreases in foreign currency values relative to the U.S. dollar. Foreign markets also may be less liquid and more volatile than U.S. markets.

•

Health Care Sector Risk — The value of the portfolio’s shares is particularly vulnerable to factors affecting the health care sector, such as substantial government regulation. Also, the products and services offered by health care companies may be subject to rapid obsolescence caused by scientific advances and technological innovations.

•

Large Capitalization Risk — Larger more established companies may be unable to respond quickly to new competitive challenges such as changes in technology and consumer tastes. Many larger companies also may not be able to attain the high growth rate of successful smaller companies, especially during extended periods of economic expansion.

•

Non-Diversification Risk — As a non-diversified mutual fund, more of the portfolio’s assets may be focused in the common stocks of a small number of issuers, which may make the value of the portfolio’s shares more sensitive to changes in the market value of a single issuer or industry than shares of a diversified mutual fund.

•

Portfolio Management Risk — The risk that the strategies used by a portfolio’s sub-advisers and their securities selections fail to produce the intended result.

•

Portfolio Turnover Risk — High portfolio turnover may result in increased transaction costs to a portfolio, which would reduce investment returns.

•

Sector Concentration Risk — Since the portfolio invests primarily in a particular sector, it could experience greater volatility than stock funds investing in a broader range of industries.

•

Small- and Mid-Capitalization Risk — To the extent the portfolio invests in securities of small- and mid-capitalization issuers, it will be exposed to the risks of investing in such issuers. The portfolio’s investments in small-cap and mid-cap companies may involve greater risks than investments in larger, more established issuers. Many companies in the health care sector have relatively small market capitalization. Risk is greater for the common stocks of small- and mid-capitalization companies because they generally are more vulnerable than larger companies to adverse business or economic developments. Smaller companies generally have narrower product lines, more limited financial resources and more limited markets for their stock as compared with larger companies. Their securities may be less well-known and trade less frequently and in limited volume compared with the securities of larger, more established companies. As a result, the value of such securities may be more volatile than the securities of larger companies, and the portfolio may experience difficulty in purchasing or selling such securities at the desired time and price. In addition, small-cap and mid-cap companies are typically subject to greater changes in earnings and business prospects than larger companies. Consequently, the prices of small-cap and mid-cap company stocks tend to rise and fall in value more frequently than the stocks of larger companies. Although investing in small-cap and mid-cap companies offers potential for above-average returns, the companies may not succeed and the value of their stock could decline significantly. In general, these risks are greater for small-capitalization companies than for mid-capitalization companies.

•

More information about the risks of an investment in the portfolio is provided below in “More About Investment Strategies & Risks.”

PORTFOLIO PERFORMANCE

The following bar chart illustrates the calendar year annual total returns for the periods indicated. The inception date for the portfolio is December 31, 2001.

Calendar Year Annual Total Returns — Class B

LOGO


Best quarter (% and time period)		Worst quarter (% and time period)
18.42% (2003 2nd Quarter)		–13.46% (2002 2nd Quarter)

The table below shows how the average annual total returns for the one-year, five-year and since-inception periods ended December 31, 2007 compare to those of a broad-based index and an index that the manager believes more closely reflects the market sector in which the portfolio invests.


Average Annual Total Returns
	One Year	Five Years	Since Inception
Multimanager Health Care Portfolio — Class B	9.04%	11.97%	5.89%
Russell 1000 Index*	5.77%	13.43%	6.65%
Russell 1000 Healthcare Index*^#	7.52%	8.48%	3.14%

The Manager believes that this index more closely reflects the market sector in which the portfolio invests.

For more information on this index, see “Description of Benchmarks.”

MULTIMANAGER HIGH YIELD PORTFOLIO


Manager:		AXA Equitable

Sub-adviser:		Pacific Investment Management Company LLC Post Advisory Group, LLC

Key Term

•

Below Investment Grade Bonds — Bonds rated BB or lower by S&P or Fitch and Ba or lower by Moody’s and pay a higher yield to compensate for their greater risk.

Investment Goal

High total return through a combination of current income and capital appreciation.

Principal Investment Strategies

Under normal circumstances, the portfolio intends to invest at least 80% of its net assets, plus borrowings for investment purposes, in a diversified mix of bonds that are rated below investment grade (so called “junk bonds”), which generally involve greater volatility of price and risk to principal and income than higher quality fixed income securities. For purposes of this investment policy, a debt security is considered a “bond.” Debt securities represent an issuer’s obligation to repay a loan of money that generally pays interest to the holder. Bonds, notes and debentures are examples of debt securities. Junk bonds generally have a higher current yield but are rated Ba or lower by Moody’s or BB or lower by S&P or Fitch or, if unrated, are determined to be of comparable quality by a sub-adviser. In the event that any securities held by the portfolio fall below those ratings at the time of purchase, the portfolio will not be obligated to dispose of such securities and may continue to hold such securities if the sub-adviser believes that such investments are considered appropriate under the circumstances.

The portfolio, may invest, to a limited extent, in securities denominated in foreign currencies and U.S. dollar-denominated securities of foreign issuers, including issuers located in emerging markets. Foreign currency exposure (from non-U.S. dollar-denominated securities or currencies) normally will be limited to 10% of the portfolio’s total assets. The portfolio also may invest, to a limited extent, in illiquid securities. The portfolio may engage in active and frequent trading to achieve its investment objective.

The portfolio’s sub-advisers evaluate several sectors of the bond market and individual securities within these sectors. The sub-advisers select bonds from several sectors including: commercial and residential mortgage-backed securities, asset-backed securities, corporate bonds and bonds of foreign issuers, including issuers located in emerging markets. The portfolio will attempt to maximize current income by taking advantage of market developments, yield disparities and variations in the creditworthiness of issuers. Substantially all of the portfolio’s investments will be income producing. A sub-adviser may sell a security for a variety of reasons, such as to invest in a company believed by the sub-adviser to offer superior investment opportunities.

The portfolio’s sub-advisers may, when consistent with the portfolio’s investment objective, use derivative securities. Derivative securities include futures and options contracts, options on futures contracts, foreign currencies, securities and bond indices, structured notes, swaps (including long and short credit default swaps and interest rate swaps) and indexed securities. The portfolio will typically use derivatives as a substitute for taking a position in the underlying asset and/or in an attempt to reduce risk to the portfolio as a whole (hedge), but they may also be used to maintain liquidity, commit cash pending investment or for speculation to increase returns. Certain derivative securities may have the effect of creating financial leverage by multiplying a change in the value of the asset underlying the derivative to produce a greater change in the value of the derivative security. This creates an opportunity for increased return but, at the same time, creates the possibility for greater loss (including the likelihood of greater volatility in the net asset value of the shares of the portfolio). The portfolio may also invest in participations and assignments of loans originally made by institutional lenders or lending syndicates. The portfolio’s sub-adviser’s may also make use of various other investment strategies, including investments in common stocks and other equity-type securities (such as convertible debt securities) and secured loans of its portfolio securities in order to enhance its current return and to reduce fluctuations in net asset value.

The portfolio may also invest in fixed income securities that are providing high current yields because of risks other than credit, such as prepayment risks, in the case of mortgage-backed securities, or currency risks, in the case of non-U.S. dollar denominated foreign securities.

other sub-advisers retained for other allocated portions of the portfolio. AXA Equitable normally allocates the portfolio’s assets to at least two or more sub-advisers. AXA Equitable monitors the sub-advisers and may dismiss, replace or appoint sub-advisers, subject to the approval of the Trust’s board of trustees.

Principal Investment Risks

The principal risks presented by the portfolio are:

•

Credit/Default Risk — The risk that an issuer of a security or the counter-party to a contract will default or otherwise become unable to honor a financial obligation. Securities rated below investment grade may involve a substantial risk of default. For more information, see “Credit Quality Risk” in “More About Investment Strategies and Risks.”

•

Leverage Risk — The risk associated with securities or practices (e.g. borrowing) that multiply small price movements into large changes in value.

•

Loan Participation and Assignment Risk — The portfolio’s investments in loan participations and assignments are subject to the risk that the financial institution acting as agent for all interests in a loan might fail financially. It is also possible that the portfolio could be held liable as a co-lender.

•

Portfolio Management Risk — The risk that the strategies used by a portfolio’s sub-advisers and their securities selections fail to produce the intended result.

•

Portfolio Turnover Risk — High portfolio turnover may result in increased transaction costs to a portfolio, which would reduce investment returns.

•

More information about the risks of an investment in the portfolio is provided below in “More About Investment Strategies & Risks.”

PORTFOLIO PERFORMANCE

The portfolio’s performance shown below includes the performance of its predecessor registered investment company. On August 15, 2003, the portfolio merged with EQ/High Yield Portfolio, a series of EQ Advisors Trust, which is a separate trust managed by AXA Equitable, and assumed its operating history and performance record, which, in turn, assumed the operating history and performance record of its predecessor, HRT Alliance High Yield Portfolio, which transferred its assets to the EQ/High Yield Portfolio on October 19, 1999. The performance included in the bar chart and table below for the periods between October 19, 1999 and August 15, 2003 is that of EQ/High Yield Portfolio and the performance shown for periods prior to October 19, 1999 is that of HRT Alliance High Yield Portfolio, whose inception date is January 2, 1987. The performance results of these portfolios have been linked for purposes of this presentation.

The following information gives some indication of the risks of an investment in the portfolio by showing yearly changes in the portfolio’s performance and by comparing the portfolio’s performance with a broad measure of market performance. Both the bar chart and table below assume reinvestment of dividends and other distributions. The performance results presented below do not reflect any insurance and Contract-related fees and expenses, which would reduce the performance results. Since AXA Equitable may appoint, dismiss or replace the sub-advisers for a portfolio, the portfolio’s historical performance may cover periods when portions of the portfolio were advised by different sub-advisers. Past performance is not an indication of future performance. This may be particularly true for this portfolio because the portfolio’s predecessor was advised by one investment sub-adviser until July 15, 2002. After that date, the predecessor portfolio employed multiple investment sub-advisers.

The following bar chart illustrates the calendar year annual total returns for the periods indicated.

Calendar Year Annual Total Returns — Class B

LOGO


Best quarter (% and time period)		Worst quarter (% and time period)
7.69% (2003 2nd Quarter)		–11.09% (1998 3rd Quarter)

The table below shows how the average annual total returns for the one-year, five-year and ten-year periods ended December 31, 2007 compare to those of a broad-based index.


Average Annual Total Returns
	One Year	Five Years	Ten Years
Multimanager High Yield Portfolio — Class B	3.18%	9.29%	2.38%
Merrill Lynch High Yield Master Cash Pay Only Index*	2.21%	10.57%	5.80%

For more information on this index, see “Description of Benchmarks.”

MULTIMANAGER INTERNATIONAL EQUITY PORTFOLIO


Manager:		AXA Equitable

Sub-advisers:		AllianceBernstein L.P. JPMorgan Investment Management Inc. Marsico Capital Management, LLC

Key Term

•

International Investing — Focuses primarily on companies organized or headquartered outside the U.S.

Investment Goal

Long-term growth of capital.

Principal Investment Strategies

Under normal circumstances, the portfolio intends to invest at least 80% of its net assets, plus borrowings for investment purposes, in equity securities of companies, including at least 65% of its total assets in equity securities of foreign companies (companies organized or headquartered outside of the U.S.). Foreign securities include securities issued by companies in countries with either developed or developing economies. The portfolio does not limit its investment to issuers within a specific market capitalization range.

Each of the sub-advisers utilizes an approach that concentrates its efforts on identifying foreign companies with good prospects for future growth. Other factors, such as country and regional factors, are considered by the sub-advisers. While the sub-advisers believe that the identification, research and selection of individual stocks is of great importance to the portfolio’s success, regional issues or political and economic considerations also play a role in the overall success of the portfolio. The sub-advisers may sell a security for a variety of reasons, such as to invest in a company offering superior investment opportunities.

For temporary defensive purposes, the portfolio may invest, without limit, in U.S. securities, cash, money market instruments or high quality short-term debt securities, including repurchase agreements. To the extent that the portfolio is invested in these cash instruments, the portfolio will not be pursuing its investment goal.

Principal Investment Risks

The principal risks presented by the portfolio are:

•

Large Capitalization Risk — Larger more established companies may be unable to respond quickly to new competitive challenges such as changes in technology and consumer tastes. Many larger

companies also may not be able to attain the high growth rate of successful smaller companies, especially during extended periods of economic expansion.

•

Portfolio Management Risk — The risk that the strategies used by a portfolio’s sub-advisers and their securities selections fail to produce the intended result.

•

Small- and Mid-Capitalization Risk — To the extent the portfolio invests in securities of small- and mid-capitalization issuers, it will be exposed to the risks of investing in such issuers. The portfolio’s investments in small-cap and mid-cap companies may involve greater risks than investments in larger, more established issuers. Risk is greater for the common stocks of small- and mid-capitalization companies because they generally are more vulnerable than larger companies to adverse business or economic developments. Smaller companies generally have narrower product lines, more limited financial resources and more limited markets for their stock as compared with larger companies. Their securities may be less well-known and trade less frequently and in limited volume compared with the securities of larger, more established companies. As a result, the value of such securities may be more volatile than the securities of larger companies, and the portfolio may experience difficulty in purchasing or selling such securities at the desired time and price. In addition, small-cap and mid-cap companies are typically subject to greater changes in earnings and business prospects than larger companies. Consequently, the prices of small-cap and mid-cap company stocks tend to rise and fall in value more frequently than the stocks of larger companies. Although investing in small-cap and mid-cap companies offers potential for above-average returns, the companies may not succeed and the value of their stock could decline significantly. In general, these risks are greater for small-capitalization companies than for mid-capitalization companies.

•

More information about the risks of an investment in the portfolio is provided below in “More About Investment Strategies & Risks.”

PORTFOLIO PERFORMANCE

The following information gives some indication of the risks of an investment in the portfolio by showing yearly changes in the portfolio’s performance and by comparing the portfolio’s performance with a broad measure of market performance. Both the bar chart and table below assume reinvestment of dividends and other distributions and include the effect of expense limitations that were in place during the period shown. The performance results presented below do not reflect any insurance and Contract-related fees and expenses, which would reduce the performance results. Since AXA Equitable may appoint, dismiss or replace the sub- advisers for a portfolio, the portfolio’s historical performance may cover periods when portions of the portfolio were advised by different sub-advisers. Past performance is not an indication of future performance.

The following bar chart illustrates the calendar year annual total returns for the periods indicated. The inception date for the portfolio is December 31, 2001.

Calendar Year Annual Total Returns — Class B

LOGO


Best quarter (% and time period)		Worst quarter (% and time period)
23.09% (2003 2nd Quarter)		–22.16% (2002 3rd Quarter)

The table below shows how the average annual total returns for the one-year, five-year and since-inception periods ended December 31, 2007 compare to those of a broad-based index.


Average Annual Total Returns
	One Year	Five Years	Since Inception
Multimanager International Equity Portfolio — Class B	12.39%	20.84%	12.60%
Morgan Stanley Capital International EAFE Index*	11.17%	21.59%	14.33%

For more information on this index, see “Description of Benchmarks.”

MULTIMANAGER LARGE CAP CORE EQUITY PORTFOLIO


Manager:		AXA Equitable

Sub-advisers:		AllianceBernstein L.P. Janus Capital Management LLC Thornburg Investment Management, Inc.

Key Terms

•

Core Investing — An investment style that includes both the strategies used when seeking either growth companies (those with strong earnings growth) or value companies (those that may be temporarily out of favor or have earnings or assets not fully reflected in their stock price).

•

Large Cap Companies — Companies with market capitalization in excess of $5 billion.

Investment Goal

Long-term growth of capital.

Principal Investment Strategies

Under normal circumstances, the portfolio intends to invest at least 80% of its net assets, plus borrowings for investment purposes, in equity securities of U.S. large capitalization companies. Large capitalization companies are companies with market capitalization in excess of $5 billion at the time of investment.

Each sub-adviser generally chooses investments that include either companies with above average growth prospects, companies selling at reasonable valuations, or both. Among other things, these processes involve researching and evaluating individual companies for potential investment. Each sub-adviser may sell a security for a variety of reasons, such as to invest in a company offering superior investment opportunities.

Principal Investment Risks

The principal risks presented by the portfolio are:

•

Portfolio Management Risk — The risk that the strategies used by a portfolio’s sub-advisers and their securities selections fail to produce the intended result.

•

More information about the risks of an investment in the portfolio is provided below in “More About Investment Strategies & Risks.”

PORTFOLIO PERFORMANCE

The following bar chart illustrates the calendar year annual total returns for the periods indicated. The inception date for the portfolio is December 31, 2001.

Calendar Year Annual Total Returns — Class B

LOGO


Best quarter (% and time period)		Worst quarter (% and time period)
16.01% (2003 2nd Quarter)		–15.50% (2002 3rd Quarter)

The table below shows how the average annual total returns for the one-year, five-year and since-inception periods ended December 31, 2007 compare to those of a broad-based index.


Average Annual Total Returns
	One Year	Five Years	Since Inception
Multimanager Large Cap Core Equity Portfolio — Class B	5.05%	12.34%	5.59%
Standard & Poor’s 500 Index*	5.49%	12.83%	6.07%

For more information on this index, see “Description of Benchmarks.”

MULTIMANAGER LARGE CAP GROWTH PORTFOLIO


Manager:		AXA Equitable

Sub-advisers:		RCM Capital Management LLC TCW Investment Management Company T. Rowe Price Associates, Inc.

Key Terms

•

Growth Investing — An investment style that emphasizes companies with strong earnings growth. Growth investing is generally considered more aggressive than “value” investing.

•

Large Cap Companies — Companies with market capitalization in excess of $5 billion.

Investment Goal

Long-term growth of capital.

Principal Investment Strategies

The portfolio intends to invest primarily in common stocks, but it may also invest in other securities that the sub-advisers believe provide opportunities for capital growth, such as preferred stocks, warrants and securities convertible into common stock. The portfolio also may invest, to a limited extent, in derivatives, including futures and options. The portfolio may invest, to a limited extent, in foreign securities, including depositary receipts of foreign based companies, and companies based in developing countries. The portfolio may invest, to a limited extent, in illiquid securities.

The sub-advisers focus on identifying companies expected to grow at a faster rate than the U.S. economy. This process involves researching and evaluating individual companies for potential investment. The sub-advisers may sell a security for a variety of reasons, including to seek more attractive growth prospects.

Principal Investment Risks

The principal risks presented by the portfolio are:

•

Equity Risk — Stocks and other equity securities generally fluctuate in value more than bonds and may decline in value over short or extended periods. The value of such securities will change

based on changes in a company’s financial condition and in overall market and economic conditions.

•

Investment Style Risk — The sub-advisers primarily use a particular style or set of styles – in this case “growth” styles – to select investments for the portfolio. Those styles may be out of favor or may not produce the best results over short or longer time periods. They may also increase the volatility of the portfolio’s share price. Growth stocks tend to be more volatile than value stocks, so in a declining market, their prices may decrease more than value stocks in general.

•

Portfolio Management Risk — The risk that the strategies used by a portfolio’s sub-advisers and their securities selections fail to produce the intended result.

•

More information about the risks of an investment in the portfolio is provided below in “More About Investment Strategies & Risks.”

PORTFOLIO PERFORMANCE

The following information gives some indication of the risks of an investment in the portfolio by showing yearly changes in the portfolio’s performance and by comparing the portfolio’s performance with a broad measure of market performance. Both the bar chart and table below assume reinvestment of dividends and other distributions and include the effect of expense limitations that were in place during the period shown. The performance results presented below do not reflect any insurance and Contract-related fees and expenses, which would reduce the performance results. Since AXA Equitable may appoint, dismiss or replace the sub- advisers for a portfolio, the portfolio’s historical performance may cover periods when portions of the portfolio were advised by different sub-advisers. Past performance is not an indication of future performance.

The following bar chart illustrates the calendar year annual total returns for the periods indicated. The inception date for the portfolio is December 31, 2001.

Calendar Year Annual Total Returns — Class B

LOGO


Best quarter (% and time period)		Worst quarter (% and time period)
13.40% (2003 2nd Quarter)		–19.07% (2002 2nd Quarter)

The table below shows how the average annual total returns for the one-year, five-year and since-inception periods ended December 31, 2007 compare to those of a broadbased index.


Average Annual Total Returns
	One Year	Five Years	Since Inception
Multimanager Large Cap Growth Portfolio — Class B	11.26%	10.77%	2.32%
Russell 1000 Growth Index*	11.81%	12.11%	4.16%

For more information on this index, see “Description of Benchmarks.”

MULTIMANAGER LARGE CAP VALUE PORTFOLIO


Manager:		AXA Equitable

Sub-advisers:		AllianceBernstein L.P. Institutional Capital LLC MFS Investment Management

Key Terms

•

Value Investing — An investment style that focuses on companies that may be temporarily out of favor or have earnings or assets not fully reflected in their stock prices.

•

Large Cap Companies — Companies with market capitalization in excess of $5 billion.

Investment Goal

Long-term growth of capital.

Principal Investment Strategies

The sub-advisers focus primarily on stocks that are currently under-priced using certain financial measurements, including the stock’s price-to-earnings and price-to-book ratios and dividend income potential. This process involves researching and evaluating individual companies for potential investment. This approach often leads the portfolio to focus on “strong companies” in out-of-favor sectors or out-of-favor companies exhibiting a catalyst for change. The sub-advisers may sell a security for a variety of reasons, such as because it becomes overvalued or shows deteriorating fundamentals.

Principal Investment Risks

The principal risks presented by the portfolio are:

•

Investment Style Risk — The sub-advisers primarily use a particular style or set of styles – in this case “value” styles – to select investments for the portfolio. Those styles may be out of favor or may not produce the best results over short or longer time periods. They may also increase the volatility of the portfolio’s share price.

•

Large Capitalization Risk — Larger more established companies may be unable to respond quickly to new competitive challenges such as changes in technology and consumer tastes. Many larger

companies also may not be able to attain the high growth rate of successful smaller companies, especially during extended periods of economic expansion.

•

Portfolio Management Risk — The risk that the strategies used by a portfolio’s sub-advisers and their securities selections fail to produce the intended result.

•

More information about the risks of an investment in the portfolio is provided below in “More About Investment Strategies & Risks.”

PORTFOLIO PERFORMANCE

The following bar chart illustrates the calendar year annual total returns for the periods indicated. The inception date for the portfolio is December 31, 2001.

Calendar Year Annual Total Returns — Class B

LOGO


Best quarter (% and time period)		Worst quarter (% and time period)
15.27% (2003 2nd Quarter)		–17.12% (2002 3rd Quarter)

The table below shows how the average annual total returns for the one-year, five-year and since-inception periods ended December 31, 2007 compare to those of a broad-based index.


Average Annual Total Returns
	One Year	Five Years	Since Inception
Multimanager Large Cap Value Portfolio — Class B	3.61%	14.71%	8.06%
Russell 1000 Value Index*	(0.17)%	14.63%	8.94%

For more information on this index, see “Description of Benchmarks.”

MULTIMANAGER MID CAP GROWTH PORTFOLIO


Manager:		AXA Equitable

Sub-advisers:		AllianceBernstein L.P. Franklin Advisers, Inc. Provident Investment Counsel, Inc.

Key Terms

•

Growth Investing — An investment style that emphasizes companies with strong earnings growth. Growth investing is generally considered more aggressive than “value” investing.

•

Mid Cap Companies — Companies with market capitalization within the range of companies in the Russell 2500 Growth Index.

Investment Goal

Long-term growth of capital.

Principal Investment Strategies

Under normal circumstances, the portfolio intends to invest at least 80% of its net assets, plus borrowings for investment purposes, in equity securities of U.S. mid-capitalization companies. Mid-capitalization companies are companies with market capitalization within the range of companies in the Russell 2500 Growth Index at the time of investment. As of December 31, 2007, the market capitalization of companies included in this index ranged from approximately $47 million to $20.6 billion.

The sub-advisers utilize an aggressive, growth-oriented investment style that emphasizes companies that are either in or entering into the growth phase of their business cycle. In choosing investments, sub-advisers utilize a process that involves researching and evaluating individual companies for potential investment. The sub-advisers may sell a security for a variety of reasons, such as to invest in a company offering superior investment opportunities.

Principal Investment Risks

The principal risks presented by the portfolio are:

•

Mid-Capitalization Risk — The portfolio’s investments in mid-cap companies may involve greater risks than investments in larger, more established issuers. Risk is greater for the common stocks of mid-capitalization companies because they generally are more vulnerable than larger companies to adverse business or economic developments. Such companies generally have narrower product lines, more limited financial resources and more limited markets for their stock as compared with larger companies. Their securities may be less well-known and trade less frequently and in limited volume compared with the securities of larger, more established companies. As a result, the value of such securities may be more volatile than the securities of larger companies, and the portfolio may experience difficulty in purchasing or selling such securities at the desired time and price. In addition, mid-cap companies are typically subject to greater changes in earnings and business prospects than larger companies. Consequently, the prices of mid-cap company stocks tend to rise and fall in value more frequently than the stocks of larger companies. Although investing in mid-cap companies offers potential for above-average returns, the companies may not succeed and the value of their stock could decline significantly.

•

Portfolio Management Risk — The risk that the strategies used by a portfolio’s sub-advisers and their securities selections fail to produce the intended result.

•

More information about the risks of an investment in the portfolio is provided below in “More About Investment Strategies & Risks.”

PORTFOLIO PERFORMANCE

The following bar chart illustrates the calendar year annual total returns for the periods indicated. The inception date for the portfolio is December 31, 2001.

Calendar Year Annual Total Returns — Class B

LOGO


Best quarter (% and time period)		Worst quarter (% and time period)
20.36% (2003 2nd Quarter)		–21.61% (2002 2nd Quarter)

The table below shows how the average annual total returns for the one-year, five-year and since-inception periods ended December 31, 2007 compare to those of a broad-based index.


Average Annual Total Returns
	One Year	Five Years	Since Inception
Multimanager Mid Cap Growth Portfolio — Class B	11.97%	15.84%	4.60%
Russell Midcap Growth Index*	11.43%	17.90%	8.74%
Russell 2500 Growth Index^,*	9.69%	17.43%	7.96%

For more information on this index, see “Description of Benchmarks.”

Effective as of the date of this Prospectus, the Portfolio has changed its benchmark from the Russell Midcap Growth Index to the Russell 2500 Growth Index. The Portfolio changed its benchmark because the Manager believes that the Russell 2500 Growth Index represents a better comparison against which to measure the Portfolio’s performance.

MULTIMANAGER MID CAP VALUE PORTFOLIO


Manager:		AXA Equitable

Sub-advisers:		AXA Rosenberg Investment Management LLC TCW Investment Management Company Wellington Management Company, LLP

Key Terms

•

Value Investing — An investment style that focuses on companies that may be temporarily out of favor or have earnings or assets not fully reflected in their stock prices.

•

Mid Cap Companies — Companies with market capitalization within the range of companies in the Russell 2500 Value Index.

Investment Goal

Long-term growth of capital.

Principal Investment Strategies

Under normal circumstances, the portfolio intends to invest at least 80% of its net assets, plus borrowings for investment purposes, in equity securities of U.S. mid-capitalization companies. Mid-capitalization companies are companies with market capitalization within the range of companies in the Russell 2500 Value Index at the time of investment. As of December 31, 2007, the market capitalization of such companies within this index ranged from approximately $27 million to $7.7 billion.

The sub-advisers utilize a value-oriented investment style that emphasizes companies deemed to be currently under-priced according to certain financial measurements, which may include price-to-earnings and price-to-book ratios and dividend income potential. This process involves researching and evaluating individual companies for potential investment by the portfolio. This approach will often lead the portfolio to focus on “strong companies” in out-of-favor sectors or out-of-favor companies exhibiting a catalyst for change. The sub-advisers may sell a security for a variety of reasons, such as because it becomes overvalued or shows deteriorating fundamentals.

Principal Investment Risks

The principal risks presented by the portfolio are:

•

Portfolio Management Risk — The risk that the strategies used by a portfolio’s sub-advisers and their securities selections fail to produce the intended result.

•

More information about the risks of an investment in the portfolio is provided below in “More About Investment Strategies & Risks.”

PORTFOLIO PERFORMANCE

The following bar chart illustrates the calendar year annual total returns for the periods indicated. The inception date for the portfolio is December 31, 2001.

Calendar Year Annual Total Returns — Class B

LOGO


Best quarter (% and time period)		Worst quarter (% and time period)
19.67% (2003 2nd Quarter)		–20.14% (2002 3rd Quarter)

The table below shows how the average annual total returns for the one-year, five-year and since-inception periods ended December 31, 2007 compare to those of a broad-based index.


Average Annual Total Returns
	One Year	Five Years	Since Inception
Multimanager Mid Cap Value Portfolio — Class B	0.10%	14.83%	6.89%
Russell Midcap Value Index*	(1.42)%	17.92%	12.80%
Russell 2500 Value Index^,*	(7.27)%	16.17%	11.36%

For more information on this index, see “Description of Benchmarks.”

Effective as of the date of this Prospectus, the Portfolio has changed its benchmark from the Russell Midcap Value Index to the Russell 2500 Value Index. The Portfolio changed its benchmark because the Manager believes that the Russell 2500 Value Index represents a better comparison against which to measure the Portfolio’s performance.

MULTIMANAGER SMALL CAP GROWTH PORTFOLIO


Manager:		AXA Equitable

Sub-advisers:		Eagle Asset Management, Inc. Wells Capital Management Inc.

Key Terms

•

Growth Investing — An investment style that emphasizes companies with strong earnings growth. Growth investing is generally considered more aggressive than “value” investing.

•

Small Cap Companies — Companies with market capitalization within the range of companies in the Russell 2000 Growth Index.

Investment Goal

Long-term growth of capital.

Principal Investment Strategies

Under normal circumstances, the portfolio intends to invest at least 80% of its net assets, plus borrowings for investment purposes, in equity securities of U.S. small-capitalization companies. Small-capitalization companies are companies with market capitalization within the range of companies in the Russell 2000 Growth Index at the time of investment. As of December 31, 2007, the market capitalization of companies included in this index ranged from approximately $47 million to $8.4 billion.

The portfolio intends to invest primarily in common stocks, but it may also invest in other securities that the sub-advisers believe provide opportunities for capital growth, such as preferred stocks, warrants and securities convertible into common stock. The portfolio also may invest, to a limited extent (generally up to 20% of its net assets), in foreign securities, and companies based in developing countries and depositary receipts of foreign based companies. The portfolio also may invest, to a limited extent, in illiquid securities and derivatives.

Principal Investment Risks

The principal risks presented by the portfolio are:

•

generated by the derivative security should be substantially offset by gains on the hedged instrument, and vice versa. To the extent that the portfolio uses a derivative security for purposes other than as a hedge, the portfolio is directly exposed to the risks of that derivative security and any loss generated by the derivative security will not be offset by a gain.

•

Portfolio Management Risk — The risk that the strategies used by a portfolio’s sub-advisers and their securities selections fail to produce the intended result.

•

Portfolio Turnover Risk — High portfolio turnover may result in increased transaction costs to a portfolio, which would reduce investment returns.

•

Small-Capitalization Risk — The portfolio’s investments in small-cap companies may involve greater risks than investments in larger, more established issuers. Risk is greater for the common stocks of small-capitalization companies because they generally are more vulnerable than larger companies to adverse business or economic developments. Smaller companies generally have narrower product lines, more limited financial resources and more limited markets for their stock as compared with larger companies. Their securities may be less well-known and trade less frequently and in limited volume compared with the securities of larger, more established companies. As a result, the value of such securities may be more volatile than the securities of larger companies, and the portfolio may experience difficulty in purchasing or selling such securities at the desired time and price. In addition, small-cap companies are typically subject to greater changes in earnings and business prospects than larger companies. Consequently, the prices of small-cap company stocks tend to rise and fall in value more frequently than the stocks of larger companies. Although investing in small-cap companies offers potential for above-average returns, the companies may not succeed and the value of their stock could decline significantly.

•

More information about the risks of an investment in the portfolio is provided below in “More About Investment Strategies & Risks.”

PORTFOLIO PERFORMANCE

The portfolio’s performance shown below includes the performance of its predecessor registered investment company. On May 25, 2007 and July 6, 2007, the portfolio merged with EQ/Small Company Growth Portfolio and EQ/Wells Fargo Montgomery Small Cap Portfolio respectively, each of which was a series of EQ Advisors Trust, a separate trust managed by AXA Equitable. In connection with the merger, the portfolio assumed the operating history and performance record of the EQ/Small Company Growth Portfolio, which, in turn, assumed the operating history and performance record of its predecessor, Enterprise Small Company Growth Portfolio, which transferred its assets to the EQ/Small Company Growth Portfolio on July 9, 2004. The performance included in the bar chart and table below for the periods between July 9, 2004 and May 25, 2007 is that of EQ/Small Company Growth Portfolio and the performance shown for periods prior to July 9, 2004 is that of Enterprise Small Company Growth Portfolio, whose inception date is December 1, 1998. The performance results of these portfolios have been linked for purposes of this presentation.

The following bar chart illustrates the calendar year annual total returns for the periods indicated.

Calendar Year Annual Total Returns — Class B

LOGO


Best quarter (% and time period)		Worst quarter (% and time period)
33.23% (1999 4th Quarter)		–23.21% (2001 3rd Quarter)

The table below shows how the average annual total returns for the one-year, five-year and since inception periods ended December 31, 2007 compare to those of a broad-based index.


Average Annual Total Returns
	One Year	Five Years	Since Inception
Multimanager Small Cap Growth Portfolio — Class B	3.60%	11.21%	8.82%
Russell 2000 Growth Index^†	7.05%	16.50%	5.60%

†

For more information on this index, see “Description of Benchmarks.”

MULTIMANAGER SMALL CAP VALUE PORTFOLIO


Manager:		AXA Equitable

Sub-advisers:		Franklin Advisory Services, LLC Lazard Asset Management LLC

Key Terms

•

Value Investing — An investment style that focuses on companies that may be temporarily out of favor or have earnings or assets not fully reflected in their stock prices.

•

Small Cap Companies — Companies with market capitalizations under $3.5 billion.

Investment Goal

Long-term growth of capital.

Principal Investment Strategies

Under normal circumstances, the portfolio intends to invest at least 80% of its net assets, plus borrowings for investment purposes, in equity securities of small-capitalization companies. Small-capitalization companies are companies with market capitalizations under $3.5 billion at the time of purchase.

The portfolio intends to invest primarily in common stocks, but it may also invest in other securities that the sub-advisers believe provide opportunities for capital growth, such as preferred stocks, warrants and securities convertible into common stock. The portfolio may invest, to a limited extent, in larger capitalization equity securities or investment grade debt securities. The portfolio also may invest, to a limited extent (generally up to 20% of its net assets), in foreign securities, including companies based in developing countries and depositary receipts of foreign based companies. The portfolio also may invest, to a limited extent, in illiquid securities. The portfolio may engage in active and frequent trading to achieve its investment objective.

Principal Investment Risks

The principal risks presented by the portfolio are:

•

Portfolio Management Risk — The risk that the strategies used by a portfolio’s sub-advisers and their securities selections fail to produce the intended result.

•

Portfolio Turnover Risk — High portfolio turnover may result in increased transaction costs to a portfolio, which would reduce investment returns.

•

More information about the risks of an investment in the portfolio is provided below in “More About Investment Strategies & Risks.”

PORTFOLIO PERFORMANCE

The portfolio’s performance shown below includes the performance of its predecessor registered investment company. On May 25, 2007, the portfolio merged with EQ/Small Cap Value Portfolio, a series of EQ Advisors Trust, which is a separate trust managed by AXA Equitable, and assumed its operating history and performance record. The performance included in the bar chart and table below for the periods prior to May 25, 2007 is that of EQ/Small Cap Value Portfolio, whose inception date is January 1, 1998. The performance results of the portfolios have been linked for purposes of this presentation.

The following bar chart illustrates the calendar year annual total returns for the periods indicated.


Calendar Year Annual Total Returns — Class B

LOGO


Best quarter (% and time period)		Worst quarter (% and time period)
19.39% (1999 2nd Quarter)		–20.10% (1998 3rd Quarter)

The table below shows how the average annual total returns for the one-year, five-year and since inception periods ended December 31, 2007 compare to those of a broad-based index.


Average Annual Total Returns
	One Year	Five Years	Ten Years
Multimanager Small Cap Value Portfolio — Class B	–9.84%	12.01%	7.20%
Russell 2000 Value Index^†	–9.78%	15.80%	9.06%

†

For more information on this index, see “Description of Benchmarks.”

MULTIMANAGER TECHNOLOGY PORTFOLIO


Manager:		AXA Equitable

Sub-advisers:		Firsthand Capital Management, Inc. RCM Capital Management LLC Wellington Management Company, LLP

Key Term

•

Sector Portfolio — A portfolio that invests in only a subset of the overall equity market, in this case the Technology Sector.

Investment Goal

Long-term growth of capital.

Principal Investment Strategies

Under normal circumstances, the portfolio intends to invest at least 80% of its net assets, plus borrowings for investment purposes, in equity securities of companies principally engaged in the technology sector. Such companies include, among others, those in the internet products and services, computer, electronic, hardware and components, communication, software, e-commerce, information service, healthcare equipment and services, including medical devices, biotechnology, chemical products and synthetic materials, defense and aerospace industries, environmental services, nanotechnology, energy equipment and services, and electronic manufacturing services. The portfolio does not limit its investment to issuers within a specific market capitalization range. While the portfolio can invest in securities of U.S. and foreign companies, the majority of portfolio assets are expected to be invested in securities of U.S. companies.

The sub-advisers select securities based upon fundamental analysis, such as an analysis of earnings, cash flows, competitive position and management’s abilities. The sub-advisers may sell a security for a variety of reasons, such as to invest in a company with more attractive growth prospects.

Principal Investment Risks

The principal risks presented by the portfolio are:

•

Non-Diversification Risk — As a non-diversified mutual fund, more of the portfolio’s assets may be focused in the common stocks of a small number of issuers, which may make the value of

the portfolio’s shares more sensitive to changes in the market value of a single issuer or industry than shares of a diversified mutual fund.

•

Portfolio Management Risk — The risk that the strategies used by a portfolio’s sub-advisers and their securities selections fail to produce the intended result.

•

Portfolio Turnover Risk — High portfolio turnover may result in increased transaction costs to a portfolio, which would reduce investment returns.

•

Sector Concentration Risk — Since the portfolio invests primarily in a particular sector, it could experience greater volatility than stock funds investing in a broader range of industries.

•

Small- and Mid-Capitalization Risk — To the extent the portfolio invests in securities of small- and mid-capitalization issuers, it will be exposed to the risks of investing in such issuers. The portfolio’s investments in small-cap and mid-cap companies may involve greater risks than investments in larger, more established issuers. Many companies in the technology sector have relatively small market capitalization. Risk is greater for the common stocks of small- and mid-capitalization companies because they generally are more vulnerable than larger companies to adverse business or economic developments. Smaller companies generally have narrower product lines, more limited financial resources and more limited markets for their stock as compared with larger companies. Their securities may be less well-known and trade less frequently and in limited volume compared with the securities of larger, more established companies. As a result, the value of such securities may be more volatile than the securities of larger companies, and the portfolio may experience difficulty in purchasing or selling such securities at the desired time and price. In addition, small-cap and mid-cap companies are typically subject to greater changes in earnings and business prospects than larger companies. Consequently, the prices of small-cap and mid-cap company stocks tend to rise and fall in value more frequently than the stocks of larger companies. Although investing in small-cap and mid-cap companies offers potential for above-average returns, the companies may not succeed and the value of their stock could decline significantly. In general, these risks are greater for small-capitalization companies than for mid-capitalization companies.

•

Technology Sector Risk — The value of the portfolio’s shares is particularly vulnerable to factors affecting the technology sector, such as dependency on consumer and business acceptance as new technology evolves, large and rapid price movements resulting from competition, rapid obsolescence of products and services and short product cycles. Many technology companies are small and at an earlier stage of development and, therefore, may be subject to risks such as those arising out of limited product lines, markets and financial and managerial resources.

More information about the risks of an investment in the portfolio is provided below in “More About Investment Strategies & Risks.”

PORTFOLIO PERFORMANCE

The following bar chart illustrates the calendar year annual total returns for the periods indicated. The inception date for the portfolio is December 31, 2001.

Calendar Year Annual Total Returns — Class B

LOGO


Best quarter (% and time period)		Worst quarter (% and time period)
26.92% (2003 2nd Quarter)		–27.05% (2002 2nd Quarter)


Average Annual Total Returns
	One Year	Five Years	Since Inception
Multimanager Technology Portfolio — Class B	18.21%	18.50%	5.01%
Russell 1000 Index*	5.77%	13.43%	6.65%
Russell 1000 Technology Index*^#	16.92%	14.83%	3.49%

The Manager believes that this index more closely reflects the market sector in which the portfolio invests.

For more information on this index, see “Description of Benchmarks.”

PORTFOLIO FEES & EXPENSES

The following tables describe the fees and expenses that you may pay if you buy and hold shares of a portfolio. The tables below do not reflect any Contract-related fees and expenses, which would increase overall fees and expenses. See the Contract prospectus for a description of those fees and expenses. There are no fees or charges to buy or sell shares of a portfolio, reinvest dividends or other distributions or exchange into other portfolios.

Annual Portfolio Operating Expenses

(expenses that are deducted from portfolio assets, as a percentage of average daily net assets)


	Multimanager High Yield Portfolio
	CLASS B
Management fee*	0.57%
Distribution and/or service (12b-1) fees**	0.25%
Other expenses*	0.19%
Total annual operating expenses****	1.01%
	Multimanager Core Bond Portfolio††	Multimanager Health Care Portfolio
	CLASS B	CLASS B
Management fee*	0.58%	1.20%
Distribution and/or service (12b-1) fees**	0.25%	0.25%
Other expenses*	0.18%	0.23%
Total annual operating expenses	1.01%	1.68%
Less fee waiver/expense reimbursement***	–0.01%	0.00%
Net annual operating expenses****	1.00%	1.68%
	Multimanager International Equity Portfolio	Multimanager Large Cap Core Equity Portfolio
	CLASS B	CLASS B
Management fee*	1.00%	0.89%
Distribution and/or service (12b-1) fees**	0.25%	0.25%
Other expenses*	0.23%	0.21%
Total annual operating expenses	1.48%	1.35%
Less fee waiver/expense reimbursement***	0.00%	0.00%
Net annual operating expenses****	1.48%	1.35%
	Multimanager Large Cap Growth Portfolio	Multimanager Large Cap Value Portfolio
	CLASS B	CLASS B
Management fee*	0.90%	0.87%
Distribution and/or service (12b-1) fees**	0.25%	0.25%
Other expenses*	0.22%	0.20%
Total annual operating expenses	1.37%	1.32%
Less fee waiver/expense reimbursement***	–0.02%	0.00%
Net annual operating expenses****	1.35%	1.32%
	Multimanager Mid Cap Growth Portfolio	Multimanager Mid Cap Value Portfolio
	CLASS B	CLASS B
Management fee*	1.10%	1.09%
Distribution and/or service (12b-1 fees)**	0.25%	0.25%
Other expenses*	0.20%	0.20%
Total annual operating expenses	1.55%	1.54%
Less waivers/expense reimbursements***	0.00%	0.00%
Net annual operating expenses****	1.55%	1.54%

PORTFOLIO FEES & EXPENSES (cont’d)


	Multimanager Small Cap Growth Portfolio†	Multimanager Small Cap Value Portfolio†
	CLASS B	CLASS B
Management fee*	1.05%	1.03%
Distribution and/or service (12b-1) fees**	0.25%	0.25%
Other expenses*	0.27%	0.18%
Total annual operating expenses	1.57%	1.46%
Less fee waiver/expense reimbursement***	–0.02%	0.00%
Net annual operating expenses****	1.55%	1.46%
	Multimanager Technology Portfolio
	CLASS B
Management fee*	1.20%
Distribution and/or service (12b-1) fees**	0.25%
Other expenses*	0.22%
Acquired fund fees and expenses (underlying portfolios)+	0.01%
Total annual operating expenses	1.68%
Less fee waiver/expense reimbursement***	0.00%
Net annual operating expenses****	1.67%

†	“Management Fee” and “Other Expenses” have been restated to reflect current fees.

††	With respect to the Core Bond Portfolio, revised to reflect current expense limit.

Effective August 1, 2007, AXA Equitable has agreed to voluntarily waive a portion of its management fee with respect to each portfolio to reflect a $250 million reduction in the requisite asset levels necessary to reach each breakpoint of each portfolio’s contractual management fee rate. In addition, effective August 1, 2007, AXA Equitable has agreed to waive a portion of its administration fee with respect to each portfolio to reflect a certain percentage reduction in two of the three breakpoints of the portfolio’s contractual administration fee rate. For more information on these voluntary waivers, please see “Management Team — The Manager and Sub-advisers — Management Fees.” Taking into account these reductions, the “Management Fee and “Other Expenses” of each portfolio would be as follows: 0.58% and 0.18%, respectively, for the Core Bond Portfolio, 1.20% and 0.23%, respectively, for the Health Care Portfolio, 0.57% and 0.18%, respectively, for the High Yield Portfolio, 1.00% and 0.22%, respectively, for the International Equity Portfolio, 0.89% and 0.19%, respectively, for the Large Cap Core Equity Portfolio, 0.90% and 0.21%, respectively, for the Large Cap Growth Portfolio, 0.87% and 0.18%, respectively, for the Large Cap Value Portfolio, 1.10% and 0.20%, respectively, for the Mid Cap Growth Portfolio, 1.09% and 0.19%, respectively, for the Mid Cap Value Portfolio, 1.05% and 0.23%, respectively, for the Small Cap Growth Portfolio, 1.03% and 0.18%, respectively, for the Small Cap Value Portfolio and 1.20% and 0.22%, respectively, for the Technology Portfolio.

The maximum distribution and/or service (12b-1) fee for the portfolio’s Class B shares is 0.50% of the average daily net assets attributable to the portfolio’s Class B shares. Under an arrangement approved by the Trust’s Board of Trustees, the distribution and/or service (12b-1) fee currently is limited to 0.25% of the average daily net assets attributable to the portfolio’s Class B shares. This arrangement will be in effect at least until April 30, 2009.

***

Pursuant to a contract, the Manager has agreed to make payments or waive its management, administration or other fees to limit the expenses of each portfolio through April 30, 2009 (unless the board of trustees consents to an earlier revision or termination of this arrangement) (“Expense Limitation Agreement”) so that the Net Annual Operating Expenses of the portfolio (exclusive of taxes, interest, brokerage commissions, capitalized expenses, fees and expenses of other investment companies is which a portfolio invests and extraordinary expenses) do not exceed 1.00% for Class B shares of the Core Bond Portfolio, 1.85% for Class B shares of the Health Care Portfolio and the Technology Portfolio, respectively, 1.80% for Class B shares of the International Equity Portfolio, 1.35% for Class B shares of the Large Cap Core Equity Portfolio, the Large Cap Growth Portfolio and the Large Cap Value Portfolio, respectively, 1.60% for Class B shares of the Mid Cap Growth Portfolio and the Mid Cap Value Portfolio, respectively, and 1.55% for Class B shares of the Small Cap Growth Portfolio and the Small Cap Value Portfolio, respectively. The Manager may be reimbursed the amount of any such payments and waivers in the future provided that the payments or waivers are reimbursed within 3 years of the payment or waiver being made and the combination of the portfolio’s expense ratio and such reimbursements do not exceed the portfolio’s expense cap. The Manager may discontinue these arrangements at any time after April 30, 2009. For more information on the Expense Limitation Agreement, see “Management Team — The Manager and the Sub-advisers — Expense Limitation Agreement”.

****

A portion of the brokerage commissions that the portfolio pays is used to reduce the portfolio’s expenses. Including this reduction, the Net Annual Operating Expenses (excluding Acquired Fund Fees and Expenses for the relevant portfolios) for each of the portfolio’s Class B shares (other than Core Bond Portfolio and High Yield Portfolio) for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2007 was 1.67% for Health Care Portfolio, 1.48% for International Equity Portfolio, 1.34% for Large Cap Core Equity Portfolio, 1.29% for Large Cap Growth Portfolio, 1.26% for Large Cap Value Portfolio, 1.52% for Mid Cap Growth Portfolio, 1.53% for Mid Cap Value Portfolio, 1.35% for Small Cap Growth Portfolio, 1.45% for Small Cap Value Portfolio and 1.67% for Technology Portfolio, respectively.

The portfolio invests in shares of unaffiliated investment companies. Therefore, the portfolio will, in addition to its own expenses such as management fees, bear its pro-rata share of the fees and expenses incurred by the unaffiliated investment companies and the investment return of the portfolios will be reduced by the unaffiliated investment companies’ expenses.

PORTFOLIO FEES & EXPENSES (cont’d)

Example

This example is intended to help you compare the direct and indirect cost of investing in each portfolio with the cost of investing in other investment options.

The example assumes that:

•

You invest $10,000 in the portfolio for the time periods indicated;

•

Your investment has a 5% return each year;

•

The portfolio’s operating expenses remain the same; and

•

The expense limitation currently in place is not renewed.

This example should not be considered a representation of past or future expenses of the portfolios. Actual expenses may be higher or lower than those shown. The costs in this example would be the same whether or not you redeemed all of your shares at the end of these periods. This example does not reflect any Contract-related fees and expenses, which would increase overall fees and expenses. Similarly, the annual rate of return assumed in the example is not an estimate or guarantee of future investment performance. Based on these assumptions your costs would be:


	Multimanager Core Bond Portfolio	Multimanager Health Care Portfolio
	CLASS B	CLASS B
1 year	$ 102	$ 171
3 years	$ 321	$ 530
5 years	$ 557	$ 913
10 years	$1,235	$1,987

	Multimanager High Yield Portfolio	Multimanager International Equity Portfolio
	CLASS B	CLASS B
1 year	$ 103	$ 151
3 years	$ 315	$ 468
5 years	$ 542	$ 808
10 years	$1,195	$1,768

	Multimanager Large Cap Core Equity Portfolio	Multimanager Large Cap Growth Portfolio
	CLASS B	CLASS B
1 year	$ 137	$ 137
3 years	$ 428	$ 432
5 years	$ 739	$ 748
10 years	$1,624	$1,645

	Multimanager Large Cap Value Portfolio	Multimanager Mid Cap Growth Portfolio
	CLASS B	CLASS B
1 year	$ 134	$ 158
3 years	$ 418	$ 490
5 years	$ 723	$ 845
10 years	$1,590	$1,845

PORTFOLIO FEES & EXPENSES (cont’d)


	Multimanager Mid Cap Value Portfolio	Multimanager Small Cap Growth Portfolio
	CLASS B	CLASS B
1 year	$ 157	$ 158
3 years	$ 486	$ 494
5 years	$ 839	$ 853
10 years	$1,834	$1,866

	Multimanager Small Cap Value Portfolio	Multimanager Technology Portfolio
	CLASS B	CLASS B
1 year	$ 149	$ 223
3 years	$ 462	$ 530
5 years	$ 797	$ 913
10 years	$1,746	$1,987

MORE ABOUT INVESTMENT STRATEGIES & RISKS

Additional Risks

The portfolios have principal investment strategies that come with inherent risks. Each portfolio’s principal risks are described in its principal risks section. The following is a list of additional risks to which each portfolio may be subject by investing in various types of securities or engaging in various practices. Each risk may apply to all the portfolios.

Convertible Securities Risk. Convertible securities may include both convertible debt and convertible preferred stock. Such securities may be converted into shares of the underlying common stock at either a stated price or stated rate. Therefore, convertible securities enable the holder to benefit from increases in the market price of the underlying common stock. Convertible securities provide higher yields than the underlying common stock, but generally offer lower yields than nonconvertible securities of similar quality. The value of convertible securities fluctuates in relation to changes in interest rates and, in addition, fluctuates in relation to the underlying common stock. While no securities investment is without some risk, investments in convertible securities generally entail less risk than the issuer’s common stock; however, the extent to which such risk is reduced depends in large measure upon the degree to which the convertible security sells above its value as a fixed income security. A convertible security may be subject to redemption at the option of the issuer at a price established in the convertible security’s governing instrument. If a convertible security held by a portfolio is called for redemption, the portfolio will be required to permit the issuer to redeem the security, convert it into underlying common stock or sell it to a third party. Investments by certain of the portfolios in convertible debt securities may not subject to any ratings restrictions, although the adviser of a portfolio will consider such ratings, and any changes in such ratings, in its determination of whether a portfolio should invest and/or continue to hold the securities. The credit standing of the issuer and other factors may have an effect on a convertible security’s investment value. Convertible securities rank senior to common stock in a corporation’s capital structure, but are usually subordinated to comparable non-convertible securities. Convertible securities are subject to interest rate risk and credit/default risk and are often lower-quality securities.

Credit Quality Risk. The actual or perceived reduction in the creditworthiness of debt issuers generally will have adverse effects on the values of their debt securities. It is possible that the issuer of a security will not be able to make interest and principal payments when due. Discontinuation of these payments could substantially adversely affect the price of the bond. Lower rated bonds involve greater risks of default or downgrade and are more volatile than investment-grade securities. Lower rated bonds involve a greater risk of price declines than investment-grade securities due to actual or perceived changes to an issuer’s creditworthiness. In addition, issuers of lower rated bonds may be more susceptible than other issuers to economic downturns. Lower rated bonds are especially subject to the risk that the issuer may not be able to pay interest and ultimately repay principal upon maturity.

Currency Risk. The risk that fluctuations in the exchange rates between the U.S. dollar and foreign currencies may negatively affect an investment. A change in the value of any such currency against the U.S. dollar will result in a change in the U.S. dollar value of a portfolio’s asset and income.

Depositary Receipts Risk. American Depositary Receipts are receipts typically issued by an American bank or trust company that evidence underlying securities issued by a foreign corporation. European Depositary Receipts (issued in Europe) and Global Depositary Receipts (issued throughout the world) each evidence a similar ownership arrangement. An portfolio may invest in unsponsored depositary receipts. The issuers of unsponsored depositary receipts are not obligated to disclose information that is considered material in the United States, therefore, there may be less information available regarding these issuers and there may not be a correlation between such information and the market value of the depositary receipts. Depositary receipts are generally subject to the same risks as the foreign securities that they evidence or into which they may be converted.

Derivatives Risk. Derivatives are financial contracts whose value is based on the value of an underlying asset, reference rate or index. A portfolio’s investment in derivatives may rise or fall more rapidly than other investments. These transactions are subject to changes in the underlying security on which such transactions are based. Even a small investment in derivative securities can have a significant impact on a portfolio’s exposure to stock market values, interest rates or currency exchange rates. Derivatives are subject to a number of risks such as liquidity risk, interest rate risk, market risk, credit/default risk and portfolio management risk depending on the type of underlying asset, reference rate or index. They also involve the risk of mispricing or improper valuation and the risk that changes in the value of a derivative may not correlate well with the underlying asset, reference rate or index. The possible lack of a liquid secondary market for derivatives and the resulting inability of the portfolio to sell or otherwise close a derivatives position could expose the portfolio to losses and could make derivatives more difficult for the portfolio to value accurately. These types of transactions will be used primarily as a substitute for taking a position in the underlying asset and/or for hedging purposes. When a derivative security is used as a hedge against an offsetting position that a portfolio also holds, any loss generated by the derivative security should be substantially offset by gains on the hedged instrument, and vice versa. To the extent that a portfolio uses a derivative security for purposes other than as a hedge, that portfolio is directly exposed to the risks of that derivative security and any loss generated by the derivative security will not be offset by a gain.

Foreign Investing and Emerging Markets Risks. The value of a portfolio’s investments in foreign securities may fall due to adverse political, social and economic developments abroad and due to

MORE ABOUT INVESTMENT STRATEGIES & RISKS (cont’d)

decreases in foreign currency values relative to the U.S. dollar. Foreign markets also may be less liquid and more volatile than U.S. markets. These risks are greater generally for investments in emerging market issuers than for issuers in more developed countries.

Illiquid and Restricted Securities Risk. Illiquid securities are securities that a portfolio cannot sell on an open market. This means that a portfolio might not be able to sell an illiquid security when it desires and that it might be difficult to value such a security. Restricted securities are securities that are subject to contractual restrictions on resale. Such a restriction could limit a security’s liquidity.

Initial Public Offering (“IPO”) Risk. A portfolio that purchases securities issued in an IPO is subject to the risk that the value of the securities may rise or fall more rapidly than other investments. Prior to an IPO, there is generally no public market for an issuer’s common stock. There can be no assurance that an active trading market will develop or be sustained following the IPO, therefore, the market price for the securities may be subject to significant fluctuations and a portfolio may be affected by such fluctuations. In addition, securities issued in an IPO are often issued by a company that may be in the early stages of development with a history of little or no revenues and such company may operate at a loss following the offering. A portfolio’s ability to obtain shares of an IPO security may be substantially limited in the event of high demand for the securities and there is no guarantee that the portfolio will receive an allocation of shares. To the extent a portfolio invests in IPOs, a significant portion of its returns may be attributable to its investments in IPOs, which have a magnified impact on portfolios with small asset bases. There is no guarantee that as those portfolios’ assets grow they will continue to experience substantially similar performance by investing in IPOs.

Information Risk. The risk that key information about a security is inaccurate or unavailable.

Interest Rate Risk. The risk of market losses attributable to changes in interest rates. When interest rates decline, the value of a portfolio’s debt securities generally rises. Conversely, when interest rates rise, the value of a portfolio’s debt securities generally declines. The magnitude of the decline will often be greater for longer-term debt securities than shorter-term debt securities.

Investment Grade Securities Risk. Debt securities generally are rated by national bond rating agencies. Securities rated BBB and higher by S&P or Fitch and Baa or higher by Moody’s (or, if unrated, determined by the sub-adviser to be of comparable quality) are considered investment grade securities, but securities rated BBB or Baa (or, if unrated, determined by the sub-adviser to be of comparable quality) are somewhat riskier than higher rated obligations because they are regarded as having only an adequate capacity to pay principal and interest, and are considered to lack outstanding investment characteristics.

Lending Risk. Each portfolio may lend portfolio securities with a value of up to 33¹/3% of a portfolio’s total assets, including collateral received for securities lent. If a portfolio lends securities, there is a risk that the securities will not be available to the portfolio on a timely basis, and the portfolio, therefore, may lose the opportunity to sell the securities at a desirable price. In addition, as with other extensions of secured credit, there is the risk of possible delay in receiving additional collateral or in the recovery of the securities, possible loss of rights in the collateral should the borrower fail financially or a decline in the value of the collateral held by a portfolio.

Leverage Risk. The risk associated with securities or practices (e.g. borrowing) that multiply small price movements into large changes in value.

Liquidity Risk. The risk that certain securities may be difficult or impossible to sell at the time and the price that the seller would like. This may result in a loss or may be costly to a portfolio.

Loan Participation and Assignment Risk. A Portfolio’s investments in loan participations and assignments are subject to the risk that the financial institution acting as agent for all interests in a loan might fail financially. It is also possible that a Portfolio could be held liable as a co-lender.

Lower-Rated Securities Risk. Lower rated bonds are especially subject to the risk that the issuer may not be able to pay interest and ultimately to repay principal upon maturity. Bonds rated below investment grade (i.e., BB or lower by S&P or Fitch or Ba or lower by Moody’s) are speculative in nature, involve greater risk of default by the issuing entity and may be subject to greater market fluctuations than higher rated fixed income securities. They are usually issued by companies without long track records of sales and earnings, or by those companies with questionable credit strength and tend to more greatly affected by economic downturn than issuers of higher grade securities. The retail secondary market for these “junk bonds” may be less liquid than that of higher rated securities and adverse conditions could make it difficult at times to sell certain securities or could result in lower prices than those used in calculating the portfolio’s net asset value. A portfolio investing in “junk bonds” may also be subject to greater credit/default risk because it may invest in debt securities issued in connection with corporate restructuring by highly leveraged issuers or in debt securities not current in the payment of interest or principal or in default. Lower-rated securities may contain redemption or call provisions. If an issuer exercises these provisions in a declining interest rate market, the portfolio would have to replace the security with a lower yielding security, resulting in a decreased return. Conversely, a lower rated security’s value will decrease in a rising interest rate market, as will the value of the portfolio’s assets. If the portfolio experiences unexpected net redemptions, this may force it to sell its lower-rated securities, without regard to their investment merits, thereby decreasing the asset base upon which the portfolio expenses can be spread and possibly reducing the portfolio’s rate of return. Only the Health Care Portfolio, Technology Portfolio, Core Bond Portfolio and High Yield Portfolio currently are permitted to invest more than 5% of their assets in lower rated bonds.

Market Risk. The risk that the value of a security will move up and down, sometimes rapidly and unpredictably based upon overall economic conditions and other factors.

MORE ABOUT INVESTMENT STRATEGIES & RISKS (cont’d)

Mortgage-Backed and Asset-Backed Securities Risk. The risk that the principal on mortgage- or asset-backed securities may be prepaid at any time, which will reduce their yield and market value. If interest rates fall, the rate of prepayments tends to increase as borrowers are motivated to pay off debt and refinance at new lower rates. Rising interest rates tend to extend the duration of mortgage-related securities, making them more sensitive to changes in interest rates. As a result, in a period of rising interest rates, a portfolio that holds mortgage-related securities may exhibit additional volatility. This is known as extension risk. In addition, the risk of default by borrowers is greater during periods of rising interest rates and/or unemployment rates. The early retirement of particular classes or series of a collateralized mortgage obligation held by a portfolio would have the same effect as the prepayment of mortgages underlying other mortgage-backed securities.

If a portfolio purchases mortgage-backed or asset-backed securities that are “subordinated” to other interests in the same mortgage pool, the portfolio as a holder of those securities may only receive payments after the pool’s obligations to other investors have been satisfied. For example, an unexpectedly high rate of defaults on the mortgages held by a mortgage pool may limit substantially the pool’s ability to make payments of principal or interest to the portfolio as a holder of such subordinated securities, reducing the values of those securities or in some cases rendering them worthless. Certain mortgage-backed securities may include securities backed by pools of mortgage loans made to “subprime” borrowers or borrowers with blemished credit histories; the risk of defaults is generally higher in the case of mortgage pools that include such subprime mortgages. The underwriting standards for subprime loans are more flexible than the standards generally used by banks for borrowers with non-blemished credit histories with regard to the borrowers credit standing and repayment ability. Borrowers who qualify generally have impaired credit histories, which may include a record of major derogatory credit items such as outstanding judgments or prior bankruptcies. In addition, they may not have the documentation required to qualify for a standard mortgage loan. As a result, the mortgage loans in the mortgage pool are likely to experience rates of delinquency, foreclosure, and bankruptcy that are higher, and that may be substantially higher, than those experienced by mortgage loans underwritten in a more traditional manner. In addition, changes in the values of the mortgaged properties, as well as changes in interest rates, may have a greater effect on the delinquency, foreclosure, bankruptcy, and loss experience of the mortgage loans in the mortgage pool than on mortgage loans originated in a more traditional manner. Moreover, instability in the markets for mortgage-backed and asset-backed securities may affect the liquidity of such securities, which means that a portfolio may be unable to sell such securities at an advantageous time and price. As a result, the value of such securities may decrease and a portfolio may incur greater losses on the sale of such securities than under more stable market conditions. Furthermore, instability and illiquidity in the market for lower-rated mortgage-backed and asset-backed securities may affect the overall market for such securities, thereby impacting the liquidity and value of higher-rated securities.

Multiple Sub-Adviser Risk. Each of the portfolios employs multiple sub-advisers. Each sub-adviser independently chooses and maintains a portfolio of securities for the portfolio and each is responsible for investing a specific allocated portion of the portfolio’s assets. Because each sub-adviser will be managing its allocated portion of the portfolio independently from the other sub-adviser(s), the same security may be held in different portions of a portfolio, or may be acquired for one portion of a portfolio at a time when a sub-adviser to another portion deems it appropriate to dispose of the security from that other portion. Similarly, under some market conditions, one sub-adviser may believe that temporary, defensive investments in short-term instruments or cash are appropriate when the other sub-adviser(s) believes continued exposure to the equity or debt markets is appropriate for its allocated portion of the portfolio. Because each sub-adviser directs the trading for its own portion of the portfolio, and does not aggregate its transactions with those of the other sub-advisers, the portfolio may incur higher brokerage costs than would be the case if a single sub-adviser were managing the entire portfolio.

Opportunity Risk. The risk of missing out on an investment opportunity because the assets necessary to take advantage of it are tied up in less profitable investments.

Political Risk. The risk of losses directly attributable to government or political actions.

Portfolio Turnover Risk. High portfolio turnover may result in increased transaction costs to a portfolio, which would reduce investment returns.

Repurchase Agreements Risk. A portfolio may enter into repurchase agreements under which it purchases a security that a seller has agreed to repurchase from the portfolio at a later date at the same price plus interest. If a seller defaults and the security declines in value, the portfolio might incur a loss. If the seller declares bankruptcy, a portfolio may not be able to sell the security at the desired time.

Securities Risk. The risk that the value of a security may move up and down, sometimes rapidly and unpredictably based upon changes in a company’s financial condition as well as overall market and economic conditions.

Short Sale Risk. A “short sale” is the sale by a portfolio of a security which has been borrowed from a third party on the expectation that the market price will drop. If the price of the security rises, the portfolio may have to cover short positions at a higher price than the short sale price, resulting in a loss.

Small-cap and/or Mid-cap Company Risk. To the extent a portfolio invests in securities of small- and mid-capitalization issuers, it will be exposed to the risks of investing in such issuers. A

MORE ABOUT INVESTMENT STRATEGIES & RISKS (cont’d)

portfolio’s investments in small-cap and mid-cap companies may involve greater risks than investments in larger, more established issuers. Risk is greater for the common stocks of small- and mid- capitalization companies because they generally are more vulnerable than larger companies to adverse business or economic developments. Smaller companies generally have narrower product lines, more limited financial resources and more limited markets for their stock, as compared with larger companies. Their securities may be less well-known and trade less frequently and in limited volume compared with the securities of larger, more established companies. As a result, the value of such securities may be more volatile than the securities of larger companies, and a portfolio may experience difficulty in purchasing or selling such securities at the desired time and price. In addition, small-cap and mid-cap companies are typically subject to greater changes in earnings and business prospects than larger companies. Consequently, the prices of small-cap and mid-cap company stocks tend to rise and fall in value more frequently than the stocks of larger companies. Although investing in small-cap and mid-cap companies offers potential for above-average returns, the companies may not succeed and the value of their stock could decline significantly. In general, these risks are far greater for small-capitalization companies than mid-capitalization companies.

Special Situations Risk. The portfolios may use aggressive investment techniques, including seeking to benefit from “special situations,” such as mergers, reorganizations or other unusual events expected to affect a particular issuer. There is a risk that the “special situation” might not occur, which could have a negative impact on the price of the issuer’s securities and fail to produce the expected gains or produce a loss for the portfolio.

Unseasoned Companies Risk. The portfolios can invest in small unseasoned companies. These are companies that have been in operation less than three years, including operation of any predecessors. These securities may have limited liquidity and their prices may be very volatile.

Valuation Risk. The risk that a portfolio has valued certain securities at a higher price than it can sell them for.

Additional Investment Strategies

The following is a list of additional investment strategies. Each investment strategy may apply to all the portfolios. For further information about investment strategies, see the portfolios’ Statement of Additional Information (“SAI”).

Derivatives. The portfolios can use “derivative” instruments to seek enhanced returns or to try to hedge investment risks, although it is not anticipated that they will do so to a significant degree. In general terms, a derivative instrument is an investment contract whose value depends on (or is derived from) the value of an underlying asset, reference rate or index. Options, futures contracts and forward contracts are examples of “derivatives.”

Foreign Investing. The portfolios may invest in foreign securities, including depositary receipts of foreign based companies and including companies based in developing countries.

Initial Public Offerings (“IPOs”). Each of the portfolios that may invest in equity securities may participate in the IPO market, and a significant portion of those portfolios’ returns may be attributable to their investment in IPOs, which have a magnified impact on portfolios with small asset bases. There is no guarantee that as those portfolios’ assets grow they will continue to experience substantially similar performance by investing in IPOs.

Portfolio Turnover. The portfolios do not restrict the frequency of trading to limit expenses. The portfolios may engage in active and frequent trading of portfolio securities to achieve their investment objectives. Frequent trading can result in a portfolio turnover in excess of 100% (high portfolio turnover).

Securities Lending. For purposes of realizing additional income, a portfolio may lend its portfolio securities with a value of up to 33¹/3% of the portfolio’s total assets (including collateral received for securities lent) to broker-dealers approved by the Trust’s board of trustees. Generally, any such loan of portfolio securities will be continuously secured by collateral at least equal to the value of the security loaned. Such collateral will be in the form of cash, marketable securities issued or guaranteed by the U.S. Government or its agencies, or a standby letter of credit issued by qualified banks. Loans will only be made to firms deemed by the Manager to be of good standing and will not be made unless, in the judgment of the sub-adviser, the consideration to be earned from such loans would justify the risk.

Short Sales. The portfolios may engage in short sales. A “short sale” is the sale by a portfolio of a security that has been borrowed from a third party on the expectation that the market price will drop. If the price of the security drops, the portfolio will make a profit by purchasing the security in the open market at a lower price than at which it sold the security. If the price of the security rises, the portfolio may have to cover short positions at a higher price than the short sale price, resulting in a loss. The portfolios generally will only engage in covered short sales. In a covered short sale, a portfolio either (1) borrows and sells securities it already owns (also known as a short sale “against the box”), or (2) deposits in a segregated account cash, U.S. government securities, or other liquid securities in an amount equal to the market value of the securities sold short.

MANAGEMENT TEAM

The Manager and the Sub-advisers

The Manager

AXA Equitable, through its Funds Management Group unit, 1290 Avenue of the Americas, New York, New York 10104, serves as the manager of each portfolio. AXA Equitable is an investment adviser registered under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940, as amended, and a wholly owned subsidiary of AXA Financial, Inc., a subsidiary of AXA, a French insurance holding company.

As manager, AXA Equitable has a variety of responsibilities for the general management and administration of the Trust and the portfolios, including the selection of sub-advisers. AXA Equitable plays an active role in monitoring each portfolio and sub-adviser and uses portfolio analytics systems to strengthen its evaluation of performance, style, risk levels, diversification and other criteria. AXA Equitable also monitors each sub-adviser’s portfolio management team to ensure that investment activities remain consistent with the portfolios’ investment style and objectives.

Beyond performance analysis, AXA Equitable monitors significant changes that may impact the sub-adviser’s overall business. AXA Equitable monitors continuity in the sub-adviser’s operations and changes in investment personnel and senior management. AXA Equitable also performs due diligence reviews with each sub-adviser no less frequently than annually.

In its capacity as manager, AXA Equitable obtains detailed, comprehensive information concerning portfolio and sub-adviser performance and portfolio operations that is used to oversee and monitor the sub-advisers and the portfolio operations. A team is responsible for conducting ongoing investment reviews with each sub-adviser and for developing the criteria by which portfolio performance is measured.

AXA Equitable selects sub-advisers from a pool of candidates, including its affiliates, to manage the portfolios. AXA Equitable may appoint, dismiss and replace sub-advisers and amend sub-advisory agreements subject to the approval of the Trust’s board of trustees. AXA Equitable also may allocate a portfolio’s assets among additional sub-advisers subject to the approval of the Trust’s board of trustees and has discretion to allocate each portfolio’s assets among the portfolio’s current sub-advisers. AXA Equitable recommends sub-advisers for each portfolio to the board of trustees based upon its continuing quantitative and qualitative evaluation of each sub-adviser’s skills in managing assets pursuant to specific investment styles and strategies. Unlike many other mutual funds, the portfolios are not associated with any one portfolio manager, and seek to benefit from different specialists selected from the investment management industry. Short-term investment performance, by itself, is not a significant factor in selecting or terminating a sub-adviser, and AXA Equitable does not expect to recommend frequent changes of sub-advisers.

AXA Equitable has received an exemptive order from the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) to permit it and the board of trustees to appoint, dismiss and replace a portfolio’s sub-advisers and to amend the sub-advisory agreements between AXA Equitable and the sub-advisers without obtaining shareholder approval. Accordingly, AXA Equitable is able, subject to the approval of the board of trustees, to appoint, dismiss and replace sub-advisers and to amend sub-advisory agreements without obtaining shareholder approval. If a new sub-adviser is retained for a portfolio, shareholders would receive notice of such action. However, AXA Equitable may not enter into a sub-advisory agreement with an Affiliated Adviser unless the sub-advisory agreement with the Affiliated Adviser, including compensation, is also approved by the affected portfolio’s shareholders. AllianceBernstein L.P. and AXA Rosenberg Investment Management LLC, two of the current sub-advisers, are affiliates of AXA Equitable.

The Sub-advisers

Each portfolio’s investments are selected by two or more sub-advisers, which act independently of one another. The following describes each portfolio’s sub-advisers, portfolio managers and each portfolio manager’s business experience. Information about the portfolio managers’ compensation, other accounts they manage and their ownership of securities of the portfolios is available in the Trust’s SAI.

Invesco Aim Capital Management, Inc. (“Invesco Aim Capital Management”) serves as a sub-adviser to Multimanager Health Care Portfolio. Invesco Aim Capital Management is an indirect wholly owned subsidiary of Invesco Aim Management Group, Inc. (“Invesco Aim Management”). Invesco Aim Management is a wholly owned subsidiary of Invesco Ltd., a publicly held company and one of the world’s largest investment services companies. As of December 31, 2007, Invesco Aim Management had approximately $166 billion in assets under management.

AllianceBernstein L.P. (“AllianceBernstein”) serves as a sub-adviser to Multimanager International Equity Portfolio, Multimanager Large Cap Core Equity Portfolio, Multimanager Large Cap Value Portfolio and Multimanager Mid Cap Growth Portfolio. AllianceBernstein, a limited partnership, is a majority owned subsidiary of AXA Financial, Inc. As of December 31, 2007, AllianceBernstein had approximately $800 billion in assets under management.

AXA Rosenberg Investment Management LLC (“AXA Rosenberg”) serves as a sub-adviser to Multimanager Mid Cap Value Portfolio. AXA Rosenberg is a wholly owned subsidiary of AXA Rosenberg Group LLC (“AXA Rosenberg Group”). AXA Investment Managers S. A., a French société anonyme and investment arm of AXA, a

MANAGEMENT TEAM

The Manager and the Sub-advisers (cont’d)

French insurance holding company that includes AXA Equitable among its subsidiaries, holds a majority interest in AXA Rosenberg Group. As of December 31, 2007, AXA Rosenberg Group had approximately $135 billion in assets under management.

BlackRock Financial Management, Inc. (“BFI”) serves as a sub-adviser to Multimanager Core Bond Portfolio. BFI is a subsidiary of BlackRock, Inc., and Merrill Lynch & Co., Inc. and the PNC Financial Services Group, Inc. each have an economic ownership of approximately 49.8% and 34%, respectively in BlackRock, Inc. The PNC Financial Services Group, Inc. and Merrill Lynch & Co., Inc. are both publicly traded financial services companies. As of December 31, 2007, BFI had approximately $1.3 trillion in assets under management.

Eagle Asset Management, Inc. (“Eagle”) serves as a sub-adviser to Multimanager Small Cap Growth Portfolio. Eagle has been providing investment counseling services since 1976 and is a wholly owned subsidiary of Raymond James Financial, Inc., a publicly-traded financial services company. As of December 31, 2007, Eagle had approximately $14.4 billion in assets under management.

Firsthand Capital Management, Inc. (“Firsthand”) serves as a sub-adviser to Multimanager Technology Portfolio. Kevin M. Landis is the controlling shareholder of Firsthand. As of December 31, 2007, Firsthand had approximately $750 million in assets under management.

Franklin Advisers, Inc. (“Franklin Advisers”) serves as a sub-adviser to Multimanager Mid Cap Growth Portfolio. Franklin Advisers is a wholly owned subsidiary of Franklin Resources, Inc., which is a publicly traded, global investment management organization listed on the New York Stock Exchange. As of December 31, 2007, Franklin Advisers, together with its affiliates, had approximately $643 billion in assets under management.

Franklin Advisory Services, LLC (“Franklin”) serves as a sub-adviser to Multimanager Small Cap Value Portfolio. Franklin is a wholly owned subsidiary of Franklin Resources, Inc., which is a publicly traded, global investment management organization listed on the New York Stock Exchange. As of December 31, 2007, Franklin, together with its affiliates, had approximately $643 billion in assets under management.

Institutional Capital LLC (“ICAP”) serves as a sub-adviser to Multimanager Large Cap Value Portfolio. ICAP is a wholly owned subsidiary of New York Life Investment Management Holdings, LLC, which in turn is a wholly owned subsidiary of New York Life Insurance Company. As of December 31, 2007, ICAP had approximately $18.4 billion in assets under management.

Janus Capital Management LLC (“Janus”) serves as a sub-adviser to Multimanager Large Cap Core Equity Portfolio. Janus is a direct subsidiary of Janus Capital Group Inc. (“JCGI”), a publicly traded company with principal operations in financial asset management businesses. JCGI owns approximately 95% of Janus, with the remaining 5% held by Janus Management Holdings Corporation. As of December 31, 2007, JCGI had approximately $206.7 billion in assets under management.

JPMorgan Investment Management Inc. (“JPMorgan”) serves as a sub-adviser to Multimanager International Equity Portfolio. JPMorgan is an indirect wholly owned subsidiary of JPMorgan Chase & Co., a publicly held bank. As of December 31, 2007, JPMorgan had approximately $1.2 trillion in assets under management.

Lazard Asset Management LLC (“LAM”) serves as a sub-adviser to Multimanager Small Cap Value Portfolio. In particular, two separate management teams within LAM serve as sub-adviser to two distinct allocated portions of the Multimanager Small Cap Value Portfolio. LAM and its affiliates provide their clients with a wide variety of investment banking and related services, including investment management. LAM is a subsidiary of Lazard Freres & Co. LLC, a New York limited liability company with one member, Lazard Group LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, which is owned by Lazard Ltd., a publicly-traded financial services firm. As of December 31, 2007, LAM had approximately $126.9 billion in assets under management.

Marsico Capital Management, LLC (“Marsico”) serves as a sub-adviser to Multimanager International Equity Portfolio. Marsico was organized in September 1997 as a registered investment adviser and is an independently-owned investment management firm. Thomas F. Marsico is the founder, principal owner and Chief Executive Officer of Marsico. Marsico provides investment services to mutual funds and private accounts. As of December 31, 2007, had approximately $106.06 billion in assets under management.

MFS Investment Management (“MFS”) serves as a sub-adviser to Multimanager Large Cap Value Portfolio. MFS is a subsidiary of Sun Life of Canada (U.S.) Financial Services Holdings, Inc., which in turn is an indirect wholly owned subsidiary of Sun Life Financial Inc., a publicly traded diversified financial services organization. As of December 31, 2007, MFS had approximately $197.6 billion in assets under management.

Pacific Investment Management Company LLC (“PIMCO”) serves as a sub-adviser to Multimanager Core Bond Portfolio and Multimanager High Yield Portfolio. PIMCO, a Delaware limited liability company, is a majority owned subsidiary of Allianz Global Investors of America L.P., (“AGI LP”). Allianz SE (“Allianz SE”) is the indirect majority owner of AGI LP. Allianz SE is a European-based, publicly-traded, multinational insurance and financial services holding company. As of December 31, 2007, PIMCO had approximately $746.3 billion in assets under management.

Post Advisory Group, LLC (“Post”) serves as a sub-adviser to Multimanager High Yield Portfolio. Post is the successor advisory entity of Post Advisory Group, Inc. Post is affiliated with Principal Global Investors, Inc. (“Principal”), a member of the Principal

MANAGEMENT TEAM

The Manager and the Sub-advisers (cont’d)

Financial Group. Principal owns 72% of Post and eight senior management professionals at Post own 28%. As of December 31, 2007, Post had approximately $11.72 billion in assets under management.

Provident Investment Counsel, Inc. (“Provident”) serves as a sub-adviser to Multimanager Mid Cap Growth Portfolio. Provident is a wholly owned subsidiary of Old Mutual Asset Managers (US) LLC, a publicly traded company. As of December 31, 2007, Provident had approximately $3 billion in assets under management.

RCM Capital Management LLC (“RCM”) serves as a sub-adviser to Multimanager Health Care Portfolio, Multimanager Large Cap Growth Portfolio and Multimanager Technology Portfolio. RCM is an indirect wholly owned subsidiary of Allianz SE, a European-based, multinational insurance and financial services holding company that is publicly traded. As of December 31, 2007, RCM had approximately $20 billion in assets under management.

TCW Investment Management Company (“TCW”) serves as a sub-adviser to Multimanager Large Cap Growth Portfolio and Multimanager Mid Cap Value Portfolio. TCW is a wholly owned subsidiary of The TCW Group, Inc. Société Générale Asset Management, S.A. (“SGAM”) holds a majority interest in The TCW Group, Inc. SGAM is a wholly owned subsidiary of Société Générale, S.A., a publicly held financial firm headquartered in Paris, France. As of December 31, 2007, TCW had approximately $27.25 billion in assets under management or committed to management.

Thornburg Investment Management, Inc. (“Thornburg”) serves as a sub-adviser to Multimanager Large Cap Core Equity Portfolio. Thornburg is an employee owned investment management firm. H. Garrett Thornburg, Jr. is the controlling shareholder of Thornburg. As of December 31, 2007, Thornburg had approximately $52.9 billion in assets under management.

T. Rowe Price Associates, Inc. (“T. Rowe”) serves as a sub-adviser to Multimanager Large Cap Growth Portfolio. T. Rowe is a wholly owned subsidiary of the T. Rowe Price Group, which is a publicly-traded financial services firm. As of December 31, 2007, T. Rowe and its affiliates had approximately $400 billion in assets under management.

Wellington Management Company, LLP (“Wellington Management”) serves as a sub-adviser to Multimanager Health Care Portfolio, Multimanager Mid Cap Value Portfolio and Multimanager Technology Portfolio. Wellington Management is a Massachusetts limited liability partnership with principal offices at 75 State Street, Boston, Massachusetts 02109. Wellington Management is a professional investment counseling firm which provides investment services to investment companies, employee benefit plans, endowments, foundations, and other institutions. As of December 31, 2007, Wellington Management had investment management authority with respect to approximately $588 billion in assets.

Wells Capital Management Inc. (“Wells Capital Management”) serves as a sub-adviser to Multimanager Small Cap Growth Portfolio. In particular, two separate investment management teams within Wells Capital Management serve as sub-adviser to two distinct allocated portions of the Multimanager Small Cap Growth Portfolio. Wells Capital Management is a registered investment adviser that provides investment advisory services for registered mutual funds, company retirement plans, foundations, endowments, trust companies and high net-worth individuals. Wells Capital Management is an indirect wholly owned subsidiary of Wells Fargo & Company, a publicly held company. As of December 31, 2007, Wells Capital Management had approximately $219 billion in assets under management.

MANAGEMENT TEAM

The Manager and the Sub-advisers (cont’d)


Portfolio	Sub-Advisers and Portfolio Manager(s)	Business Experience
Multimanager Core Bond Portfolio	BlackRock Financial Management, Inc. 40 East 52nd Street New York, NY 10022 Portfolio Managers Scott M. Amero Matthew Marra Andrew J. Phillips	Scott M. Amero, Matthew Marra and Andrew J. Phillips are primarily responsible for the day-to-day management of the allocated portion of the portfolio. Mr. Amero, a Managing Director since 1990 and Vice Chairman since 2007, is BFI’s Global Chief Investment Officer for Fixed Income and co-head of the Fixed Income Portfolio Management Group. He is a member of the Executive, Operating and Management Committees and Chairman of the Fixed Income Investment Strategy Group that is responsible for global fixed income strategy, asset allocation and overall management of client portfolios. Mr. Marra, Managing Director since 2005, is a member of BFI’s Fixed Income Portfolio Management Group. Mr. Marra’s primary responsibility is managing total return portfolios, with a sector emphasis on Treasury and agency securities. He also helps lead the effort to oversee the consistent implementation of investment strategies across all total return accounts. He is Co-Chairman of the monthly Account Review Meeting, which examines performance, compliance and operations for all client portfolios. Mr. Marra has been a member of BlackRock’s fixed income team since 1997. Mr. Phillips, Managing Director since 1998, is co-head of US Fixed Income within BFI’s Fixed Income Portfolio Management Group and his primary responsibility is the consistent implementation of investment strategies across all total return accounts. He is Chairman of the monthly Account Review Meeting, which examines performance, compliance and operations for all client portfolios. Mr. Phillips is also a member of the mortgage securities team and previously served as the lead sector specialist before assuming his current responsibilities. Mr. Phillips has been a member of BFI’s fixed income team since 1991.

	Pacific Investment Management Company LLC 840 Newport Center Drive Suite 300 Newport Beach, CA 92660 Portfolio Manager Paul A. McCulley	Paul A. McCulley is primarily responsible for day-to-day management of the allocated portion of the portfolio. Mr. McCulley is Managing Director, Generalist Portfolio Manager, member of the investment committee and head of PIMCO’s Short-Term Desk. Mr. McCulley joined the firm in 1999 and has had portfolio management responsibilities since that time.

MANAGEMENT TEAM

The Manager and the Sub-advisers (cont’d)


Portfolio	Sub-Advisers and Portfolio Manager(s)	Business Experience
Multimanager Health Care Portfolio	Invesco Aim Capital Management, Inc. 11 Greenway Plaza Suite 100 Houston, TX 77046 Portfolio Manager Derek M. Taner	Derek M. Taner, Portfolio Manager, has been responsible for the allocated portion of the portfolio since 2005 and has been associated with Invesco Aim Capital Management and/or its affiliates as an investment professional since 2005. From 2000 to 2005, he was a portfolio manager and analyst for Franklin Advisers, Inc. Mr. Tanner is assisted by the sub-adviser’s Global Health Care Team, which is comprised of portfolio managers and research analysts. Team members provide research support and make securities recommendations with respect to the allocated portion of the portfolio, but do not have day-to-day management responsibilities with respect to the portfolio’s investment portfolio.

	RCM Capital Management LLC Four Embarcadero Center San Francisco, CA 94111 Portfolio Manager Michael Dauchot	Dr. Michael Dauchot re-joined RCM in 2005 as Senior Analyst and Lead Portfolio Manager. From 2004 to October 2005, he was a Principal and Healthcare Analyst at Pequot Capital Management. From 1999 to 2004, he served as a Senior Analyst and Sector Fund Manager on the Healthcare team at RCM.

	Wellington Management Company, LLP 75 State Street Boston, MA 02109 Portfolio Managers Robert L. Deresiewicz Ann C. Gallo Jean M. Hynes, CFA Kirk J. Mayer, CFA Joseph H. Schwartz, CFA	Robert L. Deresiewicz, Ann C. Gallo, Jean M. Hynes, Kirk J. Mayer and Joseph H. Schwartz are primarily responsible for day-to-day management of the allocated portion of the portfolio. Mr. Deresiewicz, Vice President and Global Industry Analyst of Wellington Management, joined the firm as an investment professional in 2000. Mr. Deresiewicz has been involved in portfolio management and securities analysis for the portfolio since 2004. Ms. Gallo, Senior Vice President and Global Industry Analyst of Wellington Management, joined the firm as an investment professional in 1998. Ms. Gallo has been involved in portfolio management and securities analysis for the portfolio since its inception. Ms. Hynes, Senior Vice President and Global Industry Analyst of Wellington Management, joined the firm in 1991 and has been an investment professional since 1993. Ms. Hynes has been involved in portfolio management and securities analysis for the portfolio since its inception. Mr. Mayer, Vice President and Global Industry Analyst of Wellington Management, joined the firm as an investment professional in 1998. Mr. Mayer has been involved in portfolio management and securities analysis for the portfolio since its inception.

MANAGEMENT TEAM

The Manager and the Sub-advisers (cont’d)


Portfolio	Sub-Advisers and Portfolio Manager(s)	Business Experience
		Mr. Schwartz, Senior Vice President and Global Industry Analyst of Wellington Management, joined the firm as an investment professional in 1983. Mr. Schwartz has been involved in portfolio management and securities analysis for the portfolio since its inception.

Multimanager High Yield Portfolio	Pacific Investment Management Company LLC 840 Newport Center Drive Suite 300 Newport Beach, CA 92660 Portfolio Manager Mark Hudoff	Mark Hudoff is primarily responsible for the day-to-day management of the allocated portion of the portfolio. Mr. Hudoff is an Executive Vice President of PIMCO. Mr. Hudoff joined the firm in 1996 as a Senior Credit Analyst, and has served as a portfolio manager of fixed income accounts for various institutional clients since that time.

	Post Advisory Group, LLC 11755 Wilshire Boulevard Suite 1400 Los Angeles, CA 90025 Portfolio Managers Larry Post Allan Schweitzer	Larry Post and Allan Schweitzer are primarily responsible for the day-to-day management of the allocated portion of the portfolio. Mr. Post, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Investment Officer of Post since August 2000 and January 2004, respectively, has overall responsibility for the portfolio and investment process. Mr. Schweitzer, a Managing Director-Investment Management of Post, joined Post in 2000 and has held his current position since that time.

MANAGEMENT TEAM

The Manager and the Sub-advisers (cont’d)


Portfolio	Sub-Advisers and Portfolio Manager(s)	Business Experience
Multimanager International Equity Portfolio	AllianceBernstein L.P. 1345 Avenue of the Americas New York, NY 10105 Portfolio Management Team	The management of and investment decisions for the allocated portion of the portfolio are made by the Global Value Investment Policy Group, comprised of senior Global Value Investment Team members. The Global Value Investment Policy Group relies heavily on the fundamental analysis and research of the sub-adviser’s large internal research staff. No one person is principally responsible for making recommendations for the portfolio. The four members of the portfolio management team are: Sharon Fay, Kevin Simms, John Mahedy and Henry D’Auria. Ms. Fay was appointed CIO-Global Value Equities in 2003, assuming oversight for all portfolio-management and research activities relating to cross-border and non-US value investment portfolios. In addition to her role as CIO of Global Value Equities and Chairman of the Global Investment Policy Group, Ms. Fay serves as Co-CIO-European and UK Value equities; previously the CIO for both services from 1999 to 2004. She also serves on the firm’s Executive Committee, the group of senior professionals responsible for managing the firm, enacting key strategic initiatives and allocating resources. Ms. Fay joined AllianceBernstein in 1990 as a research analyst. Mr. Simms was named Co-CIO-International Value Equities in 2003, which he has assumed in addition to his role as Director of Research-Global and International Value equities, a position he has held since 2000. He joined AllianceBernstein in 1992. Mr. Mahedy was named Co-Chief Investment Officer-US Value Equities in 2003. He continues to serve as Director of Research-US Value Equities, a position he has held since 2001. He joined AllianceBernstein in . Mr. D’Auria was named Co-CIO of International Value Equities in 2003, adding to his responsibilities as CIO-Emerging Markets Value Equities, which he assumed in 2002. Mr. D’Auria was one of the chief architects of AllianceBernstein’s global research department, which he managed from 1998 through 2002. Mr. D’Auria joined the firm in 1991.

	JPMorgan Investment Management Inc. 245 Park Avenue New York, NY 10167 Portfolio Management Team	Howard Williams and James Fisher are the members of the portfolio management team primarily responsible for the day-to-day management of the allocated portion of the portfolio. Mr. Williams joined JPMorgan as a portfolio manager in 1994 and has had portfolio management responsibilities since that time. He is currently a Managing Director and the head of JPMorgan’s Global Equities Team. Mr. Fisher joined JPMorgan in 1985 as a trainee portfolio manager and has had portfolio management responsibilities since that time. He is currently a Managing Director and Portfolio Manager in JPMorgan’s Equities Team.

	Marsico Capital Management, LLC 1200 17th Street Suite 1600 Denver, CO 80202 Portfolio Manager James G. Gendelman	James G. Gendelman is primarily responsible for day-to-day management of the allocated portion of the portfolio. Prior to joining Marsico in May of 2000, Mr. Gendelman spent thirteen years as a Vice President of International Sales for Goldman, Sachs & Co. He holds a bachelor’s degree in Accounting from Michigan State University and a MBA in Finance from the University of Chicago.

MANAGEMENT TEAM

The Manager and the Sub-advisers (cont’d)


Portfolio	Sub-Advisers and Portfolio Manager(s)	Business Experience
Multimanager Large Cap Core Equity Portfolio	AllianceBernstein L.P. 1345 Avenue of the Americas New York, NY 10105 Portfolio Management Team	The management of and investment decisions for the allocated portion of the portfolio are made by the US Value Investment Policy Group, comprised of Senior US Value Investment Team members. The US Value Investment Policy Group relies heavily on the fundamental analysis and research of AllianceBernstein’s large internal research staff. No one person is principally responsible for making recommendations for the portfolio. The members of the US Value Investment Policy Group with the most significant responsibility for the day-to-day management of the portfolio are Marilyn Fedak, John Mahedy, Chris Marx and John Phillips. Ms. Fedak has been Chief Investment Officer — US Value Equities and Chairman of the US Value Equity Investment Policy Group since 1993. In 2003, she became head of the AllianceBernstein value equities business. She serves on AllianceBernstein’s Executive Committee, a group of senior professionals responsible for managing the firm, enacting key strategic initiatives and allocating resources. Ms. Fedak served on the board of directors of Sanford C. Bernstein & Co., Inc. from 1994 until the combination with Alliance Capital Management L.P. in 2000. Mr. Mahedy was named Co-Chief Investment Officer — US Value Equities in 2003. He continues to serve as Director of Research — US Value Equities, a position he has held since 2001. Mr. Marx is a Senior Portfolio Manager and Member of the US Value Equity Investment Policy Group. He joined AllianceBernstein in 1997 as a Research Analyst and has covered a variety of industries both domestically and internationally, including chemicals, food, supermarkets, beverages and tobacco. He has had portfolio management responsibilities since he joined the firm. Mr. Phillips is a Senior Portfolio Manager and Member of the US Value Equity Investment Policy Group. He is also Chairman of AllianceBernstein’s Proxy Voting Committee. Mr. Phillips joined AllianceBernstein in 1994 and has had portfolio management responsibilities since he joined the firm.

	Janus Capital Management LLC 151 Detroit Street Denver, CO 80206 Portfolio Manager E. Marc Pinto, CFA	E. Marc Pinto is primarily responsible for day-to-day management of the allocated portion of the portfolio, which he has managed since December 31, 2001. Mr. Pinto joined Janus in 1994 as an analyst and has acted as portfolio manager of other Janus-advised mutual funds since May 2005. Mr. Pinto is also portfolio manager of other Janus accounts.

	Thornburg Investment Management, Inc. 119 East Marcy Street Santa Fe, NM 87501 Portfolio Managers William V. Fries, CFA Connor Browne, CFA Ed Maran, CFA	William V. Fries, Connor Browne and Ed Maran are primarily responsible for day-to-day management of the allocated portion of the portfolio. William V. Fries has been a Managing Director and Portfolio Manager of Thornburg since 1995 when he joined the firm. Connor Browne, joined Thornburg in August 2001 as an Associate Portfolio Manager and has had portfolio management responsibilities since that time. In 2006, Mr. Browne became Co-Portfolio Manager and Managing Director. Ed Maran joined Thornburg in October 2002 as Associate Portfolio Manager and has had portfolio management responsibilities since he joined the firm.

MANAGEMENT TEAM

The Manager and the Sub-advisers (cont’d)


Portfolio	Sub-Advisers and Portfolio Manager(s)	Business Experience
Multimanager Large Cap Growth Portfolio	RCM Capital Management LLC Four Embarcadero Center San Francisco, CA 94111 Portfolio Managers Scott T. Migliori Seth A. Reicher	Scott T. Migliori, Director and Co-Chief Investment Officer, U.S. Large Cap Select Growth Equities and Seth A. Reicher, Managing Director and Co-Chief Investment Officer of RCM are primarily responsible for the day-to-day management of the allocated portion of the portfolio. Mr. Migliori is a Senior Portfolio Manager on the U.S. Large Cap Equity Portfolio Management Team. He joined RCM in 2003 as a Director and Senior Portfolio Manager. Mr. Reicher has been a Managing Director and Co-Chief Investment Officer of RCM since 2000. Mr. Reicher joined RCM as an Analyst in 1993.

	TCW Investment Management Company 865 South Figueroa Street Suite 1800 Los Angeles, CA 90017 Portfolio Manager Craig C. Blum	Craig C. Blum, Managing Director, U.S. Equities is primarily responsible for the day-to-day management of the allocated portion of the portfolio. Mr. Blum previously served as a Managing Director, U.S. Equities, TCW Concentrated Core Equities. In 2003 he served as a Senior Vice President, U.S. TCW Concentrated Core Equities. Mr. Blum joined TCW in 1999.

	T. Rowe Price Associates, Inc. 100 East Pratt Street Baltimore, MD 21202. Portfolio Management Team	An Investment Advisory Committee is responsible for the day-to-day management of the allocated portion of the portfolio. Robert W. Sharps, lead Portfolio Manager, has primary responsibility for the day-to-day management of the allocated portion of the portfolio and works with the committee in developing and executing the allocated portion’s investment program. Mr. Sharps has been chairman of the committee since 2002. He joined T. Rowe Price in 1997 and has been managing investments since 1999.

MANAGEMENT TEAM

The Manager and the Sub-advisers (cont’d)


Portfolio	Sub-Advisers and Portfolio Manager(s)	Business Experience
Multimanager Large Cap Value Portfolio	AllianceBernstein L.P. 1345 Avenue of the Americas New York, NY 10105 Portfolio Management Team	The management of and investment decisions for the allocated portion of the portfolio are made by the US Value Investment Policy Group, comprised of Senior US Value Investment Team members. The US Value Investment Policy Group relies heavily on the fundamental analysis and research of AllianceBernstein’s large internal research staff. No one person is principally responsible for making recommendations for the portfolio. The members of the US Value Investment Policy Group with the most significant responsibility for the day-to-day management of the portfolio are Marilyn Fedak, John Mahedy, Chris Marx and John Phillips. Ms. Fedak has been Chief Investment Officer — US Value Equities and Chairman of the US Value Equity Investment Policy Group since 1993. In 2003, she became head of the AllianceBernstein value equities business. She serves on AllianceBernstein’s Executive Committee, a group of senior professionals responsible for managing the firm, enacting key strategic initiatives and allocating resources. Ms. Fedak served on the board of directors of Sanford C. Bernstein & Co., Inc. from 1994 until the combination with Alliance Capital Management L.P. in 2000. Mr. Mahedy was named Co-Chief Investment Officer — US Value Equities in 2003. He continues to serve as Director of Research — US Value Equities, a position he has held since 2001. Mr. Marx is a Senior Portfolio Manager and Member of the US Value Equity Investment Policy Group. He joined AllianceBernstein in 1997 as a Research Analyst and has covered a variety of industries both domestically and internationally, including chemicals, food, supermarkets, beverages and tobacco. He has had portfolio management responsibilities since he joined the firm. Mr. Phillips is a Senior Portfolio Manager and Member of the US Value Equity Investment Policy Group. He is also chairman of AllianceBernstein’s Proxy Voting Committee. Mr. Phillips joined AllianceBernstein in 1994 and has had portfolio management responsibilities since he joined the firm.

	Institutional Capital LLC 225 West Wacker Drive Suite 2400 Chicago, IL 60606 Portfolio Managers Jerrold K. Senser Thomas R. Wenzel	Jerrold K. Senser and Thomas R. Wenzel are primarily responsible for the day-to-day management of the allocated portion of the portfolio. Mr. Senser serves as chief executive officer and chief investment officer of ICAP. As CEO and CIO, Mr. Senser heads the investment committee and is the lead portfolio manager for all of ICAP’s investment strategies. Mr. Senser joined the firm in 1986. Mr. Wenzel serves as executive vice president and director of research of ICAP. Mr. Wenzel is a senior member of the investment committee and serves as a lead portfolio manager for all of ICAP’s investment strategies. Mr. Wenzel joined ICAP in 1993.

	MFS Investment Management 500 Boylston Street Boston, MA 02116 Portfolio Managers Nevin P. Chitkara Steven R. Gorham	Nevin P. Chitkara and Steven R. Gorham are primarily responsible for day-to-day management of the allocated portion of the portfolio. Mr. Chitkara is an Investment Officer and portfolio manager with MFS and has been employed in the investment management area of MFS since 1997. Mr. Gorham is an Investment Officer and portfolio manager with MFS and has been employed in the investment management area of MFS since 1992.

MANAGEMENT TEAM

The Manager and the Sub-advisers (cont’d)


Portfolio	Sub-Advisers and Portfolio Manager(s)	Business Experience
Multimanager Mid Cap Growth Portfolio	AllianceBernstein L.P. 1345 Avenue of the Americas New York, NY 10105 Portfolio Management Team	The management of and investment decisions for the allocated portion of the portfolio are made by AllianceBernstein’s US Small/SMID Cap Growth Investment Team, which is responsible for management of all of AllianceBernstein’s US Small/SMID Cap Growth accounts. The US Small/SMID Cap Growth Investment Team relies heavily on the fundamental analysis and research of the US Small/SMID Cap Growth Team. In addition, the team draws upon the research of AllianceBernstein’s industry analysts as well as other portfolio management teams. The four members of the US Small/SMID Cap Growth Investment Team with the most significant responsibility for the day-to-day management of the allocated portion of the portfolio are Bruce K. Aronow, N. Kumar Kirpalani, Samantha S. Lau and Wen-Tse-Tseng. Mr. Aronow, Senior Vice President, Portfolio Manager/Research Analyst, serves as Team Leader for the Small/SMID Cap Growth product and is also responsible for research and portfolio management for the Small/SMID Cap Growth consumer/commercial sectors. Mr. Aronow joined AllianceBernstein in 1999 and has had portfolio management responsibilities since that time. Mr. Kirpalani joined AllianceBernstein as an Investment Professional in 1999 and is responsible for research and portfolio management for the Small Cap/SMID Growth industrials sector. Ms. Lau joined AllianceBernstein as an Investment Professional in 1999 and is responsible for research and portfolio management for the Small Cap/SMID Growth technology sector. Mr. Tseng is Vice President and Portfolio Analyst/Manager and is responsible for research and portfolio management for the Small/SMID Cap Growth healthcare sector. Prior to joining AllianceBernstein in March 2006, Mr. Tseng was the healthcare sector portfolio manager for the small cap growth team at William D. Witter since August 2003 and with Weiss, Peck & Greer, from April 2002 to August 2003.

	Franklin Advisers, Inc. One Franklin Parkway San Mateo, CA 94403 Portfolio Management Team	Edward B. Jamieson, Executive Vice President, Chief Investment Officer-Franklin Equity Group and Portfolio Manager, and Michael McCarthy, Senior Vice President, Director of Research and Portfolio Manager are the members of the portfolio management team primarily responsible for the day-to-day management of the allocated portion of the portfolio. Members of the team work jointly to determine investment strategy and security selection for the portfolio. Mr. Jamieson has had portfolio management responsibilities with Franklin Advisers and its predecessor since 1987. Mr. McCarthy joined Franklin Advisers in 1992 and has had portfolio management responsibilities since he joined the firm.

	Provident Investment Counsel, Inc. 300 North Lake Avenue Pasadena, CA 91101 Portfolio Management Team	Richard S. Campagna and James M. Landreth are the members of the portfolio management team primarily responsible for the day-to-day management of the allocated portion of the portfolio. Members of the team work jointly to determine investment strategy and security selection for the portfolio. Mr. Campagna, a Managing Director, Portfolio Manager and Analyst, joined Provident in 2005 as an investment professional. From 2001 to 2005 Mr. Campagna was a Portfolio Manager, Managing Director and Head of Research at Shaker Investments, LLC. Mr. Landreth, a Senior Vice President, Portfolio Manager and Analyst joined Provident in 1993. Since 2001 he has been an analyst and portfolio manager for both small and mid cap portfolios. In 2002 he became the lead portfolio manager for Provident’s SMID cap strategy. He has been an analyst/portfolio manager for the allocated portion of the portfolio since inception with Provident.

MANAGEMENT TEAM

The Manager and the Sub-advisers (cont’d)


Portfolio	Sub-Advisers and Portfolio Manager(s)	Business Experience
Multimanager Mid Cap Value Portfolio	AXA Rosenberg Investment Management LLC 4 Orinda Way Building E Orinda, CA 94563 Portfolio Engineer William E. Ricks	Investment decisions arise from AXA Rosenberg’s automatic expert system processing which combines proprietary software programs and comprehensive databases to replicate the decisions financial experts might make in a perfect world. A team of personnel employed by AXA Rosenberg is jointly responsible for monitoring the recommendations for all accounts that are generated by the investment model and for the day-to-day operations of the accounts. Dr. Ricks is primarily responsible for the day-to-day management of the allocated portion of the portfolio and is the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Investment Officer of AXA Rosenberg. Dr. Ricks has held these positions since 1998. He joined AXA Rosenberg’s predecessor in 1989. He is responsible for overseeing the implementation of AXA Rosenberg’s investment strategies, which are primarily driven by stock selection and portfolio construction models. To that end, he has overall responsibility for the various aspects of AXA Rosenberg’s investment process, including trading, operations, portfolio engineering, and portfolio construction.

	TCW Investment Management Company 865 South Figueroa Street Suite 1800 Los Angeles, CA 90017 Portfolio Managers Nicholas F. Galluccio Susan I. Suvall	Nicholas F. Galluccio and Susan I. Suvall are primarily responsible for the day-to-day management of the allocated portion of the portfolio. Mr. Galluccio has been a Managing Director of TCW since 1997 and joined TCW in 1982. Ms. Suvall has been a Managing Director of TCW since 1998 and joined TCW in 1985.

	Wellington Management Company, LLP 75 State Street Boston, MA 02109 Portfolio Manager James N. Mordy	James N. Mordy is primarily responsible for day-to-day management of the allocated portion of the portfolio. Mr. Mordy, Senior Vice President and Equity Portfolio Manager of Wellington Management, has served as Portfolio Manager of the portfolio since 2002. Mr. Mordy joined Wellington Management as an investment professional in 1985.

MANAGEMENT TEAM

The Manager and the Sub-advisers (cont’d)


Portfolio	Sub-Advisers and Portfolio Manager(s)	Business Experience
Multimanager Small Cap Growth Portfolio	Eagle Asset Management, Inc. 880 Carillon Parkway St. Petersburg, Florida 33716 Portfolio Managers Bert Boksen, CFA Eric Mintz, CFA	Bert L. Boksen has been responsible for the day to day management of the allocated portion of the portfolio. Mr. Boksen has been a Managing Director and Senior Vice President of Eagle since 1995. Eric Mintz has been Assistant Portfolio Manager since 2008 and Senior Research Analyst at Eagle since 2005. Mr. Mintz assists Mr. Boksen in the responsibilities of managing the allocated portion of the portfolio. Mr Mintz does not have individual discretion over the assets of the allocated portion of the portfolio. Previously, Mr. Mintz served as Vice President of equity research for the Oakmont Corporation from 1999 to 2005.

	Wells Capital Management Inc. 525 Market Street San Francisco, CA 94105 Portfolio Managers Jerome Philpott Stuart Roberts Portfolio Managers Thomas C. Ognar, CFA Bruce C. Olson, CFA	Jerome “Cam” Philpott and Stuart Roberts are primarily responsible for the day-to-day management of one of two allocated portions of the portfolio managed by Wells Capital Management. Mr. Philpott joined Wells Capital Management in 2003 as a Senior Portfolio Manager. Prior to joining Wells Capital Management, Mr. Philpott was a senior portfolio manager with Montgomery Asset Management, which he joined in 1991 as an analyst for the Small Cap Growth Equity team. Mr. Roberts joined Wells Capital Management in 2003 as a Senior Portfolio Manager. Prior to joining Wells Capital Management, Mr. Roberts was a senior portfolio manager with Montgomery Asset Management, which he joined in 1990 as founder of the Small Cap Growth Equity Strategy. He has specialized in small-cap growth investments since 1983. Thomas C. Ognar and Bruce C. Olson are the members of the Wells Capital Management’s Growth Equity Team who are primarily responsible for the day-to-day management of the second of two allocated portions of the Small Cap Growth Portfolio managed by Wells Capital Management. Mr. Ognar, Managing Director and Senior Portfolio Manager, joined Wells Capital in 2005 as a portfolio manager. Prior to joining Wells Capital, Mr. Ognar was a portfolio manager with Strong Capital Management, Inc. since May 2002 and has managed separate and institutional accounts since 2001. Mr. Olson, Managing Director and Senior Portfolio Manager, joined Wells Capital in 2005 as a portfolio manager. Prior to joining Wells Capital, he was a portfolio manager with Strong Capital Management, Inc. and has managed separate and institutional accounts since January 1998.

MANAGEMENT TEAM

The Manager and the Sub-advisers (cont’d)


Portfolio	Sub-Advisers and Portfolio Manager(s)	Business Experience
Multimanager Small Cap Value Portfolio	Franklin Advisory Services, LLC One Parker Plaza, Ninth Floor Fort Lee, New Jersey 07024 Portfolio Management Team	The portion of the portfolio allocated to Franklin (“Franklin Allocated Portion”) is managed by a team of investment professionals. The portfolio managers have responsibility for the day-to-day management of the Franklin Allocated Portion and operate as a team providing research and advice on the purchases and sales of individual securities for the Franklin Allocated Portion. The portfolio managers of the team include William J. Lippman, Bruce C. Baughman, CFA, Margaret McGee, Y. Dogan Sahin and Donald G. Taylor, CPA. Mr. Lippman, President of Franklin, joined Franklin Templeton Investments in 1988 and has held his current position since that time. He has primary responsibility for the investments of the Franklin Allocated Portion. He has final authority over all aspects of the Franklin Allocated Portion’s investment portfolio, including but not limited to, purchases and sales of individual securities. The degree to which he may perform these functions, and the nature of these functions, may change from time to time. Mr. Baughman, Senior Vice President of Franklin, joined Franklin Templeton Investments in 1988 and has held his current position since that time. He is a portfolio manager for the Franklin Allocation Portion, providing research and advice on the purchases and sales of individual securities and portfolio risk assessment. Ms. McGee, Vice President of Franklin, joined Franklin Templeton Investments in 1988. She has held her current position since 1997. She is a portfolio manager for the Franklin Allocated Portion, providing research and advice on the purchases and sales of individual securities and portfolio risk assessment. Mr. Sahin is a portfolio manager with Franklin. Mr. Sahin joined Franklin in September 2003 as a research analyst. From 2001 to 2003, Mr. Sahin was a research analyst with Franklin Templeton Investments. Mr. Taylor, Senior Vice President of Franklin, joined Franklin Templeton Investments in 1996 and has held his current position since that time. He is a portfolio manager for the Franklin Allocated Portion, providing research and advice on the purchases and sales of individual securities and portfolio risk assessment.

	Lazard Asset Management LLC 30 Rockefeller Plaza New York, New York 10122 Portfolio Managers Patrick Mullin Andrew Lacey Mark W. Stuckelman	Patrick Mullin and Andrew Lacey are primarily responsible for the day-to-day management of one of two allocated portions of the portfolio managed by LAM. Mr. Mullin, a Director of LAM since 2002, was a Senior Vice President and Portfolio Manager for more than five years prior thereto. He has been with LAM since 1998. Mr. Lacey has been a Deputy Chairman of LAM since 2004. Prior thereto, he was a Managing Director of LAM since 2002 and has been with LAM since 1995. Mark W. Stuckelman is primarily responsible for the day-to-day management of the second of two allocated portions of the Small Cap Value Portfolio managed by LAM. Mr. Stuckelman joined LAM in 2007 as a portfolio manager and is responsible for U.S. small cap value portfolios benchmarked to the Russell 2000 Value Index. He began working in the investment field in 1991. Prior to joining LAM, Mr. Stuckelman served as a portfolio manager with Nicholas-Applegate from 1995 to 2007.

MANAGEMENT TEAM

The Manager and the Sub-advisers (cont’d)


Portfolio	Sub-Advisers and Portfolio Manager(s)	Business Experience
Multimanager Technology Portfolio	Firsthand Capital Management, Inc. 125 South Market Suite 1200 San Jose, CA 95113 Portfolio Manager Kevin M. Landis	Kevin M. Landis is primarily responsible for day-to-day management of the allocated portion of the portfolio. Mr. Landis is a Portfolio Manager for Firsthand and has been an executive of the firm since co-founding it in 1993.

	RCM Capital Management LLC Four Embarcadero Center San Francisco, CA 94111 Portfolio Managers Huachen Chen Walter C. Price	Huachen Chen and Walter C. Price are primarily responsible for day-to-day management of the allocated portion of the portfolio. Mr. Chen is a Managing Director, Senior Analyst and Portfolio Manager since 2004 and has been associated with RCM as an investment professional since 1984. Mr. Price has been a Managing Director, Senior Analyst and Portfolio Manager of RCM since 1978. He joined RCM in 1974 as a Senior Securities Analyst.

	Wellington Management Company, LLP 75 State Street Boston, MA 02109 Portfolio Managers John F. Averill, CFA Bruce L. Glazer Anita M. Killian, CFA Scott E. Simpson Eric Stromquist	John F. Averill, Bruce L. Glazer, Anita M. Killian, Scott E. Simpson and Eric Stromquist are primarily responsible for day-to-day management of the allocated portion of the portfolio. Mr. Averill, Senior Vice President and Global Industry Analyst of Wellington Management, joined the firm as an investment professional in 1994. Mr. Averill has been involved in portfolio management and securities analysis for the portfolio since 2003. Mr. Glazer, Senior Vice President and Global Industry Analyst of Wellington Management, joined the firm as an investment professional in 1997. Mr. Glazer has been involved in portfolio management and securities analysis for the portfolio since 2003. Ms. Killian, Senior Vice President and Global Industry Analyst of Wellington Management, joined the firm as an investment professional in 2000. Ms. Killian has been involved in portfolio management and securities analysis for the portfolio since 2003. Mr. Simpson, Senior Vice President and Global Industry Analyst of Wellington Management, joined the firm as an investment professional in 1995. Mr. Simpson has been involved in portfolio management and securities analysis for the portfolio since 2003. Mr. Stromquist, Senior Vice President and Global Industry Analyst of Wellington Management, joined the firm as an investment professional in 1989. Mr. Stromquist has been involved in portfolio management and securities analysis for the portfolio since 2003.

Management Fees

Each portfolio pays a contractual fee to AXA Equitable for management services. For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2007, the Large Cap Core Equity Portfolio and Large Cap Growth Portfolio each paid a management fee at an annual rate of 0.89% and 0.90%, respectively, of the average daily net assets of the portfolio. The Large Cap Value Portfolio paid a management fee at an annual rate of 0.87%. The Mid Cap Growth Portfolio and Mid Cap Value Portfolio each paid a management fee at an annual rate of 1.10% and 1.09%, respectively, of the average daily net assets of the portfolio. The Small Cap Growth Portfolio and Small Cap Value Portfolio each paid a management fee at an annual rate of 1.05% and 1.03%, respectively, of the average daily net assets of the portfolio. The International Equity Portfolio paid a

MANAGEMENT TEAM

The Manager and the Sub-advisers (cont’d)

management fee at an annual rate of 1.00% of the average daily net assets of the portfolio. The Technology Portfolio and Health Care Portfolio each paid a management fee at an annual rate of 1.20% of the average daily net assets of the portfolio. The Core Bond Portfolio paid a management fee at an annual rate of 0.58% of the average daily net assets of the portfolio. The High Yield Portfolio paid a management fee at an annual rate of 0.57% of the average daily net assets of the portfolio. Effective August 1, 2007, the Manager has agreed to voluntarily waive a portion of its management fee with respect to each portfolio to reflect a $250 million reduction in the requisite asset levels necessary to reach each breakpoint of each portfolio’s contractual management fee rate. The management fees discussed above reflect the effects of this voluntary waiver.

A discussion of the basis for the decision by the Trust’s board of trustees to approve the investment management agreement with AXA Equitable and the investment advisory agreements with the sub-advisers is available in the Trust’s Annual Report to Shareholders for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2007.

The sub-advisers are paid by AXA Equitable. Changes to the sub-advisory fees may be negotiated, which could result in an increase or decrease in the amount of the management fee retained by AXA Equitable, without shareholder approval.

AXA Equitable also provides administrative services to the Trust including coordination of the Trust’s audit, financial statements and tax returns; expense management and budgeting; legal administrative services and compliance monitoring; portfolio accounting services, including daily net asset value accounting; operational risk management; and oversight of the Trust’s proxy voting policies and procedures and anti-money laundering program. For administrative services, in addition to the management fee, the portfolios pay AXA Equitable a contractual fee at an annual rate of 0.15% of the portfolios’ total average net assets up to and including $15 billion, 0.14% of the portfolios’ total average net assets over $15 billion and up to and including $30 billion and 0.125% of the portfolios’ average daily net assets over $30 billion, plus $35,000 per portfolio and an additional $35,000 for each portion of the portfolio for which separate administrative services are provided (e.g. portion of a portfolio allocated to separate sub-advisers and/or managed in a discrete style). Effective August 1, 2007, AXA Equitable has agreed to voluntarily waive a portion of its administration fee with respect to the portfolios to reflect the following reduced rate: 0.15% of the portfolios’ total average net assets up to and including $15 billion, 0.125% of the portfolios’ total average net assets over $15 billion up to and including $30 billion, and 0.100% of the portfolios’ total average net assets over $30 billion, plus $35,000 per portfolio and an additional $35,000 for each portion of the portfolio for which separate administrative services are provided (e.g., portions of a portfolio allocated to separate sub-advisers and/or managed in a discrete style).

Expense Limitation Agreement

In the interest of limiting through April 30, 2009 (unless the board of trustees consents to an earlier revision or termination of this arrangement) the expenses of each portfolio (except High Yield Portfolio), the Manager has entered into an expense limitation agreement with the Trust with respect to the portfolios (“Expense Limitation Agreement”). Pursuant to that Expense Limitation Agreement, the Manager has agreed to make payments or waive its management, administration and other fees to limit the expenses of each portfolio listed below so that the net annual operating expenses of each portfolio (other than interest, taxes, brokerage commissions, other expenditures which are capitalized in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, fees and expenses of other investment companies in which a portfolio invests, other extraordinary expenses not incurred in the ordinary course of each portfolio’s business and amounts payable pursuant to a plan adopted in accordance with Rule 12b-1 under the 1940 Act), do not exceed 0.75% for the Core Bond Portfolio, 1.60% for the Health Care Portfolio and Technology Portfolio, 1.55% for the International Equity Portfolio, 1.10% for the Large Cap Core Equity Portfolio, the Large Cap Growth Portfolio and the Large Cap Value Portfolio, 1.35% for the Mid Cap Growth Portfolio and the Mid Cap Value Portfolio and 1.30% for the Small Cap Growth Portfolio and the Small Cap Value Portfolio.

AXA Equitable may be reimbursed the amount of any such payments or waivers in the future provided that the payments or waivers are reimbursed within three years of the payment or waivers being made and the combination of the portfolio’s expense ratio and such reimbursements do not exceed the portfolio’s expense cap. If the actual expense ratio is less than the expense cap and AXA Equitable has recouped all eligible previous payments made, the portfolio will be charged such lower expenses.

MANAGEMENT TEAM

The Manager and the Sub-advisers (cont’d)

Legal Proceedings Relating to the Sub-advisers

Invesco Aim Capital Management, Inc.

Invesco Aim Capital Management, Inc. (“Invesco Aim Capital Management”) is a subsidiary of Invesco Aim Advisors, Inc. (“Invesco Aim Advisors”, formerly A I M Advisors, Inc.), which is an indirect wholly owned subsidiary of Invesco Ltd. (“Invesco”). Another indirect wholly owned subsidiary of Invesco, INVESCO Funds Group, Inc. (“IFG”), was formerly the investment advisor to the INVESCO Funds.

The mutual fund industry as a whole is currently subject to a wide range of inquiries and litigation related to a wide range of issues, including issues of “market timing” and “late trading”. Both Invesco Aim Advisors and IFG are the subject of a number of such inquiries, as described below.

Settled Enforcement Actions Related to Market Timing

On October 8, 2004, IFG (the former investment advisor to certain AIM Funds), Invesco Aim Advisors and Invesco Aim Distributors, Inc., formerly A I M Distributors, Inc., (“Invesco Aim Distributors”) reached final settlements with certain regulators, including the SEC, the New York Attorney General and the Colorado Attorney General, to resolve civil enforcement actions and/or investigations related to market timing and related activity in the AIM Funds, including those formerly advised by IFG. As part of the settlements, a $325 million fair fund ($110 million of which is civil penalties) has been created to compensate shareholders harmed by market timing and related activity in funds formerly advised by IFG. Additionally, Invesco Aim Advisors and Invesco Aim Distributors created a $50 million fair fund ($30 million of which is civil penalties) to compensate shareholders harmed by market timing and related activity in funds advised by Invesco Aim Advisors, which was done pursuant to the terms of the settlements. These two fair funds will be distributed in accordance with a methodology to be determined by Invesco Aim’s independent distribution consultant, in consultation with Invesco Aim Advisors and the independent trustees of the AIM Funds and acceptable to the staff of the SEC. Under the terms of the settlements, Invesco Aim Advisors also will make certain governance and compliance reforms, including maintaining an internal controls committee and retaining an independent compliance consultant and a corporate ombudsman. The SEC has also settled market timing enforcement actions against senior IFG and Invesco Aim Advisors executives.

Regulatory Action Alleging Market Timing

On August 30, 2005, the West Virginia Office of the State Auditor - Securities Commission (“WVASC”) issued a Summary Order to Cease and Desist and Notice of Right to Hearing to Invesco Aim Advisors and ADI (Order No. 05-1318). The WVASC makes findings of fact that Invesco Aim Advisors and Invesco Aim Distributors entered into certain arrangements permitting market timing of the AIM Funds and failed to disclose these arrangements in the prospectuses for such Funds, and conclusions of law to the effect that Invesco Aim Advisors and Invesco Aim Distributors violated the West Virginia securities laws. The WVASC orders Invesco Aim Advisors and Invesco Aim Distributors to cease any further violations and seeks to impose monetary sanctions, including restitution to affected investors, disgorgement of fees, reimbursement of investigatory, administrative and legal costs and an “administrative assessment,” to be determined by the Commissioner. Initial research indicates that these damages could be limited or capped by statute. By agreement with the Commissioner of Securities, Invesco Aim Advisors’ time to respond to that Order has been indefinitely suspended.

Private Civil Actions Alleging Market Timing

Multiple civil lawsuits, including purported class action and shareholder derivative suits, have been filed against various parties (including, depending on the lawsuit, certain AIM Funds, IFG, Invesco Aim Advisors, Invesco Aim Management Group, Inc., formerly A I M Management Group Inc., (“Invesco Aim Management”), certain related entities, certain of their current and former officers and/or certain unrelated third parties) based on allegations of improper market timing and related activity in the AIM Funds. These lawsuits allege a variety of theories of recovery, including but not limited to: (i) violation of various provisions of the Federal and state securities laws; (ii) violation of various provisions of ERISA; (iii) breach of fiduciary duty; and/or (iv) breach of contract. These lawsuits were initiated in both Federal and state courts and seek such remedies as compensatory damages; restitution; injunctive relief; disgorgement of management fees; imposition of a constructive trust; removal of certain directors and/or employees; various corrective measures under ERISA; rescission of certain Funds’ advisory agreements; interest; and attorneys’ and experts’ fees. All lawsuits based on allegations of market timing, late trading, and related issues have been transferred to the United States District Court for the District of Maryland (the “MDL Court”) for consolidated or coordinated pre-trial proceedings. Pursuant to an Order of the MDL Court, plaintiffs in these lawsuits consolidated their claims for pre-trial

MANAGEMENT TEAM

The Manager and the Sub-advisers (cont’d)

purposes into three amended complaints against various AIM- and IFG-related parties. Plaintiffs in two of the underlying lawsuits transferred to the MDL Court continue to seek remand of their action to state court.

Private Civil Actions Alleging Improper Use of Fair Value Pricing

Multiple civil class action lawsuits have been filed against various parties (including, depending on the lawsuit, certain AIM Funds, IFG and/or Invesco Aim Advisors) alleging that certain AIM Funds inadequately employed fair value pricing. These lawsuits allege a variety of theories of recovery, including but not limited to: (i) violations of various provisions of the Federal securities laws; (ii) common law breach of duty; and (iii) common law negligence and gross negligence. These lawsuits have been filed in both Federal and state courts and seek such remedies as compensatory and punitive damages; interest; and attorneys’ fees and costs.

AllianceBernstein L.P.

All aspects of AllianceBernstein L.P.’s (“AllianceBernstein” and “the firm”) business are subject to various federal and state laws and regulations, and to laws in foreign countries in which AllianceBernstein’s subsidiaries conduct business. Accordingly, from time to time, regulators contact AllianceBernstein seeking information concerning the firm and its business activities. At any given time, AllianceBernstein is also a party to civil lawsuits.

Please see below for details on current material litigation against AllianceBernstein and material regulatory matters involving AllianceBernstein:

Pending Litigation

Market Timing Litigation. On October 2, 2003, a complaint (Hindo v. Alliance Capital Management L.P., et al.) was filed in federal court in New York alleging that AllianceBernstein and numerous other defendants entered into agreements under which certain parties were permitted to engage in “late trading” and “market timing” transactions in certain firm-sponsored mutual funds in violation of the Securities Act of 1933 (“Securities Act”), the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”) and the Investment Advisers Act of 1940. Hindo further alleges that the prospectuses for certain of these funds were false and misleading. Numerous additional lawsuits making factual allegations generally similar to those in Hindo were later filed in federal and state court, including a lawsuit by the State of West Virginia. In February 2004, all of the pending actions were transferred to the United States District Court for the District of Maryland. In September 2004, plaintiffs filed consolidated amended class action complaints with respect to four types of claim against the firm and other defendants - mutual fund shareholder claims, mutual fund derivative claims, ERISA claims by participants in the firm’s profit sharing plan, and derivative claims brought on behalf of AllianceBernstein Holding L.P. In general terms, these lawsuits allege facts similar to those in the Hindo complaint, and assert claims under the Securities Act and Exchange Act, as well as claims under the 1940 Act, the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 and common law. They seek unspecified damages. AllianceBernstein has moved to dismiss the consolidated complaints.

On April 21, 2006, the firm and attorneys for plaintiffs entered into a confidential memorandum of understanding containing their agreement to settle the claims in the mutual fund shareholder, mutual fund derivative and ERISA actions. The agreement will be documented by a stipulation of settlement and will be submitted for court approval at a later date. AllianceBernstein and the other defendants in these actions continue to vigorously defend against any remaining and/or unsettled claims.

* * *

At the present time, AllianceBernstein is unable to predict the outcome or estimate a possible loss or range of loss in respect of the foregoing matters because of the inherent uncertainty regarding the outcome of complex litigation.

With respect to all significant litigation matters, AllianceBernstein conducts a probability assessment of the likelihood of a negative outcome. If the likelihood of a negative outcome is probable, and the amount of the loss can be reasonably estimated, AllianceBernstein records an estimated loss for the expected outcome of the litigation as required by Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 5 (“SFAS No. 5”), “Accounting for Contingencies”, and Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) Interpretation No. 14, “Reasonable Estimation of the Amount of a Loss — an interpretation of FASB Statement No. 5”.

If the likelihood of a negative outcome is reasonably possible and AllianceBernstein is able to indicate an estimate of the possible loss or range of loss, AllianceBernstein discloses that fact together with the estimate of the possible loss or range of loss. However,

MANAGEMENT TEAM

The Manager and the Sub-advisers (cont’d)

it is difficult to predict the outcome or estimate a possible loss or range of loss because litigation is subject to significant uncertainties, particularly when plaintiffs allege substantial or indeterminate damages, or when the litigation is highly complex or broad in scope.

Pending Regulatory Matters

Mutual Fund Trading Matters. Certain regulatory authorities, including the SEC and the Office of the New York State Attorney General (“NYAG”), are investigating practices in the mutual fund industry identified as “market timing” and “late trading” of mutual fund shares and have requested that the firm provide information to them. Our firm has cooperated and will continue to cooperate with all of these authorities.

On December 18, 2003, the firm reached terms with the SEC for the resolution of regulatory claims against Alliance Capital Management L.P. with respect to market timing. The SEC Order reflecting the agreement found that the firm maintained relationships with certain investors who were permitted to engage in market timing trades in certain domestic mutual funds sponsored by the firm in return for or in connection with making investments (which were not actively traded) in other firm products, including hedge funds and mutual funds, for which it receives advisory fees (“Market Timing Relationships”). The Order also stated that the SEC determined to accept an Offer of Settlement submitted by Alliance Capital Management L.P. The firm concurrently reached an agreement in principle with the NYAG which was subject to final, definitive documentation. That documentation, titled the Assurance of Discontinuance, is dated September 1, 2004.

Under both the SEC Order and the NYAG agreement, the firm must establish a $250 million fund to compensate fund shareholders for the adverse effect of market timing. Of the $250 million fund, the Agreements characterize $150 million as disgorgement and $100 million as a penalty. The Agreement with the NYAG requires a weighted average reduction in fees of 20% with respect to investment advisory agreements with AllianceBernstein-sponsored U.S. long-term open-end retail mutual funds for a minimum of five years, which commenced January 1, 2004. The terms of the agreements also call for the formation of certain compliance and ethics committees and the election of independent chairman to mutual fund boards, among other things.

On February 10, 2004, AllianceBernstein received (i) a subpoena duces tecum from the Office of the Attorney General of the State of West Virginia and (ii) a request for information from West Virginia’s Office of the State Auditor, Securities Commission (“West Virginia Securities Commission”) (together, the “Information Requests”). Both Information Requests require AllianceBernstein to produce documents concerning, among other things, any market timing or late trading in our sponsored mutual funds. AllianceBernstein responded to the Information Requests and is cooperating fully with the investigation.

On August 30, 2005, the deputy commissioner of securities of the West Virginia Securities Commission signed a “Summary Order to Cease and Desist, and Notice of Right to Hearing” addressed to Alliance Capital Management L.P. and Alliance Capital Management Holding L.P. The Summary Order claims that the firms violated the West Virginia Uniform Securities Act, and makes factual allegations generally similar to those in the Hindo Complaint. On January 25, 2006, AllianceBernstein and several unaffiliated firms filed a Petition for Writ of Prohibition and Order Suspending Proceedings in West Virginia state court, seeking to vacate the Summary Order and for other relief. The court denied the writ and in September 2006 the Supreme Court of Appeals declined our petition for appeal. On September 22, 2006, AllianceBernstein filed an answer and motion to dismiss the Summary Order with the Securities Commissioner. AllianceBernstein intends to vigorously defend against the allegations in the Summary Order.

On September 16, 2005, the SEC issued a Wells notice to the firm claiming that it aided and abetted violations of Section 19(a) of the 1940 Act by the Alliance All-Market Advantage Fund and the Spain Fund. The notice alleged that the funds did not, under Section 19(a), provide the required disclosure of the character of dividend distributions. The funds revised their dividend disclosures in 2004 in response to the SEC’s review of this matter and the firm believes that the disclosures now fully comply with Section 19(a). The firm has reached an agreement in principle with the SEC to resolve this matter, and has recorded a $450,000 earnings charge in connection therewith.

A discussion of material litigation and regulatory matters also is contained in AllianceBernstein’s Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2005, and Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2006. If you would like additional information concerning any of these matters, or any other matters, please let us know.

MANAGEMENT TEAM

The Manager and the Sub-advisers (cont’d)

Franklin Advisers, Inc.

Franklin Advisory Services, LLC

On August 2, 2004, Franklin Resources, Inc. announced that Franklin Advisers, Inc. (“Advisers”) (investment manager to many of the funds within Franklin Templeton Investments, and an affiliate of the investment manager to the other funds) reached a settlement with the SEC that resolved the issues resulting from the SEC’s investigation of market timing activity in the Franklin Templeton Investments funds. Under the terms of the settlement and the SEC’s administrative order, pursuant to which Advisers neither admitted nor denied any of the findings contained therein, Advisers agreed, among other matters, to pay $50 million, of which $20 million is a civil penalty, to be distributed to shareholders of certain funds in accordance with a plan to be developed by an independent distribution consultant. Such a distribution plan has been prepared and submitted to the SEC for approval. After publication of notice of the plan and a 30-day comment period, the proposed plan of distribution will be submitted to the SEC for approval. Following the SEC’s approval of the plan of distribution, with modifications as appropriate, distribution of the settlement monies will begin in accordance with the terms and conditions of that settlement and the plan.

Franklin Resources, Inc., certain of its subsidiaries and certain funds, current and former officers, employees, and directors have been named in multiple lawsuits in different courts alleging violations of various federal securities and state laws and seeking, among other relief, monetary damages, restitution, removal of fund trustees, directors, investment managers, administrators, and distributors, rescission of management contracts and 12b-1 plans, and/or attorneys’ fees and costs. Specifically, the lawsuits claim breach of duty with respect to alleged arrangements to permit market timing and/or late trading activity, or breach of duty with respect to the valuation of the portfolio securities of certain Templeton funds managed by Franklin Resources, Inc. subsidiaries, allegedly resulting in market timing activity. The majority of these lawsuits duplicate, in whole or in part, the allegations asserted in the SEC’s findings as described above. The lawsuits are styled as class actions, or derivative actions on behalf of either the named funds or Franklin Resources, Inc.

To date, more than 400 similar lawsuits against at least 19 different mutual fund companies, among other defendants, have been filed in federal district courts throughout the country. Because these cases involve common questions of fact, the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (the Judicial Panel) ordered the creation of a multidistrict litigation in the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, entitled “In re Mutual Funds Investment Litigation” (the MDL). The Judicial Panel then transferred similar cases from different districts to the MDL for coordinated or consolidated pretrial proceedings.

On December 13, 2004, Franklin Templeton Distributors, Inc. (Distributors) (the principal underwriter of shares of the Franklin Templeton mutual funds) and Advisers reached an agreement with the SEC, resolving the issues resulting from the SEC’s investigation concerning marketing support payments to securities dealers who sell fund shares. In connection with that agreement, in which Advisers and Distributors neither admitted nor denied any of the findings contained therein, they agreed to pay the funds a penalty of $20 million and disgorgement of $1 (one dollar), in accordance with a plan to be developed by an independent distribution consultant to be paid for by Advisers and Distributors. The SEC approved the independent distribution consultant’s proposed plan of distribution arising from this SEC order, and disbursement of the settlement monies to the designated funds under this plan was completed in September 2006, in accordance with the terms and conditions of the SEC’s order and the plan.

Franklin Resources, Inc., certain of its subsidiaries and certain funds, current and former officers, employees, and directors, have also been named in multiple lawsuits alleging violations of various securities laws and pendent state law claims relating to the disclosure of marketing support payments and/or payment of allegedly excessive commissions and/or advisory or distribution fees, and seeking, among other relief, monetary damages, restitution, rescission of advisory contracts, including recovery of all fees paid pursuant to those contracts, an accounting of all monies paid to the named investment managers, declaratory relief, injunctive relief, and/or attorneys’ fees and costs. These lawsuits are styled as class actions or derivative actions brought on behalf of certain funds.

Franklin Resources, Inc. previously disclosed these issues as matters under investigation by government authorities and the subject of an internal company inquiry as well as private lawsuits in its regulatory filings and on its public website. Any further updates on these matters will be disclosed on Franklin Resources, Inc.’s website at franklintempleton.com under “Statement on Current Industry Issues.”

Janus Capital Management LLC

In the fall of 2003, the SEC, NYAG, the Colorado Attorney General (“COAG”), and the Colorado Division of Securities (‘‘CDS’’) announced that they were investigating alleged frequent trading practices in the mutual fund industry. On August 18, 2004, Janus announced that it had reached final settlements with the SEC, the NYAG, the COAG, and the CDS related to such regulators’ investigations into Janus, frequent trading arrangements.

MANAGEMENT TEAM

The Manager and the Sub-advisers (cont’d)

A number of civil lawsuits were brought against Janus and certain of its affiliates, the Janus funds, and related entities and individuals based on allegations similar to those announced by the above regulators and were filed in several state and federal jurisdictions. Such lawsuits alleged a variety of theories for recovery including, but not limited to, the federal securities laws, other federal statutes (including ERISA), and various common law doctrines. The Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation transferred these actions to the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland (the “Court”) for coordinated proceedings. On September 29, 2004, five consolidated amended complaints were filed with the Court that generally include: (i) claims by a putative class of investors in certain Janus funds asserting claims on behalf of the investor class (Marini, et al. v. Janus Investment Fund, et al., U.S. District Court, District of Maryland, Case No. 04-CV-00497); (ii) derivative claims by investors in certain Janus funds ostensibly on behalf of such funds (Steinberg et al. v. Janus Capital Management, LLC et al., U.S. District Court, District of Maryland, Case No. 04-CV-00518); (iii) claims on behalf of participants in the Janus 401(k) plan (Wangberger v. Janus Capital Group Inc., 401(k) Advisory Committee, et al., U.S. District Court, District of Maryland, Case No. JFM-05-2711); (iv) claims brought on behalf of shareholders of Janus Capital Group Inc. (‘‘JCGI’’) on a derivative basis against the Board of Directors of JCGI (Chasen v. Whiston, et al., U.S. District Court, District of Maryland, Case No. 04-MD-00855); and (v) claims by a putative class of shareholders of JCGI asserting claims on behalf of the shareholders (Wiggins, et al. v. Janus Capital Group, Inc., et al., U.S. District Court, District of Maryland, Case No. 04-CV-00818). Each of the five complaints initially named JCGI and/or Janus as a defendant. In addition, the following were also named as defendants in one or more of the actions: Janus Investment Fund (“JIF”), Janus Aspen Series (“JAS”), Janus Adviser Series (“JAD”), Janus Distributors LLC, Enhanced Investment Technologies, LLC (“INTECH”), Bay Isle Financial LLC (“Bay Isle”), Perkins, Wolf, McDonnell and Company, LLC (“Perkins”), the Advisory Committee of the Janus 401(k) plan, and the current or former directors of JCGI.

On August 25, 2005, the Court entered orders dismissing most of the claims asserted against Janus and its affiliates by fund investors in the Marini and Steinberg cases (actions (i) and (ii) above) except certain claims under Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and under Section 36(b) of the 1940 Act. On August 15, 2006, the Wangberger complaint in the 401(k) plan class action (action (iii) above) was dismissed by the district court with prejudice; the plaintiff appealed that dismissal decision to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. The appeal is still pending and argument in the matter is scheduled to commence in December 2007. The Court also dismissed the Chasen lawsuit (action (iv) above) against JCGI’s Board of Directors without leave to amend. Finally, a Motion to Dismiss the Wiggins suit (action (v) above) was granted and the matter was dismissed in May 2007. However, in June 2007, Plaintiffs appealed that dismissal to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. That appeal is currently pending.

In addition to the lawsuits described above, the Auditor of the State of West Virginia (“Auditor”), in his capacity as securities commissioner, has initiated administrative proceedings against many of the defendants in the market timing cases (including JCGI and Janus) and, as a part of its relief, is seeking disgorgement and other monetary relief based on similar market timing allegations (In the Matter of Janus Capital Group Inc. et al., Before the Securities Commissioner, State of West Virginia, Summary Order No. 05-1320). The respondents in these proceedings collectively sought a Writ of Prohibition in state court, which was denied. Their subsequent Petition for Appeal was also denied. Consequently, in September 2006, JCGI and Janus filed their answer to the Auditor’s summary order instituting proceedings and requested a hearing. A status conference was held on June 28, 2007, during which the parties were ordered to submit their proposed scheduling order. In addition to a recently filed Motion to Discharge Order to Show Cause, JCGI and Janus, as well as other similarly situated defendants, continue to challenge the statutory authority of the Auditor to bring such an action.

Additional lawsuits may be filed against certain of the Janus funds, Janus, and related parties in the future. Janus Capital does not currently believe that these pending actions will materially affect its ability to continue providing services it has agreed to provide to the Janus funds.

MFS Investment Management

Since December 2003, MFS, MFS Fund Distributors, Inc., MFS Service Center, Inc., MFS Corporation Retirement Committee, Sun Life Financial Inc., various MFS proprietary funds (“MFS funds”), certain current and/or former Trustees of the MFS funds, and certain officers of MFS have been named as defendants in multiple lawsuits filed in federal and state courts. The various lawsuits generally allege that some or all of the defendants (i) permitted or acquiesced in market timing and/or late trading in some of the MFS funds, and inadequately disclosed MFS’ internal policies concerning market timing and such matters, (ii) received excessive compensation as fiduciaries with respect to the MFS funds, or (iii) permitted or acquiesced in the improper use of fund assets by MFS to support the distribution of MFS fund shares and inadequately disclosed MFS’ use of fund assets in this manner. The lawsuits assert that some or all of the defendants violated the federal securities laws, including the Securities Act of 1933 and the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the 1940 Act, and the Investment Advisers Act of 1940, the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA), as well as fiduciary duties and other violations of common law. The lawsuits variously have been commenced as class actions or individual actions on behalf of investors who purchased, held, or redeemed shares of the MFS funds during specified periods, as ERISA actions by participants in certain retirement plan accounts on behalf of those accounts, or as derivative actions on behalf of the MFS funds.

MANAGEMENT TEAM

The Manager and the Sub-advisers (cont’d)

The lawsuits relating to market timing and related matters have been transferred to, and consolidated before, the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, as part of a multi-district litigation of market timing and related claims involving several other fund complexes (In re Mutual Funds Investment Litigation (Alger, Columbia, Janus, MFS, One Group, Putnam, Allianz Dresdner), No. 1:04-md-15863 (transfer began March 19, 2004)). The market timing cases related to the MFS funds include Riggs v. MFS et al., Case No. 04-CV-01162-JFM (direct), Hammerslough v. MFS et al., Case No. 04-MD-01620 (derivative), Anita Walker v. MFS et al., Case No. 1:04-CV-01758 (ERISA), and Reaves v. MFS Series Trust I, et al., Case No. 1:05-CV-02220-JFM (Class B Shares). The plaintiffs in these consolidated lawsuits generally seek injunctive relief including removal of the named Trustees, adviser and distributor, rescission of contracts and 12b-1 Plans, disgorgement of fees and profits, monetary damages, punitive damages, attorney’s fees and costs and other equitable and declaratory relief. One lawsuit alleging improper brokerage allocation practices and excessive compensation is pending in the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts (Forsythe v. Sun Life Financial Inc., et al., No. 04cv10584 (GAO) (a consolidated action, first filed on March 25, 2004). The plaintiffs in this lawsuit are generally seeking compensatory damages, punitive damages, recovery of fees, rescission of contracts, an accounting, restitution, equitable and/or injunctive relief and attorney’s fees and costs. Insofar as any of the actions is appropriately brought derivatively on behalf of any of the MFS funds, any recovery will inure to the benefit of the MFS funds. Several claims of the various lawsuits have been dismissed; MFS and the other named defendants continue to defend the various lawsuits.

Pacific Investment Management Company LLC (“PIMCO”)

Since February 2004, PIMCO, Allianz Global Investors of America L.P. (“AGI”), Allianz Global Investors Distributors (“AGID”), AGID, and certain of their affiliates, and certain employees of PIMCO, have been named as defendants in fifteen lawsuits filed in various jurisdictions. Eleven of those lawsuits concern “market timing,” and they have been transferred to and consolidated for pre-trial proceedings in a multi-district litigation proceeding in the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland; the other four lawsuits concern “revenue sharing” and have been consolidated into a single action in the U.S. District Court for the District of Connecticut. The lawsuits have been commenced as putative class actions on behalf of investors who purchased, held or redeemed shares of the various series of the PIMCO Funds and the Allianz Funds (the”funds”) during specified periods, or as derivative actions on behalf of the funds.

The market timing actions in the District of Maryland generally allege that certain hedge funds were allowed to engage in “market timing” in certain of the Allianz Funds and PIMCO Funds and this alleged activity was not disclosed. Pursuant to tolling agreements entered into with the derivative and class action plaintiffs, PIMCO, certain PIMCO Funds’ Trustees, and certain employees of PIMCO who were previously named as defendants have all been dropped as defendants in the market timing actions; the plaintiffs continue to assert claims on behalf of the shareholders of the PIMCO Funds or on behalf of the PIMCO Funds themselves against other defendants. By order dated November 3, 2005, the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland granted PIMCO Funds’ motion to dismiss claims asserted against it in a consolidated amended complaint where PIMCO Funds was named, in the complaint, as a nominal defendant. Thus, at present the PIMCO Funds is not a party to any “market timing” lawsuit. The revenue sharing action in the District of Connecticut generally alleges that fund assets were inappropriately used to pay brokers to promote the funds of the Allianz Funds and PIMCO Funds, including directing fund brokerage transactions to such brokers, and that such alleged arrangements were not fully disclosed to shareholders. On September 19, 2007 the U.S. District Court for the District of Connecticut granted defendants’ motion to dismiss the consolidated amended complaint in the revenue sharing action. The market timing and revenue sharing lawsuits seek, among other things, unspecified compensatory damages plus interest and, in some cases, punitive damages, the rescission of investment advisory contracts, the return of fees paid under those contracts and restitution.

Two nearly identical class action civil complaints have been filed in August 2005, in the Northern District of Illinois Eastern Division, alleging that the plaintiffs each purchased and sold a 10-year Treasury note futures contract and suffered damages from an alleged shortage when PIMCO held both physical and futures positions in 10-year Treasury notes for its client accounts. The two actions have been consolidated into one action, and the two separate complaints have been replaced by a consolidated complaint. PIMCO is a named defendant, and PIMCO Funds have been added as a defendant, to the consolidated action. PIMCO strongly believes the complaint is without merit and intends to vigorously defend itself.

In April 2006, certain portfolios of the Trust were served in an adversary proceeding brought by the Official Committee of Asbestos Claimants of G-I Holdings, Inc. in G-I Holdings, Inc.’s bankruptcy in the District of New Jersey. In July 2004, PIMCO was named in this lawsuit and remains a defendant. The plaintiff seeks to recover for the bankruptcy estate assets that were transferred by the predecessor entity of G-I Holdings, Inc. to a wholly-owned subsidiary in 1994. The subsidiary has since issued notes, of which certain funds are alleged to be holders. The complaint alleges that in 2000, more than two hundred noteholders — including certain funds were granted a second priority lien on the assets of the subsidiary in exchange for their consent to a refinancing transaction and the granting of a first priority lien to

MANAGEMENT TEAM

The Manager and the Sub-advisers (cont’d)

the lending banks. The plaintiff is seeking invalidation of the lien in favor of the noteholders and/or the value of the lien. On June 21, 2006, the District of New Jersey overturned the Bankruptcy Court’s decision granting permission to file the adversary proceeding and remanded the matter to the Bankruptcy Court for further proceedings. Following a motion to reconsider, the District Court upheld its remand on August 7, 2006, and instructed the Bankruptcy Court to conduct a “cost-benefit” analysis of the Committee’s claims, including the claims against the noteholders. The Bankruptcy Court held a status conference on October 25, 2006 and set a briefing schedule relating to this cost-benefit analysis.

It is possible that these matters and/or other developments resulting from these matters could result in increased fund redemptions or other adverse consequences to a fund. However, PIMCO and AGID believe that these matters are not likely to have a material adverse effect on a fund or on PIMCO’s or AGID’s ability to perform their respective investment advisory or distribution services relating to a fund.

The foregoing speaks only as of the date of this prospectus. While there may be additional litigation or regulatory developments in connection with the matters discussed above, the foregoing disclosure of litigation and regulatory matters will be updated only if those developments are material.

RCM Capital Management LLC

Since February, 2004, RCM Capital Management LLC (“RCM”), in its capacity as a sub-adviser to various mutual funds, has been named as a defendant in the four “revenue sharing” lawsuits described above in the section entitled “Pacific Investment Management Company LLC”, which have been consolidated into a single action in the U.S. District Court for the District of Connecticut. The consolidated lawsuits were commenced as putative class actions on behalf of investors who purchased, held or redeemed shares of various mutual funds during specified periods, or as derivative actions. The revenue sharing action in the District of Connecticut generally alleges that fund assets were inappropriately used to pay brokers, including directing fund brokerage transactions to such brokers, and that such alleged arrangements were not fully disclosed to shareholders. On August 11, 2005 the U.S. District Court for the District of Connecticut conducted a hearing on defendants’ motion to dismiss the consolidated amended complaint in the revenue sharing action but has not yet ruled on the motion to dismiss. The revenue sharing action seeks, among other things, unspecified compensatory damages plus interest and, in some cases, punitive damages, the rescission of investment advisory contracts, the return of fees paid under those contracts and restitution.

It is possible that these matters and/or other developments resulting from these matters could result in increased portfolio redemptions or other adverse consequences to the portfolio. However, RCM believes that these matters are not likely to have a material adverse effect on the portfolio or on RCM’s ability to perform its investment advisory services relating to the portfolio.

Wells Capital Management Inc.

Wells Capital Management Inc. (“Wells”) has been joined as a defendant in a class action lawsuit filed against it and Wells Fargo in connection with an alleged violation of the 1940 Act. However, Wells believes it was erroneously joined in this action and it is working with the plaintiff’s counsel to obtain a dismissal. Wells may also from time to time be engaged in legal employment related actions with current and former employees. Based upon reasonable inquiry, Wells is informed and believes that none of its officers, employees or directors has been subject to any legal action relating to their employment with Wells.

PORTFOLIO SERVICES

Buying and Selling Shares

Each portfolio offers Class A and Class B shares. All shares are purchased and sold at their net asset value without any sales load. These portfolios are not designed for market-timers, see the section entitled “Purchase Restrictions on Market-Timers and Active Traders.”

The price at which a purchase or sale is effected is based on the next calculation of net asset value after an order is placed by an insurance company or qualified retirement plan investing in or redeeming from the Trust. All redemption requests will be processed and payment with respect thereto will normally be made within seven days after tender.

Restrictions on Buying and Selling Shares

Purchase Restrictions

The portfolios reserve the right to suspend or change the terms of purchasing or selling shares.

Purchase Restrictions on Market-Timers and Active Traders

Frequent transfers or purchases and redemptions of portfolio shares, including market timing and other program trading or short-term trading strategies, may be disruptive to the portfolios. Excessive purchases and redemptions of shares of a portfolio may adversely affect portfolio performance and the interests of long-term investors by requiring it to maintain larger amounts of cash or to liquidate portfolio holdings at a disadvantageous time or price. For example, when market timing occurs, a portfolio may have to sell its holdings to have the cash necessary to redeem the market timer’s shares. This can happen when it is not advantageous to sell any securities, so the portfolio’s performance may be hurt. When large dollar amounts are involved, market timing can also make it difficult to use long-term investment strategies because a portfolio cannot predict how much cash it will have to invest. In addition, disruptive transfers or purchases and redemptions of portfolio shares may impede efficient portfolio management and impose increased transaction costs, such as brokerage costs, by requiring the portfolio manager to effect more frequent purchases and sales of portfolio securities. Similarly, a portfolio may bear increased administrative costs as a result of the asset level and investment volatility that accompanies patterns of excessive or short-term trading. Portfolios that invest a significant portion of their assets in foreign securities (e.g., International Equity Portfolio), the securities of small- and mid-capitalization companies (e.g., Mid Cap Growth Portfolio, Mid Cap Value Portfolio, Small Cap Growth Portfolio and Small Cap Value Portfolio) or high-yield securities (e.g., High Yield Portfolio) tend to be subject to the risks associated with market timing and short-term trading strategies to a greater extent than funds that do not. Securities trading in overseas markets present time zone arbitrage opportunities when events affecting portfolio securities values occur after the close of the overseas market but prior to the close of the U.S. market. Securities of small- and mid-capitalization companies and high-yield securities also present arbitrage opportunities because the market for such securities may be less liquid than the market for the securities of larger companies and higher quality bonds, which could result in pricing inefficiencies.

The Trust’s board of trustees has adopted policies and procedures regarding disruptive transfer activity. The Trust and the portfolios discourage frequent purchases and redemptions of portfolio shares by Contractholders and will not make special arrangements to accommodate such transactions in portfolio shares. As a general matter, each portfolio and the Trust reserve the right to reject a transfer that they believe, in their sole discretion, is disruptive (or potentially disruptive) to the management of the portfolio.

The Trust’s polices and procedures seek to discourage what it considers to be disruptive trading activity. The Trust seeks to apply its policies and procedures to all Contractholders, including any omnibus accounts, uniformly. It should be recognized, however, that such policies and procedures are subject to limitations:

•

They do not eliminate the possibility that disruptive transfer activity, including market timing, will occur or that portfolio performance will be affected by such activity.

•

The design of such policies and procedures involves inherently subjective judgments, which AXA Equitable, on behalf of the Trust, seeks to make in a fair and reasonable manner consistent with the interests of all Contractholders.

•

The limits on AXA Equitable’s ability to monitor certain potentially disruptive transfer activity means that some Contractholders may be treated differently than others, resulting in the risk that some Contractholders may be able to engage in frequent transfer activity while others will bear the effect of that frequent transfer activity.

If AXA Equitable, on behalf of the Trust, determines that a Contractholder’s transfer patterns among the Trust’s portfolios are disruptive to the Trust’s portfolios, it may, among other things, restrict the availability of personal telephone requests, facsimile transmissions, automated

PORTFOLIO SERVICES (cont’d)

telephone services, internet services or any electronic transfer services. AXA Equitable may also refuse to act on transfer instructions on an agent acting under a power of attorney who is acting on behalf of more than one owner. In making these determinations, AXA Equitable may consider the combined transfer activity of Contracts that it believes are under common ownership, control or direction.

The Trust currently considers transfers into and out of (or vice versa) the same portfolio within a five-business day period as potentially disruptive transfer activity. In order to reduce disruptive activity, it monitors the frequency of transfers, including the size of transfers in relation to portfolio assets, in each portfolio. The Trust aggregates inflows and outflows for each portfolio on a daily basis. When a potentially disruptive transfer into or out of a portfolio occurs on a day when the portfolio’s net inflows and outflows exceed an established monitoring threshold, AXA Equitable sends a letter to the Contractholder explaining that there is a policy against disruptive transfer activity and that if such activity continues, AXA Equitable may take the actions described above to restrict the availability of voice, fax and automated transaction services. If such Contractholder is identified a second time as engaging in potentially disruptive transfer activity, AXA Equitable currently restricts the availability of voice, fax and automated transaction services. AXA Equitable currently applies such action for the remaining life of each affected Contract. Because AXA Equitable exercises discretion in determining whether or not to take the actions discussed above, some Contractholders may be treated differently than others, resulting in the risk that some Contractholders may be able to engage in frequent transfer activity while others will bear the effect of the frequent transfer activity. Although AXA Equitable currently provides a letter to Contractholders who have engaged in disruptive transfer activity of its intention to restrict access to communication services, AXA Equitable may not continue to provide such letters. Consistent with seeking to discourage potentially disruptive transfer activity, AXA Equitable or the Trust may also, in its sole discretion and without further notice, change what it considers potentially disruptive transfer activity and its monitoring procedures and thresholds, as well as change its procedures to restrict this activity. You should consult the Contract prospectus that accompanies this Prospectus for information on other specific limitations on the transfer privilege.

The above policies and procedures with respect to frequent transfers or purchases and redemptions of portfolio shares also apply to retirement plan participants, but do not apply to AXA Equitable’s funds of funds.

Notwithstanding our efforts, we may be unable to detect or deter market timing activity by certain persons, which can lead to disruption of management of, and excess costs to, the particular portfolio.

Selling Restrictions

The table below describes restrictions placed on selling shares of any portfolio described in this Prospectus.



Restriction		Situation
The portfolio may suspend the right of redemption or postpone payment for more than 7 days:		• When the New York Stock Exchange is closed (other than a weekend/holiday). • During an emergency. • Any other period permitted by the SEC.
A portfolio may pay the redemption price in whole or part by a distribution in kind of readily marketable securities in lieu of cash or may take up to 7 days to pay a redemption request in order to raise capital:		• When it is detrimental for a portfolio to make cash payments as determined in the sole discretion of AXA Equitable.

How Portfolio Shares are Priced

“Net asset value” is the price of one share of a portfolio without a sales charge, and is calculated each business day using the following formula:


Net Asset Value =		Total market value of securities + Cash and other assets – Liabilities
Net Asset Value =		Number of outstanding shares

The net asset value of portfolio shares is determined according to this schedule:

•

A share’s net asset value is determined as of the close of regular trading on the New York Stock Exchange (“Exchange”) on the days the Exchange is open for trading. This is normally 4:00 p.m. Eastern Time.

PORTFOLIO SERVICES (cont’d)

•

The price you pay for purchasing or redeeming a share will be based upon the net asset value next calculated after your order is placed by an insurance company or qualified retirement plan.

•

A portfolio heavily invested in foreign securities may have net asset value changes on days when you cannot buy or sell its shares because foreign securities sometimes trade on days when a portfolio’s shares are not priced.

Generally, portfolio securities are valued as follows:

•

Equity securities (including securities issued by exchange traded funds (“ETFs”)) — most recent sales price or official closing price or if there is no sale or official closing price, latest available bid price.

•

Debt securities (other than short-term obligations) — based upon pricing service valuations.

•

Short-term obligations (with maturities of 60 days or less) — amortized cost (which approximates market value).

•

Securities traded on foreign exchanges — most recent sales or bid price on the foreign exchange or market, unless a significant event or circumstance occurs after the close of that market or exchange that will materially affect its value. In that case, fair value as determined by or under the direction of the Trust’s board of trustees at the close of regular trading on the Exchange. Foreign currency is converted into U.S. dollar equivalent daily at current exchange rates.

•

Options — last sales price or, if not available, previous day’s sales price. If the bid price is higher or the asked price is lower than the last sales price, the higher bid or lower asked price may be used. Options not traded on an exchange or actively traded are valued according to fair value methods.

•

Futures — last sales price or, if there is no sale, latest available bid price.

•

Investment Company Securities — shares of open-end mutual funds (other than ETFs) held by a portfolio will be valued at the net asset value of the shares of such funds as described in those funds’ prospectuses.

•

Other Securities — other securities and assets for which market quotations are not readily available or for which valuation cannot be provided are valued at their fair value as determined in good faith under the direction of the Trust’s board of trustees. For example, a security whose trading has been halted during the trading day may be fair valued based on the available information at the time of the close of the trading market. Similarly, securities for which there is no ready market (e.g., securities of certain small capitalization issuers and certain issuers located in emerging markets) also may be fair valued. Some methods for valuing these securities may include: fundamental analysis (earnings multiple, etc.), matrix pricing, discounts from market prices of similar securities, or discounts applied due to the nature and duration of restrictions on the disposition on the securities.

Events or circumstances affecting the values of portfolio securities that occur between the closing of their principal markets and the time the net asset value is determined, such as foreign securities trading on foreign exchanges that close before the time the net asset value is determined, may be reflected in the Trust’s calculation of net asset values for each applicable portfolio when the Trust deems that the event or circumstance would materially affect such portfolio’s net asset value. Such events or circumstances may be company specific, such as an earning report, country or region specific, such as a natural disaster, or global in nature. Such events or circumstances also may include price movements in the U.S. securities markets.

The effect of fair value pricing as described above is that securities may not be priced on the basis of quotations from the primary market in which they are traded, but rather may be priced by another method that the Trust’s board of trustees believes reflects fair value. As such, fair value pricing is based on subjective judgments and it is possible that fair value may differ materially from the value realized on a sale. This policy is intended to assure that the portfolio’s net asset value fairly reflects security values as of the time of pricing. Also, fair valuation of a portfolio’s securities can serve to reduce arbitrage opportunities available to short-term traders, but there is no assurance that fair value pricing policies will prevent dilution of the portfolio’s NAV by those traders.

Dividends and Other Distributions

The portfolios (other than the Core Bond Portfolio) generally distribute most or all of their net investment income and their net realized gains, if any, annually. The Core Bond Portfolio normally pays income dividends monthly, and its net realized gains, if any, annually. Dividends and other distributions by a portfolio are automatically reinvested at net asset value in shares of that portfolio.

PORTFOLIO SERVICES (cont’d)

Tax Consequences

Each portfolio is treated as a separate corporation, and intends to continue to qualify to be treated as a regulated investment company, for federal tax purposes. A portfolio will be so treated if it meets specified federal income tax rules, including its requirements regarding types of investments, limits on investments, types of income, and distributions. A regulated investment company is not taxed at the entity (portfolio) level to the extent it passes through its net income and gains to its shareholders by making distributions. Although the Trust intends that each portfolio will be operated to have no federal tax liability, if any portfolio does have any federal tax liability, that would hurt its investment performance. Also, any portfolio that invests in foreign securities or holds (and certain other requirements) foreign currencies could be subject to foreign taxes that could reduce its investment performance.

It is important for each portfolio to maintain its regulated investment company status (and to satisfy certain other requirements), because the shareholders of the portfolio that are insurance company separate accounts will then be able to use a “look-through” rule in determining whether the Contracts indirectly funded by the portfolio meet the investment diversification rules for separate accounts. If a portfolio failed to meet those diversification rules, owners of non-pension plan Contracts funded through that portfolio would be taxed immediately on the accumulated investment earnings under their Contracts and would lose any benefit of tax deferral. AXA Equitable, in its capacity as Manager and as the administrator for the Trust, therefore carefully monitors the portfolios’ compliance with all of the regulated investment company rules and separate account investment diversification rules.

Contractholders seeking to more fully understand the tax consequences of their investment should consult with their tax advisers or the insurance company that issued their variable product or refer to their Contract prospectus.

Additional Information

Portfolio Distribution Arrangements

The portfolios are distributed by AXA Advisors, LLC and AXA Distributors, LLC, affiliates of AXA Equitable, the Co-distributors. The Trust has adopted a Distribution Plan under Rule 12b-1 under the 1940 Act for the portfolios’ Class B shares. Under the plan, Class B shares are charged an annual fee to compensate each of the Co-distributors for promoting, selling and servicing shares of the portfolios. The annual fee is equal to 0.25% (subject to 0.50% maximum) of each portfolio’s average daily net assets attributable to Class B shares. Because these distribution fees are paid out of the portfolio’s assets on an ongoing basis, over time these fees will increase your cost of investing and may cost you more than paying other types of charges.

The Co-distributors may receive payments from certain sub-advisers of the portfolios or their affiliates to help defray expenses for sales meetings or seminar sponsorships that may relate to the Contracts and/or the sub-advisers’ respective portfolios. These sales meetings or seminar sponsorships may provide the sub-advisers with increased access to persons involved in the distribution of the Contracts. The Co-distributors also may receive other marketing support from the sub-advisers in connection with the distribution of the Contracts.

GLOSSARY OF TERMS

Bid price — The price a prospective buyer is ready to pay. This term is used by traders who maintain firm bid and offer prices in a given security by standing ready to buy or sell security units at publicly quoted prices.

Capital gain distributions — Payments to a portfolio’s shareholders of profits earned from selling securities in that portfolio. Capital gain distributions are usually paid once a year.

Core investing — An investment style that includes both the strategies used when seeking either growth companies (those with strong earnings growth) or value companies (those that may be temporarily out of favor or have earnings or assets not fully reflected in their stock price).

Derivative — A financial instrument whose value and performance are based on the value and performance of an underlying asset, reference rate or index.

Diversification — The strategy of investing in a wide range of companies to reduce the risk if an individual company suffers losses.

Duration — A measure of how much a bond’s price fluctuates with changes in interest rates.

Earnings growth — A pattern of increasing rate of growth in earnings per share from one period to another, which usually causes a stock’s price to rise.

Fundamental analysis — An analysis of the balance sheet and income statements of a company in order to forecast its future stock price movements. Fundamental analysis considers past records of assets, earnings, sales, products, management and markets in predicting future trends in these indicators of a company’s success or failure. By appraising a company’s prospects, analysts using such an approach assess whether a particular stock or group of stocks is undervalued or overvalued at its current market price.

Growth investing — An investment style that emphasizes companies with strong earnings growth. Growth investing is generally considered more aggressive than “value” investing.

Interest rate — Rate of interest charged for the use of money, usually expressed as an annual rate.

Market capitalization — Market price of a company’s shares multiplied by number of shares outstanding. A common measure of the relative size of a company.

Net asset value (NAV) — The market value of one share of a portfolio on any given day without taking into account any front-end sales charge or contingent deferred sales charge. It is determined by dividing a portfolio’s total net assets by the number of shares outstanding.

Price-to-book value ratio — Current market price of a stock divided by its book value, or net asset value.

Price-to-earnings ratio — Current market price of a stock divided by its earnings per share. Also known as the “multiple,” the price-to-earnings ratio gives investors an idea of how much they are paying for a company’s earning power and is a useful tool for evaluating the costs of different securities.

Value investing — An investment style that focuses on companies that may be temporarily out of favor or have earnings or assets not fully reflected in their stock prices.

Volatility — The general variability of a portfolio’s value resulting from price fluctuations of its investments. In most cases, the more diversified a portfolio is, the less volatile it will be.

Yield — The rate at which a portfolio earns income, expressed as a percentage. Mutual fund yield calculations are standardized, based upon a formula developed by the SEC.

DESCRIPTION OF BENCHMARKS

Each portfolio’s performance is compared to that of a broad-based securities market index.

Broad-based securities indices are unmanaged and are not subject to fees and expenses typically associated with managed investment company portfolios. Investments cannot be made directly in a broad-based securities index.

Lehman Brothers U.S. Aggregate Bond Index

Covers the U.S. investment-grade fixed-rate, taxable bond market, including government and credit securities, taxable municipal securities, agency mortgage pass-through securities, asset-backed securities, and commercial mortgage-based securities. To qualify for inclusion in the Lehman Brothers U.S. Aggregate Bond Index, a bond must have at least one year remaining to final maturity, rated Baa3 or better by Moody’s, and rated BBB- or better by S&P, have a fixed coupon rate, and be U.S. dollar denominated.

Merrill Lynch High Yield Master Cash Pay Only Index

Is an unmanaged index that tracks the performance of below investment grade U.S. dollar denominated corporate bonds publicly issued in the U.S. domestic market.

Morgan Stanley Capital International EAFE Index

Contains a market capitalization weighted sampling of securities deemed by Morgan Stanley Capital International (“MSCI”) to be representative of the market structure of the developed equity markets in Europe, Australasia and the Far East. To construct the index, MSCI targets at least 60% coverage of the market capitalization of each industry within each country in the EAFE index. Companies with less than 40% of their market capitalization publicly traded are float-adjusted to include only a fraction of their market capitalization in the broader EAFE index. The EAFE index assumes dividends are reinvested net of withholding taxes and does not reflect any fees and expenses.

Russell 1000^® Index

Contains 1,000 of the largest companies in the Russell 3000 Index, representing approximately 92% of the investable U.S. equity market. The Russell 3000 Index is composed of 3,000 large U.S. securities, as determined by total market capitalization. This index is capitalization weighted and represents approximately 98% of the investable U.S. equity market.

Russell 1000^® Growth Index

Contains those Russell 1000 securities (1,000 largest securities in the Russell 3000 Index) with a greater-than-average growth orientation. Securities in this index tend to exhibit higher price-to-book and price-to-earnings ratios, lower dividend yields and higher forecasted growth values than the Value universe.

Russell 1000^® Value Index

Contains those Russell 1000 securities (1,000 largest securities in the Russell 3000 Index) with a less-than-average growth orientation. It represents the universe of stocks from which value managers typically select. Securities in this index tend to exhibit lower price-to-book and price-to-earnings ratios, higher dividend yields and lower forecasted growth values than the Growth universe.

Russell Midcap^® Growth Index

Contains the bottom 800 companies in the Russell 1000 Index with a greater-than-average growth orientation. Securities in this index tend to exhibit higher price-to-book and price-earnings ratios, lower dividend yields and higher forecasted growth values than the Value universe.

Russell Midcap^® Value Index

Contains the bottom 800 companies in the Russell 1000 Index with a less-than-average growth orientation. Securities in this index tend to exhibit lower price-to-book and price-earnings ratios, lower dividend yields and lower forecasted growth values than the Growth universe.

DESCRIPTION OF BENCHMARKS (cont’d)

Russell 2000^® Growth Index

Is an unmanaged index which measures the performance of those Russell 2000 companies with higher price-to-book ratios and higher forecasted growth values. The Russell 2000 Index contains 2,000 of the smallest companies in the Russell 3000 Index, representing approximately 8% of the total market capitalization of the Russell 3000 Index.

Russell 2000^® Value Index

Is an unmanaged index which measures the performance of those Russell 2000 companies with lower price-to-book ratios and lower forecasted growth values. The Russell 2000 Index contains 2,000 of the smallest companies in the Russell 3000 Index, representing approximately 8% of the total market capitalization of the Russell 3000 Index.

Russell 2500^™ Growth Index

Is an unmanaged index which measures the performance of those Russell 2500 companies with higher price-to-book ratios and higher forecasted growth values. The Russell 2500 Index contains 2,500 of the smallest companies in the Russell 3000 Index.

Russell 2500^™ Value Index

Is an unmanaged index which measures the performance of those Russell 2500 companies with lower price-to-book ratios and lower forecasted growth values. The Russell 2500 Index contains 2,500 of the smallest companies in the Russell 3000 Index.

Russell 3000^® Growth Index

Is an unmanaged index that measures the performance of those companies in the Russell 3000 Index with higher price-to-book ratios and higher forecasted growth values. The Russell 3000 Index is composed of 3,000 large U.S. securities as determined by total market capitalization. The index is capitalization weighted and represents approximately 98% of the investable U.S. equity market.

Russell 1000 Technology Index

Contains those Russell 1000 Index securities (1,000 largest securities in the Russell 3000 Index) that are deemed technology companies by the Russell sector classification scheme. This sector includes securities in the following industries: computer hardware, computer software, communications technology, electrical & electronics, semiconductors, and scientific equipment & suppliers. The index is market value weighted.

Russell 1000 Healthcare Index

Contains those Russell 1000 Index securities (1,000 largest securities in the Russell 3000 Index) that are deemed healthcare companies by the Russell sector classification scheme.

Standard & Poor’s 500 Composite Stock Index

Contains 500 of the largest U.S. industrial, transportation, utility and financial companies deemed by Standard & Poor’s to be representative of the larger capitalization portion of the U.S. stock market. The index is capitalization weighted, thereby giving greater weight to companies with the largest market capitalizations.

FINANCIAL HIGHLIGHTS

The financial highlights table is intended to help you understand the financial performance of the Trust’s Class A and Class B shares for each of the portfolios. The financial information in the table below is for the past five (5) years. The information below has been derived from the financial statements of the Trust, which have been audited by PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, an independent registered public accounting firm. PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP’s report on the Trust’s financial statements as of December 31, 2007 and the financial statements themselves appear in the Trust’s Annual Report.

Certain information reflects financial results for a single portfolio share. The total returns in the tables represent the rate that a shareholder would have earned (or lost) on an investment in the portfolio (assuming reinvestment of all dividends and other distributions). The total return figures shown below do not reflect any separate account or Contract fees and charges. The total return figures would be lower if they did reflect such fees and charges. The information should be read in conjunction with the financial statements contained in the Trust’s Annual Report which are incorporated by reference into the Trust’s SAI and available upon request.

Multimanager Core Bond Portfolio


	Class A
	Year Ended December 31,
	2007(a)			2006(a)			2005(a)			2004			2003
Net asset value, beginning of year	$	10.21		$	10.25		$	10.43		$	10.42		$	10.37

Income (loss) from investment operations:
Net investment income		0.47			0.44			0.36			0.24			0.24
Net realized and unrealized gain (loss) on investments and foreign currency transactions		0.17			(0.04	)		(0.16	)		0.18			0.18

Total from investment operations		0.64			0.40			0.20			0.42			0.42

Less distributions:
Dividends from net investment income		(0.47	)		(0.44	)		(0.38	)		(0.26	)		(0.25	)
Distributions from realized gains		—			—			—			(0.15	)		(0.12	)

Total dividends and distributions		(0.47	)		(0.44	)		(0.38	)		(0.41	)		(0.37	)

Net asset value, end of year	$	10.38		$	10.21		$	10.25		$	10.43		$	10.42

Total return		6.53	%		3.96	%		2.00	%		4.13	%		4.10	%

Ratios/Supplemental Data:
Net assets, end of year (000’s)	$	2,088,488		$	1,911,399		$	1,237,241		$	944,330		$	431,203
Ratio of expenses to average net assets:
After waivers		0.71	%		0.70	%		0.70	%		0.70	%		0.70	%
After waivers and fees paid indirectly		0.71	%		0.70	%		0.70	%		0.70	%		0.70	%
Before waivers and fees paid indirectly		0.76	%		0.77	%		0.78	%		0.80	%		0.86	%
Ratio of net investment income to average net assets:
After waivers		4.62	%		4.31	%		3.51	%		2.38	%		2.23	%
After waivers and fees paid indirectly		4.62	%		4.31	%		3.51	%		2.38	%		2.23	%
Before waivers and fees paid indirectly		4.57	%		4.24	%		3.43	%		2.28	%		2.07	%
Portfolio turnover rate		475	%		366	%		654	%		767	%		633	%
Effect of contractual expense limitation during the year:
Per share benefit to net investment income	$	0.01		$	0.01		$	0.01		$	0.01		$	0.02

FINANCIAL HIGHLIGHTS (cont’d)

Multimanager Core Bond Portfolio (continued)


	Class B
	Year Ended December 31,
	2007(a)			2006(a)			2005(a)			2004			2003
Net asset value, beginning of year	$	10.20		$	10.24		$	10.42		$	10.41		$	10.37

Income (loss) from investment operations:
Net investment income		0.44			0.41			0.34			0.22			0.20
Net realized and unrealized gain (loss) on investments and foreign currency transactions		0.18			(0.03	)		(0.16	)		0.18			0.19

Total from investment operations		0.62			0.38			0.18			0.40			0.39

Less distributions:
Dividends from net investment income		(0.42	)		(0.42	)		(0.36	)		(0.24	)		(0.23	)
Distributions from realized gains		—			—			—			(0.15	)		(0.12	)

Total dividends and distributions		(0.42	)		(0.42	)		(0.36	)		(0.39	)		(0.35	)

Net asset value, end of year	$	10.40		$	10.20		$	10.24		$	10.42		$	10.41

Total return		6.23	%		3.80	%		1.74	%		3.87	%		3.74	%

Ratios/Supplemental Data:
Net assets, end of year (000’s)	$	829,932		$	825,182		$	806,356		$	781,977		$	666,007
Ratio of expenses to average net assets:
After waivers		0.96	%		0.95	%		0.95	%		0.95	%		0.95	%
After waivers and fees paid indirectly		0.96	%		0.95	%		0.95	%		0.95	%		0.95	%
Before waivers and fees paid indirectly		1.01	%		1.02	%		1.03	%		1.05	%		1.11	%
Ratio of net investment income to average net assets:
After waivers		4.37	%		4.04	%		3.26	%		2.13	%		1.98	%
After waivers and fees paid indirectly		4.37	%		4.04	%		3.26	%		2.13	%		1.98	%
Before waivers and fees paid indirectly		4.32	%		3.97	%		3.18	%		2.03	%		1.82	%
Portfolio turnover rate		475	%		366	%		654	%		767	%		633	%
Effect of contractual expense limitation during the year:
Per share benefit to net investment income	$	0.01		$	0.01		$	0.01		$	0.01		$	0.02

FINANCIAL HIGHLIGHTS (cont’d)

Multimanager Health Care Portfolio


	Class A
	Year Ended December 31,
	2007(a)			2006(a)			2005(a)			2004			2003(a)
Net asset value, beginning of year	$	11.03		$	10.98		$	10.78		$	10.22		$	8.02

Income (loss) from investment operations:
Net investment loss		(0.06	)		(0.03	)		(0.05	)		(0.05	)		(0.06	)
Net realized and unrealized gain on investments and foreign currency transactions		1.07			0.59			0.81			1.28			2.35

Total from investment operations		1.01			0.56			0.76			1.23			2.29

Less distributions:
Distributions from net realized gains		(0.90	)		(0.51	)		(0.56	)		(0.67	)		(0.09	)

Net asset value, end of year	$	11.14		$	11.03		$	10.98		$	10.78		$	10.22

Total return		9.17	%		5.39	%		7.30	%		12.32	%		28.59	%

Ratios/Supplemental Data:
Net assets, end of year (000’s)	$	18,376		$	16,808		$	15,347		$	10,588		$	6,376
Ratio of expenses to average net assets:
After waivers and reimbursements		1.43	%		1.43	%		1.48	%		1.60	%		1.60	%
After waivers, reimbursements and fees paid indirectly		1.42	%		1.38	%		1.46	%		1.56	%		1.59	%
Before waivers, reimbursements and fees paid indirectly		1.43	%		1.43	%		1.48	%		1.60	%		1.68	%
Ratio of net investment loss to average net assets:
After waivers and reimbursements		(0.49	)%		(0.34	)%		(0.46	)%		(0.59	)%		(0.69	)%
After waivers, reimbursements and fees paid indirectly		(0.48	)%		(0.28	)%		(0.44	)%		(0.55	)%		(0.68	)%
Before waivers, reimbursements and fees paid indirectly		(0.49	)%		(0.34	)%		(0.46	)%		(0.59	)%		(0.77	)%
Portfolio turnover rate		105	%		145	%		109	%		127	%		108	%
Effect of contractual expense limitation during the year:
Per share benefit to net investment loss	$	—		$	—		$	—		$	—		$	0.01

FINANCIAL HIGHLIGHTS (cont’d)

Multimanager Health Care Portfolio (continued)


	Class B
	Year Ended December 31,
	2007(a)			2006(a)			2005(a)			2004			2003(a)
Net asset value, beginning of year	$	10.88		$	10.86		$	10.70		$	10.17		$	8.01

Income (loss) from investment operations:
Net investment loss		(0.08	)		(0.06	)		(0.07	)		(0.07	)		(0.08	)
Net realized and unrealized gain on investments and foreign currency transactions		1.05			0.59			0.79			1.27			2.33

Total from investment operations		0.97			0.53			0.72			1.20			2.25

Less distributions:
Distributions from net realized gains		(0.90	)		(0.51	)		(0.56	)		(0.67	)		(0.09	)

Net asset value, end of year	$	10.95		$	10.88		$	10.86		$	10.70		$	10.17

Total return		9.04	%		5.08	%		6.98	%		12.09	%		28.12	%

Ratios/Supplemental Data:
Net assets, end of year (000’s)	$	415,882		$	381,449		$	334,012		$	270,570		$	167,416
Ratio of expenses to average net assets:
After waivers and reimbursements		1.68	%		1.68	%		1.73	%		1.85	%		1.85	%
After waivers, reimbursements and fees paid indirectly		1.67	%		1.63	%		1.71	%		1.81	%		1.84	%
Before waivers, reimbursements and fees paid indirectly		1.68	%		1.68	%		1.73	%		1.85	%		1.93	%
Ratio of net investment loss to average net assets:
After waivers and reimbursements		(0.74	)%		(0.59	)%		(0.71	)%		(0.84	)%		(0.94	)%
After waivers, reimbursements and fees paid indirectly		(0.73	)%		(0.53	)%		(0.69	)%		(0.80	)%		(0.93	)%
Before waivers, reimbursements and fees paid indirectly		(0.74	)%		(0.59	)%		(0.71	)%		(0.84	)%		(1.02	)%
Portfolio turnover rate		105	%		145	%		109	%		127	%		108	%
Effect of contractual expense limitation during the year:
Per share benefit to net investment loss	$	—		$	—		$	—		$	—		$	0.01

FINANCIAL HIGHLIGHTS (cont’d)

Multimanager High Yield Portfolio(b)


	Class A
	Year Ended December 31,
	2007(a)			2006(a)			2005(a)			2004(a)			2003(a)
Net asset value, beginning of year	$	5.61		$	5.47		$	5.75		$	5.63		$	4.82

Income (loss) from investment operations:
Net investment income		0.45			0.42			0.41			0.42			0.42
Net realized and unrealized gain (loss) on investments and foreign currency transactions		(0.27	)		0.14			(0.23	)		0.09			0.69

Total from investment operations		0.18			0.56			0.18			0.51			1.11

Less distributions:
Dividends from net investment income		(0.45	)		(0.42	)		(0.46	)		(0.39	)		(0.30	)

Net asset value, end of year	$	5.34		$	5.61		$	5.47		$	5.75		$	5.63

Total return		3.29	%		10.21	%		3.26	%		9.02	%		22.97	%

Ratios/Supplemental Data:
Net assets, end of year (000’s)	$	887,961		$	855,156		$	770,374		$	974,088		$	784,005
Ratio of expenses to average net assets		0.76	%		0.76	%		0.76	%		0.76	%		0.75	%
Ratio of net investment income to average net assets		7.78	%		7.45	%		7.08	%		7.20	%		7.67	%
Portfolio turnover rate		108	%		103	%		116	%		78	%		66	%

	Class B
	Year Ended December 31,
	2007(a)			2006(a)			2005(a)			2004(a)			2003(a)
Net asset value, beginning of year	$	5.58		$	5.44		$	5.71		$	5.59		$	4.79

Income (loss) from investment operations:
Net investment income		0.43			0.41			0.39			0.40			0.40
Net realized and unrealized gain (loss) on investments and foreign currency transactions		(0.25	)		0.13			(0.21	)		0.09			0.68

Total from investment operations		0.18			0.54			0.18			0.49			1.08

Less distributions:
Dividends from net investment income		(0.44	)		(0.40	)		(0.45	)		(0.37	)		(0.28	)

Net asset value, end of year	$	5.32		$	5.58		$	5.44		$	5.71		$	5.59

Total return		3.18	%		9.93	%		3.13	%		8.75	%		22.54	%

Ratios/Supplemental Data:
Net assets, end of year (000’s)	$	1,034,629		$	1,101,281		$	1,043,950		$	1,029,570		$	823,114
Ratio of expenses to average net assets		1.01	%		1.01	%		1.01	%		1.01	%		1.00	%
Ratio of net investment income to average net assets		7.53	%		7.20	%		6.83	%		6.95	%		7.42	%
Portfolio turnover rate		108	%		103	%		116	%		78	%		66	%

FINANCIAL HIGHLIGHTS (cont’d)

Multimanager International Equity Portfolio


	Class A
	Year Ended December 31,
	2007(a)			2006(a)			2005(a)			2004			2003
Net asset value, beginning of year	$	15.58		$	13.03		$	12.14		$	10.60		$	7.93

Income from investment operations:
Net investment income		0.21			0.11			0.14			0.09			0.05
Net realized and unrealized gain on investments, futures, and foreign currency transactions		1.73			3.20			1.73			1.83			2.69

Total from investment operations		1.94			3.31			1.87			1.92			2.74

Less distributions:
Dividends from net investment income		(0.16	)		(0.11	)		(0.21	)		(0.12	)		(0.07	)
Distributions from realized gains		(0.98	)		(0.65	)		(0.77	)		(0.26	)		—

Total dividends and distributions		(1.14	)		(0.76	)		(0.98	)		(0.38	)		(0.07	)

Net asset value, end of year	$	16.38		$	15.58		$	13.03		$	12.14		$	10.60

Total return		12.73	%		25.58	%		15.74	%		18.18	%		34.64	%

Ratios/Supplemental Data:
Net assets, end of year (000’s)	$	2,193,441		$	1,356,428		$	379,616		$	238,906		$	16,003
Ratio of expenses to average net assets:
After waivers and reimbursements		1.23	%		1.28	%		1.33	%		1.55	%		1.55	%
After waivers, reimbursements, and fees paid indirectly		1.23	%		1.27	%		1.29	%		1.50	%		1.48	%
Before waivers, reimbursements, and fees paid indirectly		1.23	%		1.28	%		1.33	%		1.55	%		1.78	%
Ratio of net investment income (loss) to average net assets:
After waivers and reimbursements		1.27	%		0.77	%		1.13	%		0.73	%		0.45	%
After waivers, reimbursements, and fees paid indirectly		1.27	%		0.78	%		1.17	%		0.78	%		0.52	%
Before waivers, reimbursements, and fees paid indirectly		1.27	%		0.77	%		1.13	%		0.73	%		0.22	%
Portfolio turnover rate		47	%		45	%		67	%		83	%		72	%
Effect of contractual expense limitation during the year:
Per share benefit to net investment income	$	—		$	—		$	—		$	—		$	0.02

FINANCIAL HIGHLIGHTS (cont’d)

Multimanager International Equity Portfolio (continued)


	Class B
	Year Ended December 31,
	2007(a)			2006(a)			2005(a)			2004			2003
Net asset value, beginning of year	$	15.56		$	13.01		$	12.12		$	10.58		$	7.91

Income from investment operations:
Net investment income		0.17			0.10			0.11			0.07			0.03
Net realized and unrealized gain on investments, futures, and foreign currency transactions		1.72			3.17			1.72			1.82			2.69

Total from investment operations		1.89			3.27			1.83			1.89			2.72

Less distributions:
Dividends from net investment income		(0.12	)		(0.07	)		(0.17	)		(0.09	)		(0.05	)
Distributions from realized gains		(0.98	)		(0.65	)		(0.77	)		(0.26	)		—

Total dividends and distributions		(1.10	)		(0.72	)		(0.94	)		(0.35	)		(0.05	)

Net asset value, end of year	$	16.35		$	15.56		$	13.01		$	12.12		$	10.58

Total return		12.39	%		25.30	%		15.47	%		17.91	%		34.39	%

Ratios/Supplemental Data:
Net assets, end of year (000’s)	$	905,461		$	765,683		$	449,400		$	336,354		$	166,915
Ratio of expenses to average net assets:
After waivers and reimbursements		1.48	%		1.53	%		1.58	%		1.80	%		1.80	%
After waivers, reimbursements, and fees paid indirectly		1.48	%		1.52	%		1.54	%		1.75	%		1.73	%
Before waivers, reimbursements, and fees paid indirectly		1.48	%		1.53	%		1.58	%		1.80	%		2.03	%
Ratio of net investment income to average net assets:
After waivers and reimbursements		1.08	%		0.67	%		0.88	%		0.48	%		0.20	%
After waivers, reimbursements, and fees paid indirectly		1.08	%		0.68	%		0.92	%		0.53	%		0.27	%
Before waivers, reimbursements, and fees paid indirectly		1.08	%		0.67	%		0.88	%		0.48	%		(0.03	)%
Portfolio turnover rate		47	%		45	%		67	%		83	%		72	%
Effect of contractual expense limitation during the year:
Per share benefit to net investment income	$	—		$	—		$	—		$	—		$	0.02

FINANCIAL HIGHLIGHTS (cont’d)

Multimanager Large Cap Core Equity Portfolio


	Class A
	Year Ended December 31,
	2007(a)			2006(a)			2005(a)			2004			2003
Net asset value, beginning of year	$	11.96		$	10.79		$	10.37		$	9.89		$	7.73

Income from investment operations:
Net investment income		0.09			0.08			0.06			0.08			0.03
Net realized and unrealized gain on investments and foreign currency transactions		0.52			1.40			0.67			0.90			2.17

Total from investment operations		0.61			1.48			0.73			0.98			2.20

Less distributions:
Dividends from net investment income		(0.08	)		(0.07	)		(0.03	)		(0.13	)		(0.04	)
Distributions from realized gains		(0.83	)		(0.24	)		(0.28	)		(0.37	)		—

Total dividends and distributions		(0.91	)		(0.31	)		(0.31	)		(0.50	)		(0.04	)

Net asset value, end of year	$	11.66		$	11.96		$	10.79		$	10.37		$	9.89

Total return		5.22	%		13.84	%		7.07	%		9.92	%		28.41	%

Ratios/Supplemental Data:
Net assets, end of year (000’s)	$	842,193		$	598,068		$	309,162		$	6,932		$	5,049
Ratio of expenses to average net assets:
After waivers and reimbursements		1.10	%		1.10	%		1.10	%		1.10	%		1.10	%
After waivers, reimbursements and fees paid indirectly		1.09	%		1.08	%		1.08	%		1.07	%		1.07	%
Before waivers, reimbursements and fees paid indirectly		1.10	%		1.10	%		1.15	%		1.22	%		1.42	%
Ratio of net investment income (loss) to average net assets:
After waivers and reimbursements		0.74	%		0.73	%		0.52	%		0.79	%		0.42	%
After waivers, reimbursements and fees paid indirectly		0.74	%		0.75	%		0.54	%		0.82	%		0.45	%
Before waivers, reimbursements and fees paid indirectly		0.74	%		0.72	%		0.47	%		0.67	%		0.10	%
Portfolio turnover rate		51	%		49	%		39	%		52	%		45	%
Effect of contractual expense limitation during the year:
Per share benefit to net investment income	$	—		$	—	#	$	0.01		$	0.01		$	0.03

FINANCIAL HIGHLIGHTS (cont’d)

Multimanager Large Cap Core Equity Portfolio (continued)


	Class B
	Year Ended December 31,
	2007(a)			2006(a)			2005(a)			2004			2003
Net asset value, beginning of year	$	11.96		$	10.79		$	10.38		$	9.89		$	7.73

Income from investment operations:
Net investment income		0.06			0.06			0.03			0.05			0.01
Net realized and unrealized gain on investments and foreign currency transactions		0.53			1.39			0.66			0.91			2.16

Total from investment operations		0.59			1.45			0.69			0.96			2.17

Less distributions:
Dividends from net investment income		(0.05	)		(0.04	)		—	#		(0.10	)		(0.01	)
Distributions from realized gains		(0.83	)		(0.24	)		(0.28	)		(0.37	)		—

Total dividends and distributions		(0.88	)		(0.28	)		(0.28	)		(0.47	)		(0.01	)

Net asset value, end of year	$	11.67		$	11.96		$	10.79		$	10.38		$	9.89

Total return		5.05	%		13.56	%		6.70	%		9.75	%		28.09	%

Ratios/Supplemental Data:
Net assets, end of year (000’s)	$	215,406		$	208,296		$	185,408		$	173,875		$	136,178
Ratio of expenses to average net assets:
After waivers and reimbursements		1.35	%		1.35	%		1.35	%		1.35	%		1.35	%
After waivers, reimbursements and fees paid indirectly		1.34	%		1.33	%		1.33	%		1.32	%		1.32	%
Before waivers, reimbursements and fees paid indirectly		1.35	%		1.35	%		1.40	%		1.47	%		1.67	%
Ratio of net investment income (loss) to average net assets:
After waivers and reimbursements		0.49	%		0.47	%		0.27	%		0.54	%		0.17	%
After waivers, reimbursements and fees paid indirectly		0.50	%		0.49	%		0.29	%		0.57	%		0.20	%
Before waivers, reimbursements and fees paid indirectly		0.49	%		0.47	%		0.22	%		0.42	%		(0.15	)%
Portfolio turnover rate		51	%		49	%		39	%		52	%		45	%
Effect of contractual expense limitation during the year:
Per share benefit to net investment income	$	—		$	—	#	$	0.01		$	0.01		$	0.03

FINANCIAL HIGHLIGHTS (cont’d)

Multimanager Large Cap Growth Portfolio


	Class A
	Year Ended December 31,
	2007(a)			2006(a)			2005(a)			2004			2003
Net asset value, beginning of year	$	9.96		$	10.40		$	9.66		$	9.03		$	6.90

Income (loss) from investment operations:
Net investment loss		(0.01	)		(0.03	)		(0.05	)		(0.01	)		(0.01	)
Net realized and unrealized gain on investments		1.13			0.08			0.79			0.64			2.14

Total from investment operations		1.12			0.05			0.74			0.63			2.13

Less distributions:
Distributions from realized gains		(1.24	)		(0.49	)		—			—			—

Net asset value, end of year	$	9.84		$	9.96		$	10.40		$	9.66		$	9.03

Total return		11.51	%		0.44	%		7.66	%		6.98	%		30.87	%

Ratios/Supplemental Data:
Net assets, end of year (000’s)	$	25,968		$	21,104		$	17,780		$	12,166		$	8,168
Ratio of expenses to average net assets:
After waivers and reimbursements		1.10	%		1.10	%		1.10	%		1.10	%		1.10	%
After waivers, reimbursements and fees paid indirectly		1.04	%		1.08	%		1.08	%		1.05	%		1.07	%
Before waivers, reimbursements and fees paid indirectly		1.12	%		1.12	%		1.13	%		1.16	%		1.33	%
Ratio of net investment loss to average net assets:
After waivers and reimbursements		(0.12	)%		(0.27	)%		(0.49	)%		(0.23	)%		(0.32	)%
After waivers, reimbursements and fees paid indirectly		(0.06	)%		(0.25	)%		(0.47	)%		(0.18	)%		(0.29	)%
Before waivers, reimbursements and fees paid indirectly		(0.14	)%		(0.28	)%		(0.52	)%		(0.29	)%		(0.55	)%
Portfolio turnover rate		77	%		48	%		42	%		53	%		30	%
Effect of contractual expense limitation during the year:
Per share benefit to net investment loss	$	—	#	$	—	#	$	—	#	$	0.01		$	0.01

	Class B
	Year Ended December 31,
	2007(a)			2006(a)			2005(a)			2004			2003
Net asset value, beginning of year	$	9.83		$	10.30		$	9.58		$	8.99		$	6.88

Income (loss) from investment operations:
Net investment loss		(0.03	)		(0.05	)		(0.07	)		(0.04	)		(0.03	)
Net realized and unrealized gain on investments		1.11			0.07			0.79			0.63			2.14

Total from investment operations		1.08			0.02			0.72			0.59			2.11

Less distributions:
Distributions from realized gains		(1.24	)		(0.49	)		—			—			—

Net asset value, end of year	$	9.67		$	9.83		$	10.30		$	9.58		$	8.99

Total return		11.26	%		0.15	%		7.52	%		6.56	%		30.67	%

Ratios/Supplemental Data:
Net assets, end of year (000’s)	$	391,335		$	372,653		$	362,850		$	343,638		$	253,326
Ratio of expenses to average net assets:
After waivers and reimbursements		1.35	%		1.35	%		1.35	%		1.35	%		1.35	%
After waivers, reimbursements and fees paid indirectly		1.29	%(e)		1.33	%		1.33	%		1.30	%		1.32	%
Before waivers, reimbursements and fees paid indirectly		1.37	%		1.37	%		1.38	%		1.41	%		1.58	%
Ratio of net investment loss to average net assets:
After waivers and reimbursements		(0.37	)%		(0.52	)%		(0.74	)%		(0.48	)%		(0.57	)%
After waivers, reimbursements and fees paid indirectly		(0.30	)%		(0.50	)%		(0.72	)%		(0.43	)%		(0.54	)%
Before waivers, reimbursements and fees paid indirectly		(0.39	)%		(0.53	)%		(0.77	)%		(0.54	)%		(0.80	)%
Portfolio turnover rate		77	%		48	%		42	%		53	%		30	%
Effect of contractual expense limitation during the year:
Per share benefit to net investment loss	$	—	#	$	—	#	$	—	#	$	0.01		$	0.01

FINANCIAL HIGHLIGHTS (cont’d)

Multimanager Large Cap Value Portfolio


	Class A
	Year Ended December 31,
	2007(a)			2006(a)			2005(a)			2004			2003
Net asset value, beginning of year	$	12.83		$	11.19		$	10.99		$	10.28		$	7.98

Income from investment operations:
Net investment income		0.19			0.14			0.13			0.13			0.07
Net realized and unrealized gain on investments and foreign currency transactions		0.29			2.05			0.68			1.36			2.43

Total from investment operations		0.48			2.19			0.81			1.49			2.50

Less distributions:
Dividends from net investment income		(0.18	)		(0.12	)		(0.09	)		(0.14	)		(0.07	)
Distributions from realized gains		(1.34	)		(0.43	)		(0.52	)		(0.64	)		(0.13	)

Total dividends and distributions		(1.52	)		(0.55	)		(0.61	)		(0.78	)		(0.20	)

Net asset value, end of year	$	11.79		$	12.83		$	11.19		$	10.99		$	10.28

Total return		3.88	%		19.62	%		7.37	%		14.71	%		31.44	%

Ratios/Supplemental Data:
Net assets, end of year (000’s)	$	1,220,184		$	914,471		$	309,385		$	9,758		$	5,999
Ratio of expenses to average net assets:
After waivers and reimbursements		1.07	%		1.10	%		1.10	%		1.10	%		1.10	%
After waivers, reimbursements and fees paid indirectly		1.01	%		1.06	%		1.04	%		0.96	%		1.03	%
Before waivers, reimbursements and fees paid indirectly		1.07	%		1.10	%		1.12	%		1.15	%		1.33	%
Ratio of net investment income to average net assets:
After waivers and reimbursements		1.38	%		1.12	%		1.03	%		1.35	%		0.92	%
After waivers, reimbursements and fees paid indirectly		1.44	%		1.16	%		1.09	%		1.49	%		0.99	%
Before waivers, reimbursements and fees paid indirectly		1.38	%		1.12	%		1.01	%		1.30	%		0.69	%
Portfolio turnover rate		77	%		63	%		76	%		99	%		135	%
Effect of contractual expense limitation during the year:
Per share benefit to net investment income	$	—		$	—		$	—	#	$	0.01		$	0.02

FINANCIAL HIGHLIGHTS (cont’d)

Multimanager Large Cap Value Portfolio (continued)


	Class B
	Year Ended December 31,
	2007(a)			2006(a)			2005(a)			2004			2003
Net asset value, beginning of year	$	12.83		$	11.19		$	10.99		$	10.28		$	7.98

Income from investment operations:
Net investment income		0.16			0.11			0.09			0.12			0.05
Net realized and unrealized gain on investments and foreign currency transactions		0.29			2.05			0.69			1.34			2.43

Total from investment operations		0.45			2.16			0.78			1.46			2.48

Less distributions:
Dividends from net investment income		(0.15	)		(0.09	)		(0.06	)		(0.11	)		(0.05	)
Distributions from realized gains		(1.34	)		(0.43	)		(0.52	)		(0.64	)		(0.13	)

Total dividends and distributions		(1.49	)		(0.52	)		(0.58	)		(0.75	)		(0.18	)

Net asset value, end of year	$	11.79		$	12.83		$	11.19		$	10.99		$	10.28

Total return		3.61	%		19.32	%		7.10	%		14.42	%		31.11	%

Ratios/Supplemental Data:
Net assets, end of year (000’s)	$	718,323		$	702,312		$	526,727		$	406,626		$	256,460
Ratio of expenses to average net assets:
After waivers and reimbursements		1.32	%		1.35	%		1.35	%		1.35	%		1.35	%
After waivers, reimbursements and fees paid indirectly		1.26	%(d)		1.31	%(d)		1.29	%		1.21	%		1.28	%
Before waivers, reimbursements and fees paid indirectly		1.32	%		1.35	%		1.37	%		1.40	%		1.58	%
Ratio of net investment income (loss) to average net assets:
After waivers and reimbursements		1.12	%		0.85	%		0.78	%		1.10	%		0.67	%
After waivers, reimbursements and fees paid indirectly		1.18	%		0.89	%		0.84	%		1.24	%		0.74	%
Before waivers, reimbursements and fees paid indirectly		1.12	%		0.85	%		0.76	%		1.05	%		0.44	%
Portfolio turnover rate		77	%		63	%		76	%		99	%		135	%
Effect of contractual expense limitation during the year:
Per share benefit to net investment income	$	—		$	—		$	—	#	$	0.01		$	0.02

FINANCIAL HIGHLIGHTS (cont’d)

Multimanager Mid Cap Growth Portfolio


	Class A
	Year Ended December 31,
	2007(a)			2006(a)			2005(a)			2004			2003
Net asset value, beginning of year	$	9.04		$	9.12		$	9.63		$	8.75		$	6.30

Income (loss) from investment operations:
Net investment loss		(0.07	)		(0.07	)		(0.08	)		(0.06	)		(0.02	)
Net realized and unrealized gain on investments		1.14			0.96			0.89			1.10			2.58

Total from investment operations		1.07			0.89			0.81			1.04			2.56

Less distributions:
Distributions from net realized gains		(0.98	)		(0.97	)		(1.32	)		(0.16	)		(0.11	)

Net asset value, end of year	$	9.13		$	9.04		$	9.12		$	9.63		$	8.75

Total return		12.22	%		9.83	%		8.66	%		12.04	%		40.60	%

Ratios/Supplemental Data:
Net assets, end of year (000’s)	$	303,194		$	230,585		$	223,527		$	395,739		$	242,059
Ratio of expenses to average net assets:
After waivers and reimbursements		1.30	%		1.30	%		1.35	%		1.35	%		1.35	%
After waivers, reimbursements and fees paid indirectly		1.27	%		1.26	%		1.30	%		1.25	%		1.21	%
Before waivers, reimbursements and fees paid indirectly		1.30	%		1.30	%		1.35	%		1.35	%		1.45	%
Ratio of net investment loss to average net assets:
After waivers and reimbursements		(0.70	)%		(0.78	)%		(0.89	)%		(1.00	)%		(0.96	)%
After waivers, reimbursements and fees paid indirectly		(0.67	)%		(0.74	)%		(0.84	)%		(0.90	)%		(0.82	)%
Before waivers, reimbursements and fees paid indirectly		(0.70	)%		(0.78	)%		(0.89	)%		(1.00	)%		(1.06	)%
Portfolio turnover rate		81	%		77	%		87	%		76	%		119	%
Effect of contractual expense limitation during the year:
Per share benefit to net investment loss	$	—		$	—		$	—		$	—		$	0.01

	Class B
	Year Ended December 31,
	2007(a)			2006(a)			2005(a)			2004			2003
Net asset value, beginning of year	$	8.90		$	9.01		$	9.55		$	8.70		$	6.28

Income (loss) from investment operations:
Net investment loss		(0.09	)		(0.09	)		(0.10	)		(0.09	)		(0.05	)
Net realized and unrealized gain on investments		1.12			0.95			0.88			1.10			2.58

Total from investment operations		1.03			0.86			0.78			1.01			2.53

Less distributions:
Distributions from net realized gains		(0.98	)		(0.97	)		(1.32	)		(0.16	)		(0.11	)

Net asset value, end of year	$	8.95		$	8.90		$	9.01		$	9.55		$	8.70

Total return		11.97	%		9.62	%		8.41	%		11.76	%		40.25	%

Ratios/Supplemental Data:
Net assets, end of year (000’s)	$	554,500		$	543,139		$	498,431		$	468,973		$	334,622
Ratio of expenses to average net assets:
After waivers and reimbursements		1.55	%		1.55	%		1.60	%		1.60	%		1.60	%
After waivers, reimbursements and fees paid indirectly		1.52	%		1.51	%		1.55	%		1.50	%		1.46	%
Before waivers, reimbursements and fees paid indirectly		1.55	%		1.55	%		1.60	%		1.60	%		1.70	%
Ratio of net investment loss to average net assets:
After waivers and reimbursements		(0.96	)%		(1.03	)%		(1.14	)%		(1.25	)%		(1.21	)%
After waivers, reimbursements and fees paid indirectly		(0.93	)%		(0.99	)%		(1.09	)%		(1.15	)%		(1.07	)%
Before waivers, reimbursements and fees paid indirectly		(0.96	)%		(1.03	)%		(1.14	)%		(1.25	)%		(1.31	)%
Portfolio turnover rate		81	%		77	%		87	%		76	%		119	%
Effect of contractual expense limitation during the year:
Per share benefit to net investment loss	$	—		$	—		$	—		$	—		$	0.01

FINANCIAL HIGHLIGHTS (cont’d)

Multimanager Mid Cap Value Portfolio


	Class A
	Year Ended December 31,
	2007(a)			2006(a)			2005(a)			2004			2003
Net asset value, beginning of year	$	10.03		$	9.74		$	11.48		$	10.50		$	7.49

Income from investment operations:
Net investment income		0.02			0.03			0.01			0.01			0.01
Net realized and unrealized gain on investments and foreign currency transactions		—	#		1.41			0.83			1.60			3.06

Total from investment operations		0.02			1.44			0.84			1.61			3.07

Less distributions:
Dividends from net investment income		—			(0.02	)		—			—			—
Distributions from realized gains		(0.86	)		(1.13	)		(2.58	)		(0.63	)		(0.06	)

Total dividends and distributions		(0.86	)		(1.15	)		(2.58	)		(0.63	)		(0.06	)

Net asset value, end of year	$	9.19		$	10.03		$	9.74		$	11.48		$	10.50

Total return		0.31	%		15.08	%		7.61	%		15.47	%		40.94	%

Ratios/Supplemental Data:
Net assets, end of year (000’s)	$	535,842		$	387,990		$	319,455		$	842,150		$	546,951
Ratio of expenses to average net assets:
After waivers and reimbursements		1.29	%		1.31	%		1.29	%		1.35	%		1.35	%
After waivers, reimbursements and fees paid indirectly		1.28	%		1.30	%		1.24	%		1.29	%		1.27	%
Before waivers, reimbursements and fees paid indirectly		1.29	%		1.31	%		1.29	%		1.35	%		1.41	%
Ratio of net investment income (loss) to average net assets:
After waivers and reimbursements		0.17	%		0.24	%		0.04	%		0.02	%		0.01	%
After waivers, reimbursements and fees paid indirectly		0.17	%		0.25	%		0.09	%		0.08	%		0.09	%
Before waivers, reimbursements and fees paid indirectly		0.17	%		0.24	%		0.04	%		0.02	%		(0.05	)%
Portfolio turnover rate		60	%		67	%		58	%		61	%		63	%
Effect of contractual expense limitation during the year:
Per share benefit to net investment income	$	—		$	—		$	—		$	—		$	0.01

FINANCIAL HIGHLIGHTS (cont’d)

Multimanager Mid Cap Value Portfolio (continued)


	Class B
	Year Ended December 31,
	2007(a)			2006(a)			2005(a)			2004			2003
Net asset value, beginning of year	$	9.87		$	9.61		$	11.39		$	10.45		$	7.47

Income (loss) from investment operations:
Net investment income (loss)		(0.01	)		—	#		(0.02	)		(0.02	)		(0.01	)
Net realized and unrealized gain on investments and foreign currency transactions		0.01			1.39			0.82			1.59			3.05

Total from investment operations		—			1.39			0.80			1.57			3.04

Less distributions:
Distributions from realized gains		(0.86	)		(1.13	)		(2.58	)		(0.63	)		(0.06	)

Net asset value, end of year	$	9.01		$	9.87		$	9.61		$	11.39		$	10.45

Total return		0.10	%		14.75	%		7.29	%		15.16	%		40.64	%

Ratios/Supplemental Data:
Net assets, end of year (000’s)	$	539,894		$	599,824		$	510,799		$	498,370		$	321,345
Ratio of expenses to average net assets:
After waivers and reimbursements		1.54	%		1.56	%(d)		1.54	%		1.60	%		1.60	%
After waivers, reimbursements and fees paid indirectly		1.53	%		1.55	%		1.49	%		1.54	%		1.52	%
Before waivers, reimbursements and fees paid indirectly		1.54	%		1.56	%(d)		1.54	%		1.60	%		1.66	%
Ratio of net investment loss to average net assets:
After waivers and reimbursements		(0.09	)%		(0.02	)%		(0.21	)%		(0.23	)%		(0.24	)%
After waivers, reimbursements and fees paid indirectly		(0.08	)%		(0.01	)%		(0.16	)%		(0.17	)%		(0.16	)%
Before waivers, reimbursements and fees paid indirectly		(0.09	)%		(0.02	)%		(0.21	)%		(0.23	)%		(0.30	)%
Portfolio turnover rate		60	%		67	%		58	%		61	%		63	%
Effect of contractual expense limitation during the year:
Per share benefit to net investment loss	$	—		$	—		$	—		$	—		$	0.01

FINANCIAL HIGHLIGHTS (cont’d)

Multimanager Small Cap Growth Portfolio(c)


	Class B
	Year Ended December 31,
	2007(a)			2006(a)			2005(a)			2004			2003(a)
Net asset value, beginning of year	$	9.52		$	8.76		$	8.28		$	7.36		$	5.98

Income (loss) from investment operations:
Net investment loss		(0.02	)		(0.07	)		(0.07	)		(0.07	)		(0.07	)
Net realized and unrealized gain on investments and foreign currency transactions		0.33			0.95			0.70			0.99			1.45

Total from investment operations		0.31			0.88			0.63			0.92			1.38

Less distributions:
Distributions from realized gains		(0.92	)		(0.12	)		(0.15	)		—			—

Net asset value, end of year	$	8.91		$	9.52		$	8.76		$	8.28		$	7.36

Total return		3.60	%		10.26	%		7.55	%		12.50	%		23.08	%

Ratios/Supplemental Data:
Net assets, end of year (000’s)	$	392,037		$	277,810		$	176,610		$	93,964		$	83,897
Ratio of expenses to average net assets:
After waivers		1.47	%		1.30	%		1.30	%		1.30	%		1.29	%
After waivers and fees paid indirectly		1.27	%		1.30	%		1.30	%		1.30	%		1.29	%
Before waivers and fees paid indirectly		1.54	%		1.39	%		1.37	%		1.43	%		1.29	%
Ratio of net investment income (loss) to average net assets:
After waivers		(0.39	)%		(0.77	)%		(0.85	)%		(0.89	)%		(1.03	)%
After waivers and fees paid indirectly		(0.19	)%		(0.77	)%		(0.85	)%		(0.89	)%		(1.03	)%
Before waivers and fees paid indirectly		(0.46	)%		(0.85	)%		(0.92	)%		(1.02	)%		(1.03	)%
Portfolio turnover rate		177	%		279	%		273	%		199	%		85	%
Effect of contractual expense limitation during the year:
Per share benefit to net investment loss	$	0.01		$	0.01		$	0.01		$	0.01		$		*

FINANCIAL HIGHLIGHTS (cont’d)

Multimanager Small Cap Value Portfolio(e)


	Class A
	Year Ended December 31,
	2007(a)			2006			2005(a)			2004			2003
Net asset value, beginning of year	$	13.70		$	13.37		$	14.02		$	13.29		$	9.76

Income (loss) from investment operations:
Net investment income		0.10			0.07			0.06			0.07			0.10
Net realized and unrealized gain (loss) on investments		(1.42	)		2.09			0.61			2.20			3.55

Total from investment operations		(1.32	)		2.16			0.67			2.27			3.65

Less distributions:
Dividends from net investment income		(0.07	)		(0.08	)		(0.06	)		(0.05	)		(0.06	)
Distributions from realized gains		(1.08	)		(1.75	)		(1.26	)		(1.49	)		(0.06	)

Total dividends and distributions		(1.15	)		(1.83	)		(1.32	)		(1.54	)		(0.12	)

Net asset value, end of year	$	11.23		$	13.70		$	13.37		$	14.02		$	13.29

Total return		(9.62	)%		16.38	%		4.94	%		17.45	%		37.69	%

Ratios/Supplemental Data:
Net assets, end of year (000’s)	$	628,684		$	577,637		$	523,308		$	281,509		$	177,723
Ratio of expenses to average net assets:
After waivers		1.07	%(d)		0.85	%(d)		0.79	%		0.80	%		0.85	%
After waivers and fees paid indirectly		1.06	%		0.77	%(d)		0.70	%		0.61	%		0.75	%
Before waivers and fees paid indirectly		1.10	%		0.85	%(d)		0.79	%		0.80	%		0.85	%
Ratio of net investment income to average net assets:
After waivers		0.71	%		0.40	%(d)		0.37	%		0.37	%		0.70	%
After waivers and fees paid indirectly		0.72	%		0.47	%(d)		0.46	%		0.56	%		0.80	%
Before waivers and fees paid indirectly		0.68	%		0.40	%(d)		0.37	%		0.37	%		0.70	%
Portfolio turnover rate		103	%		114	%		90	%		96	%		69	%
Effect of contractual expense limitation during the year:
Per share benefit to net investment income	$	—	#	$	—		$	—		$	—		$	—

FINANCIAL HIGHLIGHTS (cont’d)

Multimanager Small Cap Value Portfolio(e) (continued)


	Class B
	Year Ended December 31,
	2007(a)			2006			2005(a)			2004			2003(a)
Net asset value, beginning of year	$	13.71		$	13.38		$	14.02		$	13.30		$	9.77

Income (loss) from investment operations:
Net investment income		0.07			0.03			0.03			0.03			0.06
Net realized and unrealized gain (loss) on investments		(1.42	)		2.09			0.62			2.19			3.57

Total from investment operations		(1.35	)		2.12			0.65			2.22			3.63

Less distributions:
Dividends from net investment income		(0.04	)		(0.04	)		(0.03	)		(0.01	)		(0.04	)
Distributions from realized gains		(1.08	)		(1.75	)		(1.26	)		(1.49	)		(0.06	)

Total dividends and distributions		(1.12	)		(1.79	)		(1.29	)		(1.50	)		(0.10	)

Net asset value, end of year	$	11.24		$	13.71		$	13.38		$	14.02		$	13.30

Total return		(9.84	)%		16.07	%		4.75	%		17.06	%		37.42	%

Ratios/Supplemental Data:
Net assets, end of year (000’s)	$	980,945		$	1,326,859		$	1,153,566		$	1,042,729		$	689,540
Ratio of expenses to average net assets:
After waivers		1.32	%(d)		1.10	%(d)		1.04	%		1.05	%		1.10	%
After waivers and fees paid indirectly		1.31	%(d)		1.02	%(d)		0.95	%		0.86	%		1.00	%
Before waivers and fees paid indirectly		1.35	%(d)		1.10	%(d)		1.04	%		1.05	%		1.10	%
Ratio of net investment income to average net assets:
After waivers		0.48	%		0.15	%(d)		0.12	%		0.12	%		0.45	%
After waivers and fees paid indirectly		0.50	%		0.22	%(d)		0.21	%		0.31	%		0.55	%
Before waivers and fees paid indirectly		0.46	%		0.15	%(d)		0.12	%		0.12	%		0.45	%
Portfolio turnover rate		103	%		114	%		90	%		96	%		69	%
Effect of contractual expense limitation during the year:
Per share benefit to net investment income	$	—	#	$	—		$	—		$	—		$	—

FINANCIAL HIGHLIGHTS (cont’d)

Multimanager Technology Portfolio


	Class A
	Year Ended December 31,
	2007(a)			2006(a)			2005(a)			2004			2003
Net asset value, beginning of year	$	11.12		$	10.34		$	9.26		$	8.87		$	5.76

Income (loss) from investment operations:
Net investment loss		(0.08	)		(0.07	)		(0.08	)		(0.05	)		(0.05	)
Net realized and unrealized gain on investments and foreign currency transactions		2.14			0.85			1.16			0.50			3.38

Total from investment operations		2.06			0.78			1.08			0.45			3.33

Less distributions:
Distributions from realized gains		—			—			—			(0.06	)		(0.22	)

Net asset value, end of year	$	13.18		$	11.12		$	10.34		$	9.26		$	8.87

Total return		18.53	%		7.54	%		11.54	%		5.25	%		58.24	%

Ratios/Supplemental Data:
Net assets, end of year (000’s)	$	36,248		$	28,469		$	27,263		$	25,939		$	9,303
Ratio of expenses to average net assets:
After waivers and reimbursements		1.42	%		1.43	%		1.42	%		1.60	%		1.60	%
After waivers, reimbursements and fees paid indirectly		1.41	%		1.39	%		1.36	%		1.50	%		1.45	%
Before waivers, reimbursements and fees paid indirectly		1.42	%		1.43	%		1.42	%		1.60	%		2.03	%
Ratio of net investment loss to average net assets:
After waivers and reimbursements		(0.63	)%		(0.72	)%		(0.91	)%		(0.80	)%		(1.35	)%
After waivers, reimbursements and fees paid indirectly		(0.62	)%		(0.69	)%		(0.85	)%		(0.70	)%		(1.20	)%
Before waivers, reimbursements and fees paid indirectly		(0.63	)%		(0.72	)%		(0.91	)%		(0.80	)%		(1.78	)%
Portfolio turnover rate		132	%		163	%		148	%		160	%		169	%
Effect of contractual expense limitation during the year:
Per share benefit to net investment loss	$	—		$	—		$	—		$	—		$	0.02

FINANCIAL HIGHLIGHTS (cont’d)

Multimanager Technology Portfolio (continued)


	Class B
	Year Ended December 31,
	2007(a)			2006(a)			2005(a)			2004			2003
Net asset value, beginning of year	$	10.98		$	10.23		$	9.19		$	8.82		$	5.74

Income (loss) from investment operations:
Net investment loss		(0.11	)		(0.10	)		(0.10	)		(0.06	)		(0.06	)
Net realized and unrealized gain on investments and foreign currency transactions		2.11			0.85			1.14			0.49			3.36

Total from investment operations		2.00			0.75			1.04			0.43			3.30

Less distributions:
Distributions from realized gains		—			—			—			(0.06	)		(0.22	)

Net asset value, end of year	$	12.98		$	10.98		$	10.23		$	9.19		$	8.82

Total return		18.21	%		7.33	%		11.20	%		5.05	%		57.64	%

Ratios/Supplemental Data:
Net assets, end of year (000’s)	$	656,676		$	516,556		$	507,474		$	486,608		$	113,251
Ratio of expenses to average net assets:
After waivers and reimbursements		1.67	%		1.68	%		1.67	%		1.85	%		1.85	%
After waivers, reimbursements and fees paid indirectly		1.66	%		1.64	%		1.61	%		1.75	%		1.70	%
Before waivers, reimbursements and fees paid indirectly		1.67	%		1.68	%		1.67	%		1.85	%		2.28	%
Ratio of net investment loss to average net assets:
After waivers and reimbursements		(0.88	)%		(0.97	)%		(1.16	)%		(1.05	)%		(1.60	)%
After waivers, reimbursements and fees paid indirectly		(0.87	)%		(0.94	)%		(1.10	)%		(0.95	)%		(1.45	)%
Before waivers, reimbursements and fees paid indirectly		(0.88	)%		(0.97	)%		(1.16	)%		(1.05	)%		(2.03	)%
Portfolio turnover rate		132	%		163	%		148	%		160	%		169	%
Effect of contractual expense limitation during the year:
Per share benefit to net investment loss	$	—		$	—		$	—		$	—		$	0.02

FINANCIAL HIGHLIGHTS (cont’d)

*	Prior to December 31, 2004, these ratios and per share amounts were not provided.

#	Per share amount is less than $0.01.

‡	Amount is less than 1%.

(a)	Net investment income and capital changes are based on average shares outstanding.

(b)

On August 15, 2003, this Portfolio received, through a merger, the assets and liabilities of the EQ/High Yield Portfolio that followed the same investment objectives of this Portfolio. The information from January 1, 2001 through August 14, 2003 is that of the predecessor EQ/High Yield Portfolio. Information for the year ended December 31, 2003 includes the results of the operations of the predecessor EQ/High Yield Portfolio from January 1, 2003 through August 14, 2003.

(c)

On May 25, 2007 and July 6, 2007, respectively, the Multimanager Small Cap Growth Portfolio received, through a merger, the assets and liabilities of the EQ/Small Company Growth Portfolio and the EQ/Wells Fargo Montgomery Small Cap Portfolio, each of which followed similar investment objectives as the Multimanager Small Cap Growth Portfolio. The information for the period January 1, 2007 through May 25, 2007 and for prior periods is that of the predecessor EQ/Small Company Growth Portfolio.

(d)	Reflects overall fund ratios for investment income and non-class specific expense.

(e)

On May 25, 2007, the Multimanager Small Cap Value Portfolio received, through a merger, the assets and liabilities of the EQ/Small Cap Value Portfolio that followed similar investment objectives as the Multimanager Small Cap Value Portfolio. The information for the period January 1, 2007 through May 25, 2007 and for prior periods is that of the predecessor EQ/Small Cap Value Portfolio.

If you would like more information about the portfolios, the following documents are available free upon request. The Trust does not have a website available for accessing such information.

Annual and Semi-Annual Reports — Include more information about the portfolios’ investments and performance. The reports usually include performance information, a discussion of market conditions and the investment strategies that affected the portfolios’ performance during the last fiscal year.

Statement of Additional Information (SAI) — Provides more detailed information about the portfolios, has been filed with the SEC and is incorporated into this Prospectus by reference.

Portfolio Holdings Disclosure — A description of the portfolios’ policies and procedures with respect to the disclosure of their portfolio securities holdings is available in the portfolios’ SAI.

To order a free copy of a portfolio’s SAI and/or Annual and Semi-Annual Report, contact your financial professional, or the portfolios at:

AXA Premier VIP Trust

1290 Avenue of the Americas

New York, New York 10104

Telephone: 877-222-2144

Your financial professional or AXA Premier VIP Trust will also be happy to answer your questions or to provide any additional information that you may require.

Information about the portfolios (including the SAI) can be reviewed and copied at the SEC’s Public Reference Room in Washington, D.C. Information on the operation of the Public Reference Room may be obtained by calling the SEC at 1-202-551-8090. Reports and other information about the portfolios are available on the EDGAR database on the SEC’s Internet site at:

http://www.sec.gov.

Investors may also obtain copies of this information, after paying a duplicating fee, by electronic request at the following e-mail address:

publicinfo@sec.gov or by writing the SEC’s

Public Reference Section,

Washington, D.C. 20549-0102

AXA Premier VIP Trust


Multimanager Core Bond Portfolio Multimanager Health Care Portfolio Multimanager High Yield Portfolio Multimanager International Equity Portfolio Multimanager Large Cap Core Equity Portfolio Multimanager Large Cap Growth Portfolio		Multimanager Large Cap Value Portfolio Multimanager Mid Cap Growth Portfolio Multimanager Mid Cap Value Portfolio Multimanager Small Cap Growth Portfolio Multimanager Small Cap Value Portfolio Multimanager Technology Portfolio

(Investment Company Act File No. 811-10509)