EXHIBIT 13.1

The following is an excerpt from AllianceBernstein L.P.’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2014 (the “AllianceBernstein Annual Report”). As used in Item 1A - Risk Factors below, the words “we” and “us” refer collectively to AllianceBernstein L.P. and its subsidiaries, or their officers and employees. Item references in the excerpt below refer to item numbers in the AllianceBernstein Annual Report. Unless otherwise defined, capitalized terms used in this Exhibit 13.1 are defined under “Explanatory Note” directly following the excerpt or in the AllianceBernstein Annual Report.

Item 1A. Risk Factors

Please consider this section along with the description of our business in Item 1, the competition section immediately above and AB’s financial information contained in Items 6, 7 and 8. The majority of the risk factors discussed below directly affect AB. These risk factors also affect AB Holding because AB Holding’s principal source of income and cash flow is attributable to its investment in AB. See also “Cautions Regarding Forward-Looking Statements” in Item 7.

Business-related Risks

Our revenues and results of operations depend on the market value and composition of our AUM, which can fluctuate significantly based on various factors, including many factors outside of our control.

We derive most of our revenues from investment advisory and services fees, which typically are calculated as a percentage of the value of AUM as of a specified date, or as a percentage of the value of average AUM for the applicable billing period, and vary with the type of investment service, the size of the account and the total amount of assets we manage for a particular client. The value and composition of our AUM can be adversely affected by several factors, including:

• Our Investment Performance. Our ability to achieve investment returns for clients that meet or exceed investment returns for comparable asset classes and competing investment services is a key consideration when clients decide to keep their assets with us or invest additional assets, and when a prospective client is deciding whether to invest with us. Poor investment performance, both in absolute terms and/or relative to peers and stated benchmarks, may result in clients withdrawing assets and in prospective clients choosing to invest with competitors.

• Market Factors. Reductions in stock and/or bond prices, such as those we experienced at times during 2014, particularly during early October 2014 (largely due to investor anxiety over geopolitical and global economic factors, including the direction of interest rates), cause the value of our AUM to decrease and may cause our clients to redeem their investments, which would further reduce our AUM and revenues. Additionally, increases in interest rates, particularly if rapid, as well as uncertainty pertaining to the future direction of interest rates, likely would decrease the total return of many bond investments due to lower market valuations of existing bonds. These factors could have a significant adverse effect on our revenues and results of operations as our AUM in fixed income investments have become a larger component of our AUM.

• Client Preferences. Generally, our clients may withdraw their assets at any time and on short notice. Also, changing market dynamics and investment trends, particularly with respect to sponsors of defined benefits plans choosing to invest in less risky investments, may reduce interest in some of the investment products we offer, and/or clients and prospects may seek investment products that we may not currently offer, such as retail money market funds. Loss of, or decreases in, AUM will reduce our investment actively managed advisory and services fees and revenues.

• Investing Trends. Our fee rates vary significantly among the various investment products and services we offer to our clients. For example, we generally earn higher fees from assets invested in our actively-managed equity services than in our actively-managed fixed income services or passive services. Also, we often earn higher fees from global and international services than we do from U.S. services (see “Net Revenues” in Item 7 for additional information regarding our fee rates). If our clients choose to invest in actively managed fixed income services and/or passive services, which generally have lower fees, instead of actively managed equity services, which generally have higher fees, our investment advisory and services fees and revenues will decline.

1

• Service Changes. We may be required to reduce our fee levels, restructure the fees we charge or adjust the services we offer to our clients because of, among other things, regulatory initiatives (whether industry-wide or specifically targeted), court decisions and competitive considerations. A reduction in fees would reduce our revenues.

A decrease in the value of our AUM, or a decrease in the amount of AUM we manage, or an adverse mix shift in our AUM, would adversely affect our investment advisory and services fees and revenues. A reduction in revenues, without a commensurate reduction in expenses, would adversely affect our results of operations.

Our reputation could suffer if we are unable to deliver consistent, competitive investment performance.

Our business is based on the trust and confidence of our clients. Damage to our reputation can reduce substantially our AUM and impair our ability to maintain or grow our business.

Maintaining adequate liquidity for our general business needs depends on certain factors, including operating cash flows and our access to credit on reasonable terms.

Our financial condition is dependent on our cash flow from operations, which is subject to the performance of the capital markets, our ability to maintain and grow AUM and other factors beyond our control. Our ability to issue public or private debt on reasonable terms may be limited by adverse market conditions, our profitability, our creditworthiness as perceived by lenders and changes in government regulations, including tax rates and interest rates. Furthermore, our access to credit on reasonable terms is partially dependent on our firm’s credit ratings.

Standard & Poor’s Rating Service, Moody’s Investors Service, Inc. and Fitch Ratings each affirmed AB’s long-term and short-term credit ratings in 2014 and also affirmed its stable outlook. Future changes in our credit ratings are possible and any downgrade to our ratings is likely to increase our borrowing costs and limit our access to the capital markets. If this occurs, we may be forced to incur unanticipated costs or revise our strategic plans, which could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations and business prospects.

Our business is dependent on investment advisory agreements with clients, and selling and distribution agreements with various financial intermediaries and consultants, which, generally, are subject to termination or non-renewal on short notice.

We derive most of our revenues pursuant to written investment management agreements (or other arrangements) with institutional investors, mutual funds and private wealth clients, and selling and distribution agreements with financial intermediaries that distribute AB Funds. Generally, the investment management agreements (and other arrangements), including our agreements with AXA and its subsidiaries (our largest client), are terminable at any time or upon relatively short notice by either party. The investment management agreements pursuant to which we manage the U.S. Funds must be renewed and approved by the Funds’ boards of directors annually. A significant majority of the directors are independent. Consequently, there can be no assurance that the board of directors of each fund will approve the fund’s investment management agreement each year, or will not condition its approval on revised terms that may be adverse to us. In addition, investors in AB Funds can redeem their investments without notice. Any termination of, or failure to renew, a significant number of these agreements, or a significant increase in redemption rates, could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and business prospects.

Similarly, the selling and distribution agreements with securities firms, brokers, banks and other financial intermediaries (including our agreement with UBS AG, with respect to which UBS AG was responsible for approximately 11% of our open-end AB Fund sales in 2014) are terminable by either party upon notice (generally 30 days) and do not obligate the financial intermediary to sell any specific amount of fund shares. These intermediaries generally offer their clients investment products that compete with our products. In addition, certain institutional investors rely on consultants to advise them about choosing an investment adviser and, in previous years, some of our equities services have not been considered among the best choices by consultants. As a result, a number of investment consultants advised their clients to move their assets invested with us to other investment advisers, which contributed to significant net outflows in such years. This trend may continue.

Also, our Private Wealth Services rely on referrals from financial planners, registered investment advisers and other professionals. We cannot be certain that we will continue to have access to, or receive referrals from, these third parties. Loss of such access or referrals could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and business prospects.

2

We may be unable to continue to attract, motivate and retain key personnel, and the cost to retain key personnel could put pressure on our adjusted operating margin.

Our business depends on our ability to attract, motivate and retain highly skilled, and often highly specialized, technical, managerial and executive personnel; there is no assurance that we will be able to do so.

The market for qualified research analysts, portfolio managers, financial advisors, traders, executive officers and other professionals is extremely competitive and is characterized by frequent movement of these investment professionals among different firms. Portfolio managers, financial advisors and executive officers often maintain strong, personal relationships with investors in our products and other members of the business community so their departure may cause us to lose client accounts or result in fewer opportunities to win new business, either of which could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and business prospects.

Also, a decline in revenues may limit our ability to pay our employees at competitive levels, and maintaining (or increasing) compensation without a revenue increase, in order to retain key personnel, may adversely affect our adjusted operating margin. As a result, we will continue to be vigilant about aligning our cost structure (including headcount) with our revenue base. For additional information regarding our compensation practices, see “Compensation Discussion and Analysis” in Item 11.

Performance-based fee arrangements with our clients cause greater fluctuations in our net revenues.

We sometimes charge our clients performance-based fees, whereby we charge a base advisory fee and are eligible to earn an additional performance-based fee or incentive allocation that is calculated as either a percentage of absolute investment results or a percentage of investment results in excess of a stated benchmark over a specified period of time. Some performance-based fees include a high-watermark provision, which generally provides that if a client account underperforms relative to its performance target (whether in absolute terms or relative to a specified benchmark), it must gain back such underperformance before we can collect future performance-based fees. Therefore, if we fail to achieve the performance target for a particular period, we will not earn a performance-based fee for that period and, for accounts with a high-watermark provision, our ability to earn future performance-based fees will be impaired.

We are eligible to earn performance-based fees on approximately 10% of the assets we manage for institutional clients, approximately 4% of the assets we manage for private wealth clients and approximately 1% of the assets we manage for retail clients (in total, approximately 6% of our AUM). If the percentage of our AUM subject to performance-based fees grows, seasonality and volatility of revenue and earnings are likely to become more significant. Our performance-based fees in 2014, 2013 and 2012 were $53.2 million, $53.6 million and $66.6 million (including $39.6 million pertaining to winding up the Public-Private Investment Program (“PPIP”) fund we managed; see “Net Revenues” in Item 7), respectively.

An impairment of goodwill may occur.

Determining whether an impairment of the goodwill asset exists requires management to exercise significant judgment. In addition, to the extent that securities valuations are depressed for prolonged periods of time and market conditions deteriorate, or if we experience significant net redemptions, our AUM, revenues, profitability and unit price may be adversely affected. Although the price of an AB Holding Unit is just one factor in the calculation of fair value, if current AB Holding Unit price levels decline significantly, reaching the conclusion that fair value exceeds carrying value will, over time, become more difficult. In addition, control premiums, industry earnings multiples and discount rates are impacted by economic conditions. As a result, subsequent impairment tests may occur more frequently and be based on more negative assumptions and future cash flow projections, and may result in an impairment of goodwill. An impairment may result in a material charge to our earnings. For additional information about our impairment testing, see Item 7.

We may engage in strategic transactions that could pose risks.

As part of our business strategy, we consider potential strategic transactions, including acquisitions, dispositions, consolidations, joint ventures and similar transactions, some of which may be material. These transactions, if undertaken, may involve a number of risks and present financial, managerial and operational challenges, including:

• adverse effects on our earnings if acquired intangible assets or goodwill become impaired;

• existence of unknown liabilities or contingencies that arise after closing; and

• potential disputes with counterparties.

3

Acquisitions also pose the risk that any business we acquire may lose customers or employees or could underperform relative to expectations. Additionally, the acquisition of investment personnel poses the risk that we may lose the AUM we expected to manage, which could adversely affect our results of operations. Furthermore, strategic transactions may require us to increase our leverage or, if we issue AB Units or AB Holding Units to fund an acquisition, would dilute the holdings of our existing Unitholders.

Because many of our subsidiary operations are located outside of the United States and have functional currencies other than the U.S. dollar, changes in exchange rates to the U.S. dollar affect our reported financial results from one period to the next.

Although significant portions of our net revenues and expenses, as well as our AUM, presently are derived from the United States, we have subsidiaries outside of the United States with functional currencies other than the U.S. dollar. As a result, fluctuations in exchange rates to the U.S. dollar affect our reported financial results from one period to the next. For example, the recent significant appreciation in the value of the U.S. dollar has reduced the value of our revenues generated in other currencies. We may not be successful in our efforts to hedge our exposure to such fluctuations, which could have a negative effect on our reported financial results.

Our seed capital investments are subject to market risk. While we enter into various futures, forward and swap contracts to economically hedge many of these investments, we also may be exposed to market risk and credit-related losses in the event of non-performance by counterparties to these derivative instruments.

We have a seed investment program for the purpose of sponsoring new products. As our new product launches have increased in recent years, so too has our use of seed capital for investment purposes. These seed capital investments are subject to market risk. Our risk management team oversees a seed hedging program that attempts to minimize this risk, subject to practical and cost considerations. Also, not all seed investments are deemed appropriate to hedge, and in those cases we are exposed to market risk. As a result, volatility in the capital markets may cause significant changes in our period-to-period financial and operating results.

We use various derivative instruments, including futures, forward and swap contracts, in conjunction with our seed hedging program. While in most cases broad market risks are hedged, our hedges are imperfect and some market risk remains. In addition, our use of derivatives results in counterparty risk (i.e., the risk that we may be exposed to credit-related losses in the event of non-performance by counterparties to these derivative instruments), regulatory risk (e.g., short selling restrictions) and cash/synthetic basis risk (i.e., the risk that the underlying positions do not move identically to the related derivative instruments).

The revenues generated by Bernstein Research Services may be adversely affected by circumstances beyond our control, including declines in brokerage transaction rates and declines in global market volumes.

Electronic, or “low-touch”, trading approaches represent a significant percentage of buy-side trading activity and produce transaction fees for execution-only services that are a small fraction of traditional full service fee rates. As a result, blended pricing for the industry and SCB is lower now than it was historically, and price declines may continue. In addition, fee rates charged by SCB and other brokers for traditional brokerage services have historically experienced price pressure, and we expect these trends to continue. Also, while increases in transaction volume and market share often can offset decreases in rates, this may not continue. For example, global market volumes have declined in recent years, and we expect this may continue, especially considering recent increases in passive investing.

The individuals, counterparties or issuers on whom we rely to perform services for us or our clients may be unable or unwilling to honor their contractual obligations to us.

We rely on various third party counterparties and other vendors to fulfill their obligations to us, whether specified by contract, course of dealing or otherwise. Default rates, downgrades and disputes with counterparties as to the valuation of collateral increase significantly in times of market stress. Furthermore, disruptions in the financial markets and other economic challenges, like those presented by market volatility in October 2014, may cause our counterparties and other vendors to experience significant cash flow problems or even render them insolvent, which may expose us to significant costs.

4

We may not accurately value the securities we hold on behalf of our clients or our company investments.

In accordance with applicable regulatory requirements, contractual obligations or client direction, we employ procedures for the pricing and valuation of securities and other positions held in client accounts or for company investments. We have established a Valuation Committee, composed of senior officers and employees, which oversees pricing controls and valuation processes. If market quotations for a security are not readily available, the Valuation Committee determines a fair value for the security.

Extraordinary volatility in financial markets, significant liquidity constraints or our failure to adequately consider one or more factors when fair valuing a security based on information with limited market observability could result in our failing to properly value securities we hold for our clients or investments accounted for on our balance sheet. Improper valuation likely would result in our basing fee calculations on inaccurate AUM figures, our striking incorrect net asset values for company-sponsored mutual funds or hedge funds or, in the case of company investments, our inaccurately calculating and reporting our financial condition and operating results. Although the overall percentage of our AUM that we fair value based on information with limited market observability is not significant, inaccurate fair value determinations can harm our clients, create regulatory issues and damage our reputation.

We may not have sufficient information to confirm or review the accuracy of valuations provided to us by underlying external managers for the funds in which certain of our alternative investment products invest.

Certain of our alternative investment services invest in funds managed by external managers (“External Managers”) rather than investing directly in securities and other instruments. As a result, our abilities will be limited with regard to (i) monitoring such investments, (ii) regularly obtaining complete, accurate and current information with respect to such investments and (iii) exercising control over such investments. Accordingly, we may not have sufficient information to confirm or review the accuracy of valuations provided to us by External Managers. In addition, we will be required to rely on External Managers’ compliance with any applicable investment guidelines and restrictions. Any failure of an External Manager to operate within such guidelines or to provide accurate information with respect to the investment could subject our alternative investment products to losses and cause damage to our reputation.

The quantitative models we use in certain of our investment services may contain errors, resulting in imprecise risk assessments and unintended output.

We use quantitative models in a variety of our investment services, generally in combination with fundamental research. Our quantitative models are validated by senior quantitative professionals. We have a Model Risk Working Group to formalize and oversee a quantitative model governance framework, including minimum validation standards. However, due to the complexity of such models, it is possible that errors in the models could exist and our controls could fail to detect such errors. Failure to detect errors could result in client losses and damage to our reputation.

We may not always successfully manage actual and potential conflicts of interest that arise in our business.

Increasingly, we must manage actual and potential conflicts of interest, including situations where our services to a particular client conflict, or are perceived to conflict, with the interests of another client. Failure to adequately address potential conflicts of interest could adversely affect our reputation, results of operations and business prospects.

We have procedures and controls that are designed to identify and mitigate conflicts of interest, including those designed to prevent the improper sharing of information. However, appropriately managing conflicts of interest is complex. Our reputation could be damaged and the willingness of clients to enter into transactions in which such a conflict might arise may be affected if we fail, or appear to fail, to deal appropriately with conflicts of interest. In addition, potential or perceived conflicts could give rise to litigation or regulatory enforcement actions.

Unpredictable events, including natural disaster, dangerous weather conditions, technology failure, terrorist attack and political unrest, may adversely affect our ability to conduct business.

War, terrorist attack, political unrest in the Middle East, the Pacific Rim and elsewhere, power failure, climate change, natural disaster and rapid spread of infectious diseases could interrupt our operations by:

• causing disruptions in global economic conditions, thereby decreasing investor confidence and making investment products generally less attractive;

• inflicting loss of life;

• triggering massive technology failures or delays; and

• requiring substantial capital expenditures and operating expenses to remediate damage and restore operations.

5

Despite the contingency plans and facilities we have in place, including system security measures, information back-up and disaster recovery processes, our ability to conduct business may be adversely affected by a disruption in the infrastructure that supports our operations and the communities in which they are located. This may include a disruption involving electrical, communications, transportation or other services we may use or third parties with which we conduct business. If a disruption occurs in one location and our employees in that location are unable to occupy our offices or communicate with or travel to other locations, our ability to conduct business with and on behalf of our clients may suffer, and we may not be able to successfully implement contingency plans that depend on communication or travel. Furthermore, unauthorized access to our systems as a result of a security breach, the failure of our systems, or the loss of data could give rise to legal proceedings or regulatory penalties under laws protecting the privacy of personal information, disrupt operations, and damage our reputation.

Our operations require experienced, professional staff. Loss of a substantial number of such persons or an inability to provide properly equipped places for them to work may, by disrupting our operations, adversely affect our financial condition, results of operations and business prospects. In addition, our property and business interruption insurance may not be adequate to compensate us for all losses, failures, or breaches that may occur.

Technology failures can significantly constrain our operations and result in significant time and expense to remediate, whether caused by “cyber attack”, another type of security breach or inadvertent system error.

We are highly dependent on software and related technologies throughout our business, including both proprietary systems and those provided by outside vendors. We use our technology to, among other things, obtain securities pricing information, process client transactions, and provide reports and other services to our clients. Although we take protective measures, including measures to effectively secure information through system security technology and established and tested business continuity plans, we may experience system delays and interruptions as a result of natural disasters, power failures, acts of war (cyber or conventional) and third-party failures. We cannot predict with certainty all of the adverse effects that could result from our failure, or the failure of a third party, to efficiently address and resolve these delays and interruptions. These adverse effects could include the inability to perform critical business functions or failure to comply with financial reporting and other regulatory requirements, which could lead to loss of client confidence, reputational damage, exposure to disciplinary action and liability to our clients. Accordingly, potential system failures and the cost necessary to correct those failures could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and business prospects.

In addition, we could be subject to losses if we fail to properly safeguard sensitive and confidential information. As part of our normal operations, we maintain and transmit confidential information about our clients as well as proprietary information relating to our business operations. Although we take protective measures, our systems still could be vulnerable to cyber attack or other forms of unauthorized access (including computer viruses) that have a security impact, such as an authorized employee or vendor inadvertently or intentionally causing us to release confidential or proprietary information. Such disclosure could, among other things, allow competitors access to our proprietary business information and require significant time and expense to investigate and remediate the breach. Moreover, loss of confidential client information could harm our reputation and subject us to liability under laws that protect confidential personal data, resulting in increased costs or loss of revenues.

Also, most of the software applications that we use in our business are licensed from, and supported, upgraded and maintained by, third-party vendors. A suspension or termination of certain of these licenses or the related support, upgrades and maintenance could cause temporary system delays or interruption. Additionally, technology rapidly evolves and we cannot guarantee that our competitors may not implement more advanced technology platforms for their products and services, which may place us at a competitive disadvantage and adversely affect our results of operations and business prospects.

Our own operational failures or those of third parties we rely on, including failures arising out of human error, could disrupt our business, damage our reputation and reduce our revenues.

Weaknesses or failures in our internal processes or systems could lead to disruption of our operations, liability to clients, exposure to disciplinary action or harm to our reputation. Our business is highly dependent on our ability to process, on a daily basis, large numbers of transactions, many of which are highly complex, across numerous and diverse markets. These transactions generally must comply with client investment guidelines, as well as stringent legal and regulatory standards.

6

Our obligations to clients require us to exercise skill, care and prudence in performing our services. Despite our employees being highly trained and skilled, the large number of transactions we process makes it highly likely that errors will occasionally occur. If we make a mistake in performing our services that causes financial harm to a client, we have a duty to act promptly to put the client in the position the client would have been in had we not made the error. The occurrence of mistakes, particularly significant ones, can have a material adverse effect on our reputation, results of operations and business prospects.

Our insurance policies may be insufficient to protect us against large losses.

We can make no assurance that a claim or claims will be covered by our insurance policies or, if covered, will not exceed the limits of available insurance coverage, or that our insurers will remain solvent and meet their obligations.

Our business is subject to pervasive, complex and frequently evolving global regulation, the compliance with which could involve substantial expenditures of time and money, and the violation of which may result in material adverse consequences.

Virtually all aspects of our business are subject to federal and state laws and regulations, rules of securities regulators and exchanges, and laws and regulations in the foreign jurisdictions in which our subsidiaries conduct business. If we violate these laws or regulations, we could be subject to civil liability, criminal liability or sanction, including restriction or revocation of our and our subsidiaries’ professional licenses or registrations, revocation of the licenses of our employees, censures, fines, or temporary suspension or permanent bar from conducting business. Any such liability or sanction could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations and business prospects. A regulatory proceeding, even if it does not result in a finding of wrongdoing or sanction, could require substantial expenditures of time and money and could potentially damage our reputation.

Moreover, regulators sometimes change their policies or laws in a manner that may make compliance more expensive and/or restrict or otherwise impede our ability to register, market and distribute our investment products.

Also, the Financial Supervisory Commission in Taiwan (“FSC”) has approved new limits on the degree to which local investors can own an offshore investment product, which limits are effective January 1, 2016. While certain exemptions may be available to us, should we not qualify, the FSC’s new rules could force some of our local resident investors to redeem their investments in our funds sold in Taiwan (and/or prevent further sales of those funds in Taiwan), some of which funds have local ownership levels substantially above the new FSC limits. This may lead to significant declines in our investment advisory and services fees and revenues earned from these funds.

In addition, there is uncertainty associated with the regulatory environments in which we operate, including uncertainty created by the enactment and ongoing implementation of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010 (“Dodd-Frank Act”) and regulations currently under consideration by the European Securities and Markets Authority, including Markets in Financial Instruments Directive II (“MiFID II”). Both the Dodd-Frank Act and MiFID II may impose additional restrictions and limitations on our business.

Changes to the rules governing Rule 12b-1 Fees may affect the revenues we derive from our Retail Services.

In July 2010, the SEC proposed a new rule and rule amendments that would alter Rule 12b-1 Fees. The new rule and amendments would continue to allow funds to bear promotional costs within certain limits and would also preserve the ability of funds to provide investors with alternatives for paying sales charges (e.g., at the time of purchase, at the time of redemption or through a continuing fee charged to fund assets). Unlike the current Rule 12b-1 framework, however, the proposed rules would limit the cumulative sales charges each investor pays, regardless of how they are imposed.

If rules are adopted as proposed, changes in Rule 12b-1 Fees for a number of share classes offered by our U.S. Funds would be required, which would reduce the net fund distribution revenues we receive from our U.S. Funds. The impact of this rule change is dependent upon the final rules adopted by the SEC, any phase-in or grandfathering period, and any other changes made with respect to share class distribution arrangements.

We are involved in various legal proceedings and regulatory matters and may be involved in such proceedings in the future, any one or combination of which could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations and business prospects.

We are involved in various matters, including regulatory inquiries, administrative proceedings and litigation, some of which allege significant damages, and we may be involved in additional matters in the future. Litigation is subject to significant uncertainties, particularly when plaintiffs allege substantial or indeterminate damages, the litigation is in its early stages, or when the litigation is highly complex or broad in scope.

7

The financial services industry is intensely competitive.

We compete on the basis of a number of factors, including our investment performance for our clients, our array of investment services, innovation, reputation and price. By having a global presence, we may face competitors with more experience and more established relationships with clients, regulators and industry participants in the relevant market, which could adversely affect our ability to expand. Furthermore, if we are unable to maintain and/or continue to improve our investment performance, our client flows may be adversely affected, which may make it more difficult for us to compete effectively.

Also, increased competition could reduce the demand for our products and services, which could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations and business prospects. For additional information regarding competitive factors, see “Competition” in Item 1.

Structure-related Risks

The partnership structure of AB Holding and AB limits Unitholders’ abilities to influence the management and operation of AB’s business and is highly likely to prevent a change in control of AB Holding and AB.

The General Partner, as general partner of both AB Holding and AB, generally has the exclusive right and full authority and responsibility to manage, conduct, control and operate their respective businesses, except as otherwise expressly stated in their respective Amended and Restated Agreements of Limited Partnership. AB Holding and AB Unitholders have more limited voting rights on matters affecting AB than do holders of common stock in a corporation. Both Amended and Restated Agreements of Limited Partnership provide that Unitholders do not have any right to vote for directors of the General Partner and that Unitholders only can vote on certain extraordinary matters (including removal of the General Partner under certain extraordinary circumstances). Additionally, the AB Partnership Agreement includes significant restrictions on transfers of AB Units and provisions that have the practical effect of preventing the removal of the General Partner, which provisions are highly likely to prevent a change in control of AB’s management.

AB Units are illiquid and subject to significant transfer restrictions.

There is no public trading market for AB Units and AB does not anticipate that a public trading market will develop. The AB Partnership Agreement restricts our ability to participate in a public trading market or anything substantially equivalent to one by providing that any transfer which may cause AB to be classified as a “publicly traded partnership” (“PTP”) as defined in Section 7704 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (“Code”), shall be deemed void and shall not be recognized by AB. In addition, AB Units are subject to significant restrictions on transfer, such as obtaining the written consent of AXA Equitable and the General Partner pursuant to the AB Partnership Agreement. Generally, neither AXA Equitable nor the General Partner will permit any transfer that it believes would create a risk that AB would be treated as a corporation for tax purposes. AXA Equitable and the General Partner have implemented a transfer program that requires a seller to locate a purchaser and imposes annual volume restrictions on transfers. You may request a copy of the transfer program from our Corporate Secretary (corporate_secretary@abglobal.com). Also, we have filed the transfer program as Exhibit 10.06 to this Form 10-K.

Changes in the partnership structure of AB Holding and AB and/or changes in the tax law governing partnerships would have significant tax ramifications.

AB Holding, having elected under Section 7704(g) of the Code to be subject to a 3.5% federal tax on partnership gross income from the active conduct of a trade or business, is a “grandfathered” PTP for federal income tax purposes. AB Holding is also subject to the 4.0% New York City unincorporated business tax (“UBT”), net of credits for UBT paid by AB. In order to preserve AB Holding’s status as a “grandfathered” PTP for federal income tax purposes, management ensures that AB Holding does not directly or indirectly (through AB) enter into a substantial new line of business. A “new line of business” includes any business that is not closely related to AB’s historical business of providing research and diversified investment management and related services to its clients. A new line of business is “substantial” when a partnership derives more than 15% of its gross income from, or uses more than 15% of its total assets in, the new line of business.

AB is a private partnership for federal income tax purposes and, accordingly, is not subject to federal and state corporate income taxes. However, AB is subject to the 4.0% UBT. Domestic corporate subsidiaries of AB, which are subject to federal, state and local income taxes, generally are included in the filing of a consolidated federal income tax return with separate

8

state and local income tax returns being filed. Foreign corporate subsidiaries generally are subject to taxes in the foreign jurisdiction where they are located. If our business increasingly operates in countries other than the U.S., AB’s effective tax rate will increase over time because our international subsidiaries are subject to corporate taxes in the jurisdictions where they are located.

In order to preserve AB’s status as a private partnership for federal income tax purposes, AB Units must not be considered publicly traded. If such units were considered readily tradable, AB would be subject to federal and state corporate income tax on its net income. Furthermore, as noted above, should AB enter into a substantial new line of business, AB Holding, by virtue of its ownership of AB, would lose its status as a grandfathered PTP and would become subject to corporate income tax as set forth above. For information about the significant restrictions on transfer of AB Units, see the risk factor immediately above.

In addition, recent decisions by members of Congress and their staffs regarding the need for fundamental tax reform and possible tax law changes to raise additional revenue have included suggestions that all large partnerships (which would include both AB and AB Holding) be taxed as corporations. However, we cannot predict whether, or in what form, tax legislation will be proposed in the future and are unable to determine what effect any new legislation might have on us. If AB Holding and AB were to lose their federal tax status as partnerships, they would be subject to corporate income tax, which would reduce materially their net income and quarterly distributions to Unitholders.

------------------------------------------

EXPLANATORY NOTE:

The following terms used in Item 1A - Risk Factors directly above have the following meanings:

“AB” -- AllianceBernstein L.P. (Delaware limited partnership formerly known as Alliance Capital Management L.P., “Alliance Capital”), the operating partnership, and its subsidiaries and, where appropriate, its predecessors, AB Holding and ACMC, Inc. and their respective subsidiaries.

“AB Holding” -- AllianceBernstein Holding L.P. (Delaware limited partnership).

“AB Holding Units” -- units representing assignments of beneficial ownership of limited partnership interests in AB Holding.

“AB Units” -- units of limited partnership interest in AB.

“AUM” -- assets under management for clients.

“General Partner” -- AllianceBernstein Corporation (Delaware corporation), the general partner of AB and AB Holding and a wholly-owned subsidiary of AXA Equitable, and, where appropriate, ACMC, LLC., its predecessor.

“SCB” -- Sanford C. Bernstein & Co., LLC, Sanford C. Bernstein Limited and Sanford C. Bernstein (Hong King) Limited, together, each of which is an indirect wholly-owned subsidiary of AllianceBernstein.

9