Use these links to rapidly review the document
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Item 15. Exhibits and Financial Statement Schedules.
INDEX TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

Table of Contents

UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549

---

FORM 10-K

Commission file number: 0-24786

---

Aspen Technology, Inc.
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

Registrant's telephone number, including area code: 781-221-6400

---

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

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act:
Common stock, $0.10 par value per share

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

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

          Indicate by check mark whether the registrant: (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes ý    No o

          Indicate by checkmark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files). Yes o    No o

          Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K (§229.405 of this chapter) is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of the registrant's knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K. ý

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

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

          As of December 31, 2010, the aggregate market value of common stock (the only outstanding class of common equity of the registrant) held by non-affiliates of the registrant was $981,809,000 based on a total of 77,307,796 shares of common stock held by non-affiliates and on a closing price of $12.70 on December 31, 2010 for the common stock as reported on The NASDAQ Global Select Market.

          There were 94,012,219 shares of common stock outstanding as of August 15, 2011.

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

          Portions of the registrant's Proxy Statement related to its 2011 Annual Meeting of Stockholders to be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission pursuant to Regulation 14A not later than 120 days after the end of the fiscal year covered by this Form 10-K are incorporated by reference in Part III, Items 10-14 of this Form 10-K.

---

Table of Contents

TABLE OF CONTENTS

---

        Our registered trademarks include aspenONE, Aspen Plus, AspenTech, the AspenTech logo, DMCplus, HTFS, HYSYS and INFOPLUS.21. Aspen Basic Engineering, Aspen Collaborative Demand Manager, Aspen Economic Evaluation, Aspen Exchanger Design and Rating, Aspen Fleet Optimizer, Aspen Inventory Management & Operations Scheduling, Aspen Petroleum Scheduler, Aspen Petroleum Supply Chain Planner, Aspen PIMS, Aspen Plus and Aspen Supply Chain Planner are our trademarks. All other trademarks, trade names and service marks appearing in this Form 10-K are the property of their respective owners.

2

---

Table of Contents

SPECIAL NOTE REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS AND INDUSTRY DATA

        This Form 10-K contains "forward-looking statements" within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Forward-looking statements relate to future events or our future financial performance. We generally identify forward- looking statements by terminology such as "anticipate," "believe," "could," "estimate," "expect," "intend," "may," "potential," "should," "target," or the negative of these terms or other similar words. These statements are only predictions. The outcome of the events described in these forward-looking statements is subject to known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors that may cause our, our customers' or our industry's actual results, levels of activity, performance or achievements expressed or implied by these forward-looking statements, to differ. "Item 1. Business," "Item 1A. Risk Factors" and "Item 7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations" as well as other sections in this Form 10-K, discuss some of the factors that could contribute to these differences. The forward-looking statements made in this Form 10-K relate only to events as of the date on which the statements are made. We undertake no obligation to update any forward- looking statement to reflect events or circumstances after the date on which the statement is made or to reflect the occurrence of unanticipated events. Our forward-looking statements do not reflect the potential impact of any future acquisitions, mergers, dispositions, joint ventures or investments we may make.

        This Form 10-K also contains estimates and other information concerning our industry, including market size and growth rates that are based on industry publications, surveys and forecasts, including those generated by ARC Advisory Group. This information involves a number of assumptions and limitations, and you are cautioned not to give undue weight to these estimates. Although we believe the information in these industry publications, surveys and forecasts is reliable, we have not independently verified the accuracy or completeness of the information. The industry in which we operate is subject to a high degree of uncertainty and risk due to variety of factors, including those described in "Item 1A. Risk Factors."

PART I

Item 1.    Business.

Overview

        We are a leading global provider of mission-critical process optimization software solutions, which are designed to manage and optimize plant and process design, operational performance, and supply chain planning. Our aspenONE software and related services have been developed specifically for companies in the process industries, including the energy, chemicals, engineering and construction, and pharmaceutical industries. Customers use our solutions to improve their competitiveness and profitability by increasing throughput and productivity, reducing operating costs, enhancing capital efficiency, and decreasing working capital requirements.

        Our software incorporates our proprietary empirical models of manufacturing and planning processes and reflects the deep domain expertise we have amassed from focusing on solutions for the process industries for 30 years. We have developed our applications to design and optimize processes across three principal business areas: engineering, manufacturing and supply chain. We are a recognized market and technology leader in providing process optimization software for each of these business areas.

        We have more than 1,500 customers globally. Our customers include manufacturers in process industries such as energy, chemicals, pharmaceuticals, consumer packaged goods, power, metals and mining, pulp and paper, and biofuels, as well as engineering and construction firms that help design and build process manufacturing plants. As of June 30, 2011, our installed base included 19 of the 20 largest petroleum companies, all of the 20 largest chemical companies, and 15 of the 20 largest

3

---

Table of Contents

pharmaceutical companies. Customers outside the United States accounted for a majority of our total revenue in each of fiscal 2011, 2010 and 2009, and no single customer represented 10% or more of our total revenue in fiscal 2011, 2010 or 2009.

        We have established sustainable competitive advantages based on the breadth, flexibility and return on investment associated with our software offerings, as well as our market leadership position, our extensive process industry expertise and our established, diversified customer base. We consult and collaborate with our customers to identify new applications which leads to innovative, targeted solutions and fosters long-term customer relationships. This approach has helped us develop software solutions that are embedded in our customers' operations and integrated with their core business processes.

        In July 2009 we introduced our aspenONE subscription offering under which license revenue is recognized over the term of a license contract. Our aspenONE subscription offering provides customers with increased access to our applications and we believe this flexibility will lead to increased usage and revenue over time. Because we previously recognized a substantial majority of our license revenue upon shipment of software, our revenue for fiscal 2011and 2010 was significantly less than in the years preceding our licensing model change. We expect to recognize levels of revenue comparable to the years preceding our license model change when a significant majority of our existing arrangements has been renewed under our subscription-based licensing model. Customer collections are primarily driven by license and services billings on our portfolio of term arrangements, rather than recognized revenue. As a result, the transition to our subscription-based licensing model has not had an adverse impact on cash receipts, cash flows from operating activities or free cash flow.

Industry Background

        The process industries consist of companies that typically manufacture finished products by applying a controlled chemical process either to a raw material that is fed continuously through the plant or to a specific batch of raw material. The process industries include energy, chemicals, pharmaceuticals, consumer packaged goods, power, metals and mining, pulp and paper, and biofuels as well as engineering and construction firms that design and build process manufacturing plants.

        Process manufacturing is often complex because small changes in the feedstocks used, or to the chemical process applied, can have a significant impact on the efficiency and cost-effectiveness of manufacturing operations. As a result, process manufacturers, as well as the engineering and construction firms that partner with these manufacturers, have extensive technical requirements and need a combination of software, services and domain expertise to help design, operate and manage manufacturing environments. The unique characteristics associated with process manufacturing create special demands for business applications that frequently exceed the capabilities of generic software applications or non-process manufacturing software packages. The process industries require sophisticated, integrated software applications capable of designing and optimizing their complex, interconnected manufacturing and business processes.

Industry-Specific Challenges Facing the Process Industries

        Companies in different process industries face specific challenges that are driving the need for solutions that design, operate and manage manufacturing environments more effectively:

•

Energy.  Our energy markets are comprised of two primary sectors: Exploration and Production, also called upstream, and Refining and Marketing, also called downstream:



•

Exploration and Production companies explore for and produce hydrocarbons. They are targeting reserves in increasingly diverse geographies with greater geological, logistical and political environments. They face challenges in designing and developing ever larger and

4

---

Table of Contents

more complex and remote production, gathering and processing facilities as quickly as possible with the objective of optimizing production and ensuring regulatory compliance.

•

Refining and Marketing companies are characterized by high volumes and low operating margins. In order to deliver better margins, they focus on optimizing feedstock selection and product mix, maximizing throughput, and minimizing inventory, all while operating safely and in accordance with regulations.



•

Chemicals.  The chemicals industry includes both bulk and specialty chemical companies:



•

Bulk chemical producers, which compete primarily on price, are seeking to achieve economies of scale and manage operating margin pressure by building larger, more complex plants located near feedstock sources.



•

Specialty chemical manufacturers, which primarily manufacture highly differentiated customer-specific products, face challenges in managing diverse product lines, multiple plants and complex supply chains.



•

Engineering and construction.  Engineering and construction firms must compete on a global basis in bidding on and executing complex, large-scale projects. They need a digital environment in which optimal plant designs can be produced quickly and efficiently, incorporating highly accurate cost estimation technology. In addition, these projects require software that enables significant collaboration internally, with the manufacturer, and in many cases, with other engineering and construction firms.



•

Pharmaceuticals.  The increasing prevalence of generic drugs and expansion of regulatory requirements are driving pharmaceutical companies to improve their operational performance. They are seeking to optimize their manufacturing and distribution operations to help them meet demanding regulatory requirements, bring new products to market faster during their initial patent protection period and decrease production costs.

        Similarly, companies in the consumer packaged goods, power, metals and mining, pulp and paper, and biofuels industries are seeking process optimization solutions that help them deliver improved financial and operating results in the face of varied process manufacturing challenges.

Increasing Complexity of the Process Industries

        In addition to the technical requirements associated with the process industries, several industry trends are driving the growing complexity of these industries:

•

Globalization of markets.  Process manufacturers are expanding their operations beyond mature geographic markets in order to take advantage of growing demand and available feedstocks in emerging markets such as China, India, Russia, Latin America and the Middle East. Process manufacturers must be able to design, build and operate plants in emerging markets efficiently and economically. They also need to improve efficiency and reduce costs at their existing plants in mature markets in order to compete with new plants in emerging markets.



•

Volatile markets.  Process manufacturers must react quickly to frequent changes in feedstock prices, temporary or longer-term feedstock shortages, and rapid changes in finished product prices. Unpredictable commodity markets strain the manufacturing and supply chain operations of process manufacturers, which must consider, and when appropriate implement, changes in inventory levels, feedstock inputs, equipment usage and operational processes in order to remain competitive.



•

Increased margin pressure.  As the result of the increasingly competitive global environment, process manufacturers are seeking to design more efficient new plants and, at the same time,

5

---

Table of Contents

increase throughput and reduce costs at existing plants. These companies must optimize manufacturing operations and supply chain management, because even a relatively small change in feedstock, labor or energy costs, or in throughput, can have a significant impact on profitability.

•

Shrinking engineering workforce.  In mature markets, the number of chemical engineers is decreasing, as more engineers are retiring than are entering the process industries. Process companies are seeking information technology solutions by which they can capture and manage the knowledge acquired by their engineers through years of experience and can automate tasks traditionally performed by engineers.



•

Environmental and safety regulations.  Process companies must comply with an expanding array of data maintenance and reporting requirements under governmental and regulatory mandates, and the global nature of their operations can subject them to numerous regulatory regimes. These companies often face heightened scrutiny and oversight because of the environmental, safety and other implications of their products and manufacturing processes. These companies increasingly are relying upon software applications to model potential outcomes, store operating data and develop reporting capabilities.

Market Opportunity

        Technology solutions historically have played a major role in helping companies in the process industries improve their manufacturing productivity. In the 1980's, process manufacturers implemented distributed control systems, or DCS, to automate the management of plant hardware. DCS use computer hardware, communication networks and industrial instruments to measure, record and automatically control process variables. In the 1990's, these manufacturers adopted enterprise resource planning, or ERP, systems to streamline back office functions and interact with DCS. This allowed process manufacturers to track, monitor and report the performance of each plant, rather than relying on traditional paper and generic word processing spreadsheets.

        Many process manufacturers have implemented both DCS and ERP systems but have realized that their investments in hardware and back-office systems are inadequate. A DCS is only able to control and monitor processes based on fixed sets of parameters and cannot dynamically react to changes in the manufacturing process unless instructed by end users. ERP systems can only record what is produced in operations. Although DCS and ERP systems help manage manufacturing performance, neither of these systems can optimize what is produced, how it is produced or where it is produced. Moreover, neither can help a process manufacturer understand how to improve its processes or how to identify opportunities to decrease operating expenses.

        Process optimization software addresses the gap between DCS and ERP systems. This software focuses on optimizing the manufacturing process itself: how the process is run and the economics of that process. By connecting DCS and ERP systems with intelligent, dynamic applications, process optimization software allows a manufacturer to make better, faster economic decisions. This software can optimize a manufacturing environment by, for example, incorporating process manufacturing domain knowledge, supporting real-time decision making, and providing the ability to forecast and simulate potential actions. Furthermore, these solutions can optimize the supply chain by helping a manufacturer to understand the operating conditions in each plant, which enables a manufacturer to decide where best to manufacture products.

        Based on information and reports from ARC Advisory Group, the market for engineering, manufacturing and supply chain process optimization software and services for the energy, chemicals

6

---

Table of Contents

and pharmaceuticals industries was approximately $2.5 billion. More specifically, based on this information, it is estimated that:

•

the engineering market was $585 million in 2010 and will grow 10% annually through 2015



•

the manufacturing market was $1.7 billion in 2008 and will grow 12% annually through 2013; and



•

the supply chain market was $279 million in 2008 and will grow 5% annually through 2013.

aspenONE Solutions

        We provide integrated process optimization software solutions designed and developed specifically for the process industries. Customers use our solutions to improve their competitiveness and profitability by increasing throughput and productivity, reducing operating costs, enhancing capital efficiency, and decreasing working capital requirements. Our aspenONE software applications are organized into two suites, which are centered on our principal business areas of engineering, manufacturing and supply chain:

•

aspenONE Engineering.  Our engineering software is used on an engineer's desktop to design new plants, re-design existing plants, and simulate and optimize plant processes.



•

aspenONE Manufacturing and Supply Chain.  Our manufacturing software is designed to optimize day-to-day processing activities, enabling process manufacturers to make better, more profitable decisions and to improve plant performance. Our supply chain management software is designed to enable process manufacturers to reduce inventory levels, increase asset efficiency and optimize supply chain decisions.

        While a significant number of our customers have already migrated to our aspenONE subscription offering, we continue to offer customers the ability to purchase our applications as point products. By offering point products, we can acquire, retain and potentially up-sell any customer that does not want to migrate to our aspenONE subscription offering.

        We offer customer support, professional services and training services to our customers. Under our aspenONE subscription offering, and for point product arrangements entered into since July 2009, maintenance is included for the term of the arrangement. Professional services are offered to customers as a means to further customize and integrate our technology based on specific customer requirements.

        The key benefits of our aspenONE solutions include:

        Broad and comprehensive software suites.    We believe we are the only software provider that has developed comprehensive suites of software applications addressing the engineering, manufacturing and supply chain requirements of process manufacturers. While some competitors offer solutions in one or two principal business areas, no other vendor can match the breadth of our aspenONE offerings. In addition, we have developed an extensive array of software applications that address extremely specific and complex industry and end user challenges, such as production scheduling for petroleum companies and solubility modeling for solvent screening.

        Mission-critical, integrated software solutions.    aspenONE provides a standards-based framework that integrates applications, data and models within each of our software suites. Process manufacturers seeking to improve their mission-critical business operations can use the integrated software applications in the aspenONE Manufacturing and Supply Chain suite to support real-time decision making both for individual production facilities and across multiple sites. In addition, the common data models underlying an aspenONE suite improve collaboration and productivity by enabling data to be entered once and then maintained in a centralized repository accessible across a customer's enterprise.

7

---

Table of Contents

        Flexible commercial model.    Our aspenONE subscription offering provides a customer with access to all of the applications within the aspenONE suite(s) the customer licenses. The customer can change or alternate the use of multiple applications in a licensed suite through the use of exchangeable units of measurement, or tokens, licensed in quantities determined by the customer. This enables the customer to use those applications whenever required and to experiment with different applications to best solve whatever critical business challenges the customer faces. The customer can easily increase its usage of our software as its business requirements evolve, without disrupting its business processes.

        Hardware-independent technology.    Our software can be easily integrated and used with equipment manufactured by any major process manufacturing hardware vendor. Because of our hardware-independent approach, customers can use our software solutions to create a unified view of their operations, even if their plants use hardware from different vendors.

Our Competitive Strengths

        We believe our key competitive advantages include, in addition to the comprehensive breadth of our integrated software solutions and the flexibility of our aspenONE subscription offering, the following:

        Market leadership.    We are a leader in each of the markets addressed by our software. Based on information presented in reports issued by ARC Advisory Group relating to performance in our core industries, we ranked:

•

#1 in the market addressed by our engineering software;



•

#2 in the market addressed by our manufacturing software; and



•

#1 in the market addressed by our supply chain software.

        Industry-leading innovation based on substantial process expertise.    Over the past 30 years, we have designed a number of major process engineering advances considered to be industry-standard applications. Since our founding, we have built a highly specialized development organization comprised of not only traditional software engineers but also chemical engineers. As of June 30, 2011, approximately 50% of our software development personnel had degrees in chemical engineering or a similar discipline. This approach provides us with substantial process industry expertise, as our developers have critical know-how that allows us to address the specific challenges of our customers.

        Rapid, high return on investment.    Many customers purchase our software because they believe it will provide rapid, demonstrable and significant returns on their investment. For some customers, cost reductions in the first year following installation have exceeded the total cost of our software. For many customers, even a relatively small improvement in productivity can generate substantial recurring benefits due to the large production volumes and limited profit margins typical in process industries. In addition, our solutions can generate organizational efficiencies and operational improvements that can further increase a process company's return on investment.

        Established, diversified customer base.    We view our installed customer base of more than 1,500 customers as an important strategic asset and as evidence of our leadership position. As of June 30, 2011, our installed base included 19 of the 20 largest petroleum companies, all of the 20 largest chemical companies, and 15 of the 20 largest pharmaceutical companies. We consult and collaborate with customers to identify new applications, which leads to innovative, targeted solutions, long-term customer relationships and high renewal rates.

8

---

Table of Contents

Growth Strategy

        Our objective is to further establish and extend our position as a leading global provider of process optimization software and related services to the process industries. We intend to build upon our market and technology leadership position by pursuing the following:

        Continue to provide innovative, market-leading solutions.    We have pioneered a number of industry standard and award-winning software applications. For example, AspenPlus, our process modeling tool for the chemicals industry, has won the Chemical Processing magazine Readers' Choice Award for "Process Simulation Software" for the last seven years. We have been recognized by R&D Magazine for innovation in out of the box modeling capabilities that we developed with the National Institute of Standards and Technology. Our recent innovations include applications for electrolyte and biofuel characterizations and methodologies for carbon management. We intend to continue to invest in research and development in order to develop and offer new and enhanced solutions for our aspenONE suites.

        Further penetrate existing customer base.    We have an installed base of over 1,500 customers, but many customers do not use all of our products and services. We intend to target customers that use only one of our aspenONE suites or that do not extensively utilize our professional services and training capabilities. In addition, we believe that many of our customers do not take full advantage of the applications in the aspenONE suite they currently license. As we transition these customers to our aspenONE subscription offering, we will seek to identify ways in which they can improve their business processes by using the entire licensed suite of aspenONE applications, both at an individual user level and across all of their plant locations.

        Expand presence in emerging markets.    Companies in the process industries are expanding their operations to take advantage of growing demand and available feedstocks in less mature markets such as China, India, Russia, Latin America and the Middle East. Additionally, process manufacturers with existing plants in these markets are beginning to recognize the value of upgrading their operations to take advantage of process optimization solutions. We historically have derived a significant portion of our total revenue from outside of North America, and we believe we can further extend our international presence by penetrating emerging markets. We have, for example, established a direct sales force and customer support capabilities for Russia and the Middle East.

        Extend vertical reach and indirect sales channel.    We historically focused on the energy, chemicals, and engineering and construction industries and in recent years have increasingly targeted the pharmaceutical industry. We intend to expand beyond our core vertical industries, in part by further developing our indirect channel. We are expanding our relationships with third-party resellers that have a presence in certain non-core verticals such as power, consumer packaged goods, pulp and paper, minerals and mining, and biofuels. We believe these relationships will enable us to reach companies in additional process industries cost effectively and to leverage our indirect channel partners' market experience and domain expertise in those industries.

Products

        Our integrated process optimization software solutions are designed and developed specifically for the process industries. Customers use our solutions to improve their competitiveness and profitability by increasing throughput and productivity, reducing operating costs, enhancing capital efficiency, and decreasing working capital requirements.

9

---

Table of Contents

        We have designed and developed our software applications across three principal business areas:

•

Engineering.  Process manufacturers must address a variety of challenges related to strategic planning, collaborative engineering, economic evaluation, debottlenecking and operational improvement. They must, for example, determine where they should locate facilities, how they can lower manufacturing costs, what they should produce and how they can maximize plant efficiency. Our engineering software applications are used during both the design and the ongoing operation of plant facilities to model and improve the way engineers develop and deploy manufacturing assets. In the design phase, for example, our software supports proposal generation, develops highly accurate cost estimates, generates detailed implementation schedules and manages change orders. Our engineering solutions include desktop and server applications that typically do not require substantial professional services, although services may be provided for customized model designs and process synthesis.



•

Manufacturing.  Process manufacturers must address a wide range of manufacturing challenges such as optimizing execution efficiency, reducing costs, selecting the right raw materials, scheduling and coordinating production processes, and identifying an appropriate balance between turnaround times, delivery schedules, cost and inventory. Our manufacturing software products focus on optimizing day-to-day processing activities, enabling customers to make better, faster decisions that lead to improved plant performance and operating results. These solutions include desktop and server applications that help customers make real-time decisions, which can reduce fixed and variable costs and improve product yields.



•

Supply chain management.  Process manufacturers must address numerous challenges as they strive to effectively and efficiently manage raw materials inventory, production schedules and feedstock purchasing decisions. Supply chain managers face these challenges in an environment of ever-changing market prices, supply constraints and customer demands. Our supply chain management solutions include desktop and server applications that help customers optimize critical supply chain decisions in order to reduce inventory, increase asset efficiency, and respond more quickly to changing market conditions.

        Our software products can be linked with a customer's DCS and ERP systems to further improve the customer's ability to gather, analyze and use the resulting information across the customer's business processes. By integrating our solutions with their DCS and ERP systems, customers can utilize historical data and develop new models to project and simulate future operational behavior, throughput performance, economic value and profitability.

        Our software applications are organized into two suites: aspenONE Engineering and aspenONE Manufacturing and Supply Chain. These suites are integrated applications that allow end users to utilize common data models to design process manufacturing environments, forecast and simulate potential actions, monitor operational performance, and manage planning and scheduling activities. The

10

---

Table of Contents

two suites are designed around core modules and applications that allow customers to design, manage and operate their process manufacturing environments, as shown below:

aspenONE Engineering

aspenONE Manufacturing and Supply Chain

        Our product development activities are currently focused on strengthening the integration of our applications and adding new capabilities that address specific mission-critical operational business

11

---

Table of Contents

processes in each industry. As of June 30, 2011, we had a total of 411 employees in our research and development group, which is comprised of software development, product development and quality assurance personnel. We incurred research and development expense of $50.8 million in fiscal 2011, $48.2 million in fiscal 2010 and $46.4 million in fiscal 2009.

Maintenance and Training

        Maintenance consists primarily of providing customer technical support and access to software fixes and upgrades. For term arrangements entered into subsequent to our transition to a subscription-based licensing model, the license and software maintenance and support, or SMS, components cannot be separated, and SMS is included for the term of the arrangement. Customer technical support services are provided throughout the world by our three global call centers as well as via email and through our support website.

        We offer a variety of training solutions ranging from standardized training, which can be delivered in a public forum, on-site at a customer's location or over the Internet, to customized training sessions, which can be tailored to fit customer needs. As of June 30, 2011, we had a total of 147 employees in our customer support and training group.

Professional Services

        We offer professional services focused on implementation of our solution. Our professional services team primarily consists of project engineers with degrees in chemical engineering or a similar discipline, or who have significant relevant industry experience. Our employees include experts in fields such as thermophysical properties, distillation, adsorption processes, polymer processes, industrial reactor modeling, the identification of empirical models for process control or analysis, large-scale optimization, supply distribution systems modeling and scheduling methods. The services provided by our professional services team include implementing and integrating our software applications for customers that are seeking to integrate our technology with their existing systems in order to further improve their plant performance and gain better operational data. We offer our services on either a time-and-material or fixed-price basis. As of June 30, 2011, we had a total of 165 employees in our professional services group.

Business Segments

        We have three operating segments: license, professional services, and maintenance and training. Our chief operating decision maker, the President and Chief Executive Officer, assesses financial performance and allocates resources based upon the three lines of business. For further information of our operating segments, see Note 15, "Segment and Geographic Information," to our Consolidated Financial Statements, included in "Item 15. Exhibits and Financial Statement Schedules" of this Form 10-K.

12

---

Table of Contents

Customers

        Our software solutions are installed at the facilities of more than 1,500 customers worldwide. These customers include process manufacturers and the engineering and construction firms that provide services to them. Our customers include:

        No customer accounted for 10% or more of our total revenue in fiscal 2011, 2010 or 2009.

Sales and Marketing

        We employ a value-based sales approach, offering our customers a comprehensive suite of software and services that enhance the efficiency and productivity of their engineering, manufacturing and supply chain operations. We have increasingly focused on selling our products as a strategic investment for our customers and therefore devote an increasing portion of our sales efforts at senior management levels, including senior decision makers in manufacturing, operations and technology. Our aspenONE solution strategy supports this value-based approach by broadening the scope of optimization across the entire enterprise and expanding the use of process models in the operations environment. In particular, we offer a variety of training programs focused on illustrating the capabilities of our applications and intend to implement incentive compensation programs for our sales force that will reward efforts that increase customer usage of our products.

        Historically, most of our license sales have been generated through our direct sales force. Because the complexity and cost of our products often result in extended sales cycles, we believe that the development of long-term, consultative relationships with our customers is essential to a successful sales strategy. To develop these relationships, we focus our worldwide sales force on a defined set of strategic accounts. In North America we have organized our sales force around specific vertical markets. In the rest of the world the sales force is organized around specific countries or regions.

        In July 2009 we introduced our aspenONE subscription offering under which customers receive access to all of the applications within the aspenONE suite(s) they license. This affords customers the ability to use our software whenever required and to experiment with different applications to best solve whatever critical business challenges they face. Customers can easily increase their usage of our software as their business requirements evolve, without disrupting their business processes. We believe our aspenONE subscription offering will further enable our sales force to develop consultative sales relationships with our customers.

        In order to market the specific functionality and other complex technical features of our software, our account managers work with specialized teams of technical sales engineers and product specialists organized for each sales and marketing effort. Our technical sales engineers typically have advanced

13

---

Table of Contents

degrees in chemical engineering or related disciplines and actively consult with a customer's plant engineers. Product specialists share their detailed knowledge of the specific features of our software solutions as they apply to the unique business processes of different vertical industries. In addition, we have a limited number of global account managers, each of whom is focused on a specific global account. Our overall sales force, which consists of quota-carrying sales account managers, sales services personnel, business support engineers, internal channel support personnel, industry business unit professionals, marketing personnel and support staff, consisted of 328 employees as of June 30, 2011.

        We supplement our direct sales efforts with a variety of marketing initiatives, including industry analyst and public relations activities, campaigns to promote awareness, user group meetings and customer relationship programs. We have established reseller relationships with select companies that we believe can help us increase sales in specific regions and non-core target markets.

        We also license our software products to universities that agree to use our products in teaching and research. We believe that students' familiarity with our products will stimulate future demand once the students enter the workplace.

Competition

        Our markets in general are highly competitive, and we expect the intensity of competition in our markets to increase as existing competitors enhance and expand their product and service offerings and as new participants enter the market. Increased competition may result in price reductions, reduced profitability and loss of market share. We cannot ensure that we will be able to compete successfully against existing or future competitors. Some of our customers and companies with which we have strategic relationships also are, or may become, competitors.

        Many of our current and potential competitors have greater financial, technical, marketing, service and other resources than we have. As a result, these companies may be able to offer lower prices, additional products or services, or other incentives that we cannot match or offer. These competitors may be in a stronger position to respond more quickly to new technologies and may be able to undertake more extensive marketing campaigns. We believe they also have adopted and may continue to pursue more aggressive pricing policies and make more attractive offers to potential customers, employees and strategic partners. For example, some competitors may be able to initiate relationships through sales and installations of hardware and then seek to expand their customer relationships by offering process optimization software at a discount.

        In addition, many of our competitors have established, and may in the future continue to establish, cooperative relationships with third parties to improve their product offerings and to increase the availability of their products in the marketplace. Competitors with greater financial resources may make strategic acquisitions to increase their ability to gain market share or improve the quality or marketability of their products.

        Our primary competitors differ among our principal product areas:

•

Our engineering software competes with products of businesses such as ABB Ltd., Honeywell International, Inc., Invensys plc and KBC Advanced Technologies plc.



•

Our manufacturing software competes with products of companies such as ABB Ltd., Honeywell International, Inc., Invensys plc, OSIsoft, Inc., Rockwell Automation, Inc., Siemens AG and Yokogawa Electric Corporation.



•

Our supply chain management software competes with products of companies such as JDA Software Group, Inc., Oracle Corporation and SAP AG.

        In addition, we face challenges in selling our solutions to large companies in the process industries that have internally developed their own proprietary software solutions.

14

---

Table of Contents

        We believe the key competitive differentiator in our industry is the value, or return on investment, that our software and services provide. We seek to develop and offer integrated suites of targeted, high-value vertical industry solutions that can be implemented with relatively limited service requirements. We believe this approach provides us with an advantage over many of our competitors that offer software products that are point solutions or are more service-based. The principal competitive factors in our industry also include:

•

breadth, depth and integration of software offerings;



•

domain expertise of sales and service personnel;



•

consistent global support;



•

performance and reliability;



•

price; and



•

time to market.

Key License Agreements

Massachusetts Institute of Technology

        In March 1982, we entered into a System License Agreement with the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, or MIT, under which we received a worldwide, perpetual non-exclusive license (with the right to sublicense) to use, reproduce, distribute and create derivative works of the computer programs known as "ASPEN" and the related documentation. The ASPEN program licensed from MIT provides a framework for simulating the steady-state behavior of chemical processes that we utilize in the simulation engine for our Aspen Plus product. MIT has agreed that we would own any derivative works and enhancements of ASPEN that we may create during the term of the agreement. A one-time license fee of $30,000 has been paid in full. MIT has the right to terminate the agreement upon the occurrence of any of the following events: if we breach the agreement and do not cure the breach within 90 days after receiving a written notice from MIT; if we cease to carry on our business; if proceedings under any bankruptcy or insolvency law are commenced by or against us and not dismissed within 90 days; if we make an assignment for the benefit of our creditors and such assignment is not discontinued within 90 days; or if a receiver is appointed for us and is not discharged within 90 days. In the event of such termination, our license to ASPEN will terminate but the sublicenses granted to our customers prior to termination will remain in effect.

Honeywell

        We acquired Hyprotech Ltd. and related subsidiaries of AEA Technology plc in May 2002. The Federal Trade Commission alleged in an administrative complaint filed in August 2003 that this acquisition was improperly anticompetitive. In December 2004, we entered into a consent decree with the FTC to resolve the matter. In connection with the consent decree, we and certain of our subsidiaries entered into a purchase and sale agreement with Honeywell International Inc. and certain of its subsidiaries, pursuant to which we sold intellectual property and other assets to Honeywell relating to our operator training business and our Hyprotech engineering software products.

        Under the terms of the transactions:

•

we retained a perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, royalty-free non-exclusive license (with the limited rights to sublicense) to the Hyprotech engineering software and have the right to continue to develop and sell the Hyprotech engineering products; and



•

we retained certain agreements with third parties other than customers or distributors for HYSYS and related products.

15

---

Table of Contents

        We are subject to ongoing compliance obligations under the FTC consent decree. Under a modification order that became final in August 2009, we are required to continue to provide the ability for users to save input variable case data for Aspen HYSYS and Aspen HYSYS Dynamics software in a standard "portable" format, which will make it easier for users to transfer case data from later versions of the products to earlier versions. We also must provide documentation to Honeywell of the Aspen HYSYS and Aspen HYSYS Dynamics input variables, as well as documentation of the covered heat exchange products. These requirements will apply to all existing and future versions of the covered products released prior to December 31, 2014 or December 31, 2016, at the option of Honeywell. In addition, we provided to Honeywell a license to modify and distribute (in object code form) certain versions of our flare system analyzer software.

        There is no assurance that the actions required by the FTC's modified order and related settlement with Honeywell will not provide Honeywell with additional competitive advantages that could materially adversely affect our results of operations.

Intellectual Property

        We regard our software as proprietary. Our strategy is to rely on a combination of copyright, patent, trademark and trade secret laws in the United States and other jurisdictions, and to rely on license and confidentiality agreements and software security measures to further protect our proprietary technology and brand. The laws of many countries in which our products are licensed may not protect our intellectual property rights to the same extent as the laws of the United States.

        We have obtained or applied for patent protection with respect to some of our intellectual property, but generally do not rely on patents as a principal means of protecting intellectual property. As of June 30, 2011 we owned 30 patents issued in the United States and had 16 patent applications pending in the United States and foreign counterparts.

        We conduct business under our trademarks and use trademarks on some of our products. We believe that having distinctive marks may be an important factor in marketing our products. We have registered or applied to register some of our significant trademarks in the United States and in selected other countries. Although we have a foreign trademark registration program for selected marks, the laws of many countries protect trademarks solely on the basis of registration and we may not be able to register or use such marks in each foreign country in which we seek registration. We actively monitor use of our trademarks and have enforced, and will continue to enforce, our rights to our trademarks.

        We rely on trade secrets to protect certain of our technology. We generally seek to protect these trade secrets by entering into non-disclosure agreements with our employees and customers, and historically have restricted access to our software and source code, which we regard as proprietary information. In certain cases, we have provided copies of code to customers for the purpose of special product customization or have deposited the source code with a third-party escrow agent as security for ongoing service and license obligations. In these cases, we rely on non-disclosure and other contractual provisions to protect our proprietary rights. Trade secrets may be difficult to protect, and it is possible that parties may breach their confidentiality agreements with us.

        The steps we have taken to protect our proprietary rights may not be adequate to deter misappropriation of our technology or independent development by others of technologies that are substantially equivalent or superior to our technology. Any misappropriation of our technology or development of competitive technologies could harm our business. We could incur substantial costs in protecting and enforcing our intellectual property rights.

        Third parties have asserted, and may assert in the future, claims that our products infringe patents or patent applications under which we do not hold licenses or other rights. Third parties may own or control these patents and patent applications in the United States and abroad. These third parties have

16

---

Table of Contents

brought, and could in the future bring, claims against us that would cause us to incur substantial expenses and, if successfully asserted against us, could cause us to pay substantial damages. Further, if a patent infringement suit were brought against us, we could be forced to stop or delay manufacturing or sales of the product that is the subject of the suit before or after the suit is decided on the merits. In addition, we could be forced to redesign a product that uses an allegedly infringing technology. The cost to us of any patent litigation or other proceeding, even if resolved in our favor, could be substantial and may require significant commitments of time by our management.

        We believe that the success of our business depends more on the quality of our proprietary software products, technology, processes and know-how than on trademarks, copyrights or patents. While we consider our intellectual property rights to be valuable, we do not believe that our competitive position in the industry is dependent simply on obtaining legal protection for our software products and technology. Instead, we believe that the success of our business depends primarily on our ability to maintain a leadership position by developing proprietary software products, technology, information, processes and know-how. Nevertheless, we attempt to protect our intellectual property rights with respect to our products and development processes through trademark, copyright and patent registrations, both foreign and domestic, whenever appropriate as part of our ongoing research and development activities.

Employees

        As of June 30, 2011, we had a total of 1,269 full-time employees, of whom 683 were located in the United States. None of our employees is represented by a labor union, except for 9 employees of our subsidiary Hyprotech UK Limited who belong to the Prospect union for professionals. We have experienced no work stoppages and believe that our employee relations are satisfactory.

Corporate Information

        Aspen Technology, Inc. was formed in Massachusetts in 1981 and reincorporated in Delaware in 1998. Our principal executive offices are at 200 Wheeler Road, Burlington, MA 01803, and our telephone number at that address is (781) 221-6400. Our website address is http://www.aspentech.com. The information on our website is not part of this Form 10-K, unless expressly noted.

Available Information

        Our website address is http://www.aspentech.com. Information contained on our website is not incorporated by reference into this Form 10-K unless expressly noted. We file reports with the Securities and Exchange Commission, or the SEC, which we make available on our website free of charge. These reports include annual reports on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K and amendments to such reports, each of which is provided on our website as soon as reasonably practicable after we electronically file such materials with or furnish them to the SEC. You can also read and copy any materials we file with the SEC at the SEC's Public Reference Room at 100 F Street, N.E., Washington, DC 20549. You can obtain additional information about the operation of the Public Reference Room by calling the SEC at 1-800-SEC-0330. In addition, the SEC maintains a website (http://www.sec.gov) that contains reports, proxy and information statements, and other information regarding issuers that file electronically with the SEC, including us.

17

---

Table of Contents

Item 1A.    Risk Factors.

        Investing in our common stock involves a high degree of risk. You should carefully consider the risks and uncertainties described below before purchasing our common stock. The risks and uncertainties described below are not the only ones facing our company. Additional risks and uncertainties may also impair our business operations. If any of the following risks actually occurs, our business, financial condition, results of operations or cash flows would likely suffer. In that case, the trading price of our common stock could fall, and you may lose all or part of your investment in our common stock.

Risks Related to Our Business

If we fail to develop new software products, enhance existing products and services, or penetrate new vertical markets, we will be unable to implement our growth strategy successfully and our business could be seriously harmed.

        The maintenance and extension of our market leadership and our future growth is largely dependent upon our ability to develop new software products that achieve market acceptance with acceptable operating margins. Enterprises are requiring their application software vendors to provide greater levels of functionality and broader product offerings. We must continue to enhance our current product line and develop and introduce new products and services that keep pace with increasingly sophisticated customer requirements and the technological developments of our competitors. Our business and operating results could suffer if we cannot successfully respond to the technological advances of competitors, or if our new products or product enhancements and services do not achieve market acceptance.

        We have implemented a product strategy that unifies our software solutions under the aspenONE brand with differentiated aspenONE vertical solutions targeted at specific process industry segments. We cannot ensure that our product strategy will result in products that will meet market needs and achieve significant market acceptance. If we fail to introduce new products that meet the demands of our customers or our target markets, or if we fail to penetrate new vertical markets in the process industries, our operating results and cash flows from operations will grow at a slower rate than we anticipate and our financial condition could suffer.

Our business could suffer if the demand for, or usage of, our aspenONE software declines for any reason.

        Our aspenONE suites account for a significant majority of our revenue and will continue to do so for the foreseeable future. If demand for, or usage of, our software declines for any reason, our operating results, cash flows from operations and financial position would suffer. Our business could be adversely affected by:

•

any decline in demand for or usage of our aspenONE suites;



•

the introduction of products and technologies that serve as a replacement or substitute for, or represent an improvement over, our aspenONE suites;



•

technological innovations that our aspenONE suites do not address; and



•

our inability to release enhanced versions of our aspenONE suites on a timely basis.

Our transition to a subscription-based licensing model has resulted in, and is expected to continue to result in, lower revenue and operating losses. The reversal of a significant portion of our U.S. valuation allowance resulted in us reporting net income for fiscal 2011. However, we expect to generate net losses for the next few years, as customers continue to transition to our subscription-based licensing model.

        Our aspenONE subscription offering, which we introduced in July 2009, provides customers with access to all of the applications within the aspenONE suite or suites they license and includes SMS for

18

---

Table of Contents

the term of the license contract. Prior to July 2009 we primarily recognized license revenue "upfront," upon shipment of software, on a net present value basis in the period in which a license contract was signed, not over the license term. Although our aspenONE subscription offering makes our license revenue less volatile, it is difficult for us to increase our license revenue rapidly through additional bookings in a period, as license revenue from new customers will be recognized over the applicable license term. Similarly, the full effect of a decline in bookings in any period would not be fully recognized in our revenue for that period, but would negatively affect revenue in subsequent quarters.

        As a result of the transition to our aspenONE subscription offering and the inclusion of SMS for the term of our point product arrangements, our revenue for fiscal 2011 and 2010 was significantly less than the level achieved in the years preceding the licensing model change. The decrease in revenue levels following the introduction of our aspenONE subscription offering have not been accompanied by a corresponding reduction in operating expenses. As a result, the change to our subscription-based licensing model has, and will continue to, result in our reporting lower revenue and operating losses for the next few years.

        As further discussed in Note 10 to our Consolidated Financial Statements, "Income Taxes," we reversed a significant portion of our U.S. valuation allowance in the fourth quarter of fiscal 2011, which resulted in us reporting net income in the current fiscal year. However, this reversal is a non-recurring item, and we expect to return to a pattern where we generate net losses for the next few years.

Our operating results may suffer if customers in the energy, chemicals, engineering and construction, or pharmaceuticals industries experience an economic downturn or other adverse events.

        We derive a majority of our revenue from companies in the energy, chemicals, engineering and construction, and pharmaceutical industries. Accordingly, our future success depends upon the continued demand for process optimization software and related services by companies in these process industries. These industries are highly cyclical and highly reactive to the price of oil, as well as general economic conditions. Adverse changes in these industries could and have caused delays and reductions in information technology spending by our customers, which could lead to reductions, postponements or cancellations of customer purchases of our products and services and in turn could negatively impact our operating results.

        Because of the nature of their products and manufacturing processes, companies in these process industries are subject to heightened risk of adverse or even catastrophic environmental, safety and health accidents or incidents. Further, our customers are often subject to ever-changing standards and regulations, and the global nature of their operations can subject them to numerous regulatory regimes. Legislation or regulations regarding these areas may require us to make rapid changes in our products and services, and our inability to effect those changes could adversely impact our revenue, operating margins and other operating results. Any of the foregoing types of events that affect our customers may adversely impact their operations and information technology spending, which could have an adverse effect on our operating results.

        In addition, in the past, worldwide economic downturns and pricing pressures experienced by energy, chemical, pharmaceutical and other process industries have led to consolidations and reorganizations. These downturns, pricing pressures and reorganizations have caused delays and reductions in capital and operating expenditures by many of these companies. These delays and reductions have reduced demand for products and services like ours.

        A recurrence of these industry patterns, including any recurrence that may occur in connection with current global economic events, as well as general domestic and foreign economic conditions and other factors that reduce spending by companies in these industries, could harm our operating results in the future. There is no assurance that customers may not seek bankruptcy or other similar relief

19

---

Table of Contents

from creditors, fail to pay amounts due to us, or pay those amounts more slowly, any of which could adversely affect our results of operations.

Unfavorable economic and market conditions or a lessening demand in the market for process optimization software could adversely affect our operating results.

        Our business is influenced by a range of factors that are beyond our control and difficult or impossible to predict. If the market for process optimization software grows more slowly than we anticipate, demand for our products and services could decline and our operating results could be impaired. Further, the state of the economy, which deteriorated in the 2008 broad recession, may deteriorate further in the future. Our operating results may be adversely affected by unfavorable global economic and market conditions as well as a lessening demand for process optimization software generally. Customer demand for our products is intrinsically linked to the strength of the economy. If weakness in the economies of the United States and other countries persists, many customers may delay or reduce technology purchases. This could result in reductions in sales of our products, longer sales cycles, slower adoption of new technologies, increased price competition or reduced use of our products by our customers. We will lose revenue if demand for our products is reduced because potential customers experience weak or deteriorating economic conditions, catastrophic environmental or other events and our business, results of operations, financial condition and cash flow from operations would likely be adversely affected.

The majority of our revenue and an increasing percentage of our operations are attributable to operations outside the United States, and our operating results therefore may be materially affected by the economic, political, regulatory and other risks of foreign operations.

        As of June 30, 2011, we operated in 28 countries. We sell our products primarily through a direct sales force located throughout the world. In the event that we are unable to adequately staff and maintain our foreign operations, we could face difficulties managing our international operations.

        Customers outside the United States accounted for a significant amount of our total revenue in fiscal 2011 and in fiscal 2010. We anticipate that revenue from customers outside the United States will continue to account for a significant portion of our total revenue for the foreseeable future. Our operations outside the United States are subject to additional risks, including:

•

unexpected changes in regulatory requirements, exchange rates, tariffs and other barriers;



•

political and economic instability and possible nationalization of property by governments without compensation to the owners;



•

less effective protection of intellectual property;



•

requirements of foreign laws and other governmental controls;



•

difficulties and delays in translating products and product documentation into foreign languages;



•

difficulties and delays in negotiating software licenses compliant with accounting revenue recognition requirements in the United States;



•

difficulties in collecting trade accounts receivable in other countries;



•

adverse tax consequences; and



•

the challenges of handling legal disputes in foreign jurisdictions.

20

---

Table of Contents

Fluctuations in foreign currency exchange rates could result in declines in our reported revenue and operating results.

        In fiscal 2011, 21.7% of our total revenue was denominated in a currency other than the U.S. dollar. In addition, certain of our operating expenses incurred outside the United States are denominated in currencies other than the U.S. dollar. Our reported revenue and operating results are subject to fluctuations in foreign exchange rates. Foreign currency risk arises primarily from the net difference between non-U.S. dollar receipts from customers outside the United States and non-U.S. dollar operating expenses for subsidiaries in foreign countries. Currently, our largest exposures to foreign exchange rates exist primarily with the Euro, Pound Sterling, Canadian dollar and Japanese Yen against the U.S. dollar. Over recent months, the value of foreign currencies against the U.S. dollar has fluctuated dramatically. Since late fiscal 2008, we have not entered into derivative financial instruments, such as forward currency exchange contracts, intended to manage the volatility of these market risks. We cannot predict the impact of foreign currency fluctuations, and foreign currency fluctuations in the future may adversely affect our revenue and operating results. Any hedging policies we may implement in the future may not be successful, and the cost of those hedging techniques may have a significant negative impact on our operating results.

Competition from software offered by current competitors and new market entrants, as well as from internally developed solutions by our customers, could adversely affect our ability to sell our software products and related services and could result in pressure to price our products in a manner that reduces our margins.

        Our markets in general are highly competitive and differ among our principal product areas: engineering, manufacturing, and supply chain management. Our engineering software competes with products of businesses such as ABB Ltd., Honeywell International, Inc., Invensys plc and KBC Advanced Technologies plc. Our manufacturing software competes with products of companies such as ABB Ltd., Honeywell International, Inc., Invensys plc, OSIsoft, Inc., Rockwell Automation, Inc., Siemens AG and Yokogawa Electric Corporation. Our supply chain management software competes with products of companies such as JDA Software Group, Inc., Oracle Corporation and SAP AG. In addition, we face challenges in selling our solutions to large companies in the process industries that have internally developed their own proprietary software solutions.

        Many of our current and potential competitors have greater financial, technical, marketing, service and other resources than we have. As a result, these companies may be able to offer lower prices, additional products or services, or other incentives that we cannot match or offer. These competitors may be in a stronger position to respond more quickly to new technologies and may be able to undertake more extensive marketing campaigns. We believe they also have adopted and may continue to pursue more aggressive pricing policies and make more attractive offers to potential customers, employees and strategic partners. For example, some competitors may be able to initiate relationships through sales and installations of hardware and then seek to expand their customer relationships by offering process optimization software at a discount. In addition, many of our competitors have established, and may in the future continue to establish, cooperative relationships with third parties to improve their product offerings and to increase the availability of their products in the marketplace. Competitors with greater financial resources may make strategic acquisitions to increase their ability to gain market share or improve the quality or marketability of their products.

        Competition could seriously impede our ability to sell additional software products and related services on terms favorable to us. Businesses may continue to enhance their internally developed solutions, rather than investing in commercial software such as ours. Our current and potential commercial competitors may develop and market new technologies that render our existing or future products obsolete, unmarketable or less competitive. In addition, if these competitors develop products with similar or superior functionality to our products, we may need to decrease the prices for our products in order to remain competitive. If we are unable to maintain our current pricing due to

21

---

Table of Contents

competitive pressures, our margins will be reduced and our operating results will be negatively affected. We cannot ensure that we will be able to compete successfully against current or future competitors or that competitive pressures will not materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and operating results.

Defects or errors in our software products could harm our reputation, impair our ability to sell our products and result in significant costs to us.

        Our software products are complex and may contain undetected defects or errors. We have not suffered significant harm from any defects or errors to date, but we have from time to time found defects in our products and we may discover additional defects in the future. We may not be able to detect and correct defects or errors before releasing products. Consequently, we or our customers may discover defects or errors after our products have been implemented. We have in the past issued, and may in the future need to issue, corrective releases of our products to remedy defects or errors. The occurrence of any defects or errors could result in:

•

lost or delayed market acceptance and sales of our products;



•

delays in payment to us by customers;



•

product returns;



•

injury to our reputation;



•

diversion of our resources;



•

legal claims, including product liability claims, against us;



•

increased service and warranty expenses or financial concessions; and



•

increased insurance costs.

Defects and errors in our software products could result in claims for substantial damages against us.

Arbitration and litigation involving a former reseller in the Middle East may subject us to substantial damages and expenses.

        Prior to October 6, 2009, we had an exclusive reseller relationship covering certain countries in the Middle East with AspenTech Middle East W.L.L., a Kuwaiti corporation (now known as Advanced Technology Middle East W.L.L.) that we refer to below as ATME. Under the reseller agreement, we had the right to terminate for, among other things, a material breach in the event of ATME's willful misconduct or fraud. Effective October 6, 2009, we terminated the reseller relationship for material breach by ATME, based on certain actions of ATME.

        On November 2, 2009, ATME commenced an action in the Queen's Bench Division (Commercial Court) of the High Court of Justice (England & Wales) captioned In The Matter Of An Intended Arbitration Between AspenTech Middle East W.L.L. and Aspen Technology, Inc., 2009 Folio 1436, seeking preliminary injunctive relief restraining us from taking any steps to impede ATME from serving as our exclusive reseller in the countries covered by the reseller agreement with ATME. We filed evidence in opposition to that request for relief on November 12, 2009. At a hearing on November 13, 2009, the court dismissed ATME's application for preliminary injunctive relief. The court sealed an Order to this effect on November 23, 2009, and further ordered that ATME pay our costs of claim.

        Relatedly, on November 11, 2009, we filed a request for arbitration against ATME in the International Court of Arbitration of the International Chamber of Commerce, captioned Aspen Technology, Inc. v. AspenTech Middle East W.L.L., Case No. 16732/VRO. Our request for arbitration asserted claims against ATME seeking a declaration that ATME committed a material breach of our

22

---

Table of Contents

agreement and that our termination of our agreement was lawful, and seeking damages for ATME's willful misconduct in connection with the reseller relationship. On November 18, 2009, ATME filed its answer to that request for arbitration and asserted counterclaims against us seeking a declaratory judgment that we unlawfully terminated our agreement with ATME and seeking damages for breach of contract by reason of our purported unlawful termination of our agreement. Our reply to those counterclaims was filed on December 18, 2009. Pursuant to a procedural order issued by the arbitral tribunal, a hearing was conducted between January 24, 2011 and February 2, 2011, and a supplemental hearing took place in June 2011.

        We expect a determination to be made in the first half of fiscal 2012 with respect to the pending arbitration. However, we can provide no assurance as to the actual timing or outcome of the arbitration. In general, there is no provision for either party to appeal the determination reached. The reseller agreement with ATME contained a provision whereby we could be liable for a termination fee if the agreement were terminated other than for material breach. This fee is to be calculated based on a formula contained in the reseller agreement that we believe was originally developed based on certain assumptions about the future financial performance of ATME, as well as ATME's actual financial performance. Based on the formula and the financial information provided to us by ATME, which we have not verified independently, a calculation based on the formula would result in a termination fee of between $60 million and $77 million. Under the terminated reseller agreement, no termination fee is owed on termination for material breach. If we are found to have breached the terms of our agreement with ATME, we could be found liable for damages including the termination fee, the amount of which may be greater or less than the number indicated above. We intend to continue to pursue our claims against ATME, and to defend the counterclaim by ATME, vigorously.

        On March 11, 2010, a Kuwaiti entity (known as ATME Group and affiliated with ATME) filed a lawsuit in a Kuwaiti court naming as defendants ATME, us and a reseller newly appointed by us in Kuwait. In this lawsuit, ATME Group claims that it was an exclusive reseller for ATME in Kuwait and that it therefore is entitled to damages resulting from purported customer contracts in Kuwait. We intend to defend this action vigorously.

We are subject to a lawsuit by a purchaser of our shares in a private placement.

        In March 2006, we settled class action litigation, including related derivative claims, arising out of our originally filed consolidated financial statements for fiscal 2000 through 2004, the accounting for which we restated in March 2005. Certain members of the class (representing 1,457,969 shares of common stock, or less than 1% of the shares putatively purchased during the class action period) opted out of the settlement and had the right to bring their own state or federal law claims against us, referred to as "opt-out" claims. Opt-out claims were filed on behalf of the holders of approximately 1.1 million of such shares. All but one of these actions were settled and/or dismissed. The remaining action is discussed below.

        380544 Canada, Inc., et al. v. Aspen Technology, Inc., was filed on February 15, 2007 in the federal district court for the Southern District of New York and docketed as Civ. A. No. 1:07-cv-01204-JFK in that court. The claims in this action include claims against us and one or more of our former officers alleging securities and common law fraud, breach of contract, deceptive practices and/or rescissory damages liability, based on the restated results of one or more fiscal periods included in our restated consolidated financial statements referenced in the class action. This action was brought by persons who purchased 566,665 shares of our common stock in a private placement. Certain motions to dismiss filed by other defendants were resolved on May 5, 2009. The claims in the 380544 Canada action are for damages totaling at least $4.0 million, not including claims for attorneys' fees. We plan to defend the 380544 Canada action vigorously.

23

---

Table of Contents

        We can provide no assurance as to the outcome of this case or the likelihood of the filing of additional opt-out claims, and these claims may result in judgments against us for significant damages. Regardless of the outcome, such litigation has resulted in the past, and may continue to result in the future, in significant legal expenses and may require significant attention and resources of management, all of which could result in losses and damages that have a material adverse effect on our business.

We may be subject to significant expenses and damages because of pending liability claims and other claims related to our products and services.

        The sale and implementation of certain of our software products and services, particularly in the areas of advanced process control and supply chain management, entail the risk of product liability claims and associated damages. Our software products and services are often integrated with our customers' networks and software applications and are used in the design, operation and management of manufacturing and supply chain processes at large facilities, often for mission critical applications.

        Any errors, defects, performance problems or other failures of our software could result in significant liability to us for damages or for violations of environmental, safety and other laws and regulations. Our software products and implementation services could give rise to warranty and other claims. In the ordinary course of business, we are from time to time involved in lawsuits or claims relating to our products or services. These matters include an April 2004 claim by a customer for approximately $5.0 million that certain of our software products and implementation services failed to meet the customer's expectations. We are unable to determine whether resolution of any of these matters will have a material adverse impact on our financial position, cash flows or results of operations, or, in many cases, reasonably estimate the amount of the loss, if any, that may result from the resolution of these matters.

        Our agreements with customers generally contain provisions designed to limit our exposure to potential product liability claims. It is possible, however, that the limitation of liability provisions in our agreements may not be effective as a result of federal, foreign, state or local laws or ordinances or unfavorable judicial decisions. A substantial product liability judgment against us could materially and adversely harm our operating results and financial condition. Even if our software is not at fault, a product liability claim brought against us could be time-consuming, costly to defend and harmful to our operations and reputation.

Third-party claims that we infringe the intellectual property rights of others may be costly to defend or settle and could damage our business.

        We cannot be certain that our software and services do not infringe issued patents, copyrights, trademarks or other intellectual property rights of third parties. Litigation regarding intellectual property rights is common in the software industry, and we may be subject to legal proceedings and claims from time to time, including claims of alleged infringement of intellectual property rights of third parties by us or our licensees concerning their use of our software products and integration technologies and services. Third parties may bring claims of infringement against us. Because our software is integrated with our customers' networks and business processes, as well as other software applications, third parties may bring claims of infringement against us, as well as our customers and other software suppliers, if the cause of the alleged infringement cannot easily be determined.

        Claims of alleged infringement may have a material adverse effect on our business and may discourage potential customers from doing business with us on acceptable terms, if at all. Defending against claims of infringement may be time-consuming and may result in substantial costs and diversion of resources, including our management's attention to our business. Furthermore, a party making an infringement claim could secure a judgment that requires us to pay substantial damages. A judgment could also include an injunction or other court order that could prevent us from selling our software or

24

---

Table of Contents

require that we re-engineer some or all of our products. Claims of intellectual property infringement also might require us to enter costly royalty or license agreements. We may be unable to obtain royalty or license agreements on terms acceptable to us or at all. Our business, operating results and financial condition could be harmed significantly if any of these events occurred, and the price of our common stock could be adversely affected. Furthermore, former employers of our current and future employees may assert that our employees have improperly disclosed confidential or proprietary information to us. In addition, we have agreed, and may agree in the future, to indemnify certain of our customers against claims that our software infringes upon the intellectual property rights of others. Although we carry general liability insurance, our current insurance coverage may not apply to, and likely would not protect us from, liability that may be imposed under any of the types of claims described above.

We may not be able to protect our intellectual property rights, which could make us less competitive and cause us to lose market share.

        We regard our software as proprietary. Our strategy is to rely on a combination of copyright, patent, trademark and trade secret laws in the United States and other jurisdictions, and to rely on license and confidentiality agreements and software security measures to further protect our proprietary technology and brand. We have obtained or applied for patent protection with respect to some of our intellectual property, but generally do not rely on patents as a principal means of protecting our intellectual property. We have registered or applied to register some of our trademarks in the United States and in selected other countries. We generally enter into non-disclosure agreements with our employees and customers, and historically have restricted third-party access to our software and source code, which we regard as proprietary information. In certain cases, we have provided copies of source code to customers for the purpose of special product customization or have deposited copies of the source code with a third party escrow agent as security for ongoing service and license obligations. In these cases, we rely on non-disclosure and other contractual provisions to protect our proprietary rights.

        The steps we have taken to protect our proprietary rights may not be adequate to deter misappropriation of our technology or independent development by others of technologies that are substantially equivalent or superior to our technology. Our intellectual property rights may expire or be challenged, invalidated or infringed upon by third parties or we may be unable to maintain, renew or enter into new licenses on commercially reasonable terms. Any misappropriation of our technology or development of competitive technologies could harm our business and could diminish or cause us to lose the competitive advantages associated with our proprietary technology, and could subject us to substantial costs in protecting and enforcing our intellectual property rights, including costs of proceedings we have instituted to enforce our intellectual property rights, such as those described in "Item 3. Other Proceedings," and/or temporarily or permanently disrupt our sales and marketing of the affected products or services. The laws of some countries in which our products are licensed do not protect our intellectual property rights to the same extent as the laws of the United States. Moreover, in some non-U.S. countries, laws affecting intellectual property rights are uncertain in their application, which can affect the scope of enforceability of our intellectual property rights.

25

---

Table of Contents

In preparing our financial statements for fiscal 2011, we identified a material weakness in our internal control over financial reporting, and our failure to remedy this or other material weaknesses could result in material misstatements in our financial statements.

        Our management is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over our financial reporting, as defined in Rule 13a-15(f) under the Securities Exchange Act. Our management identified a material weakness in our internal control over financial reporting as of June 30, 2011. A material weakness is defined as a deficiency, or combination of deficiencies, in internal control over financial reporting, such that there is a reasonable possibility that a material misstatement of our annual or interim financial statements will not be prevented or detected on a timely basis.

        The material weaknesses identified by management as of June 30, 2011 consisted of inadequate and ineffective controls over income tax accounting. As a result of this material weakness, our management concluded as of June 30, 2011 that our internal control over financial reporting was not effective based on criteria set forth by the Committee of Sponsoring Organization of the Treadway Commission in Internal Control—An Integrated Framework (September 1992).

        We have been implementing and continue to implement remedial measures designed to address this material weakness. If our remedial measures are insufficient to address this material weakness, or if additional material weaknesses or significant deficiencies in our internal control are discovered or occur in the future, our consolidated financial statements may contain material misstatements and we could be required to restate our financial results.

Implementation of some of our products can be difficult and time-consuming, and customers may be unable to implement those products successfully or otherwise achieve all of the potential benefits of the products.

        Some of our scheduling, production management and execution, and supply chain products must integrate with the existing computer systems and software programs of our customers. This process can be complex, time-consuming and expensive. As a result, some customers may have difficulty in implementing those products or be unable to implement them successfully or otherwise achieve the products' potential benefits. Delayed or ineffective implementation of those software products or related services may limit our revenue or may result in customer dissatisfaction, harm to our reputation and customer unwillingness to pay the fees associated with these products.

We may suffer losses on fixed-price professional service engagements.

        We undertake a portion of our professional service engagements on a fixed-price basis. Under these types of engagements, we bear the risk of cost overruns and inflation. We occasionally experience cost overruns, which may have a negative impact on our operating results.

If we fail to comply or are deemed to have failed to comply with our ongoing Federal Trade Commission, or FTC, consent decree, our business may suffer.

        In December 2004, we entered into a consent decree with the FTC with respect to a civil administrative complaint filed by the FTC in August 2003 alleging that our acquisition of Hyprotech in May 2002 was anticompetitive in violation of Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act and Section 7 of the Clayton Act. In July 2009, we announced that the FTC closed an investigation relating to the alleged violations of the decree, and issued an order modifying the consent decree, which became final in August 2009. We are subject to ongoing compliance obligations under the FTC consent decree. There is no assurance that the actions required by the FTC's modified order and related settlement with Honeywell International, Inc. will not require significant attention and resources of management, which could have a material adverse effect on our business. Further, if we fail to comply, or are deemed to have failed to comply, with such consent decree, our business may suffer.

26

---

Table of Contents

If we are not successful in attracting, integrating and retaining highly qualified personnel, we may not be able to successfully implement our business strategy.

        Our ability to establish and maintain a position of technology leadership in the highly competitive software market depends in large part upon our ability to attract, integrate and retain highly qualified managerial, sales, technical and accounting personnel. Competition for qualified personnel in the software industry is intense. We have from time to time in the past experienced, and we expect to continue to experience in the future, difficulty in hiring and retaining highly skilled employees with appropriate qualifications. Our future success will depend in large part on our ability to attract, integrate and retain a sufficient number of highly qualified personnel, and there can be no assurance that we will be able to do so.

Our ability to raise capital in the future may be limited, and our failure to raise capital when needed could prevent us from executing our business plan.

        We expect that our current cash and cash equivalents and cash flows from operations will be sufficient to meet our anticipated cash needs for at least the next twelve months. We may need to obtain additional financing thereafter or earlier, however, if our current plans and projections prove to be inaccurate or our expected cash flows prove to be insufficient to fund our operations because of lower-than-expected revenue, unanticipated expenses or other unforeseen difficulties.

        Our ability to obtain additional financing will depend on a number of factors, including market conditions, our operating performance, the quality of our receivables, and the availability of capital in the credit markets. These factors may make the timing, amount, terms and conditions of any financing unattractive. If adequate funds are not available, or are not available on acceptable terms, we may have to forego strategic acquisitions or other investments.

Risks Related to Our Common Stock

Our common stock may experience substantial price and volume fluctuations.

        The equity markets have from time to time experienced extreme price and volume fluctuations, particularly in the high technology sector, and those fluctuations often have been unrelated to the operating performance of particular companies. In addition, factors such our aspenONE subscription offering, our financial performance, the variability of earnings associated with the release of a significant portion of our U.S. valuation allowance, announcements of technological innovations or new products by us or our competitors, and market conditions in the computer software or hardware industries, may have a significant impact on the market price of our common stock.

        In the past, following periods of volatility in the market price of a public company's securities, securities class action litigation has often been instituted against that company. This type of litigation against us could result in substantial liability and costs and divert management's attention and resources.

Our corporate documents and provisions of Delaware law may prevent a change in control or management that stockholders may consider desirable.

        Section 203 of the Delaware General Corporation Law, our charter and our by-laws contain provisions that might enable our management to resist a takeover of our company. These provisions include:

•

limitations on the removal of directors;



•

a classified board of directors, so that not all members of the board are elected at one time;



•

advance notice requirements for stockholder proposals and nominations;

27

---

Table of Contents

•

the inability of stockholders to act by written consent or to call special meetings;



•

the ability of the board to make, alter or repeal our by-laws; and



•

the ability of the board to designate the terms of and issue new series of preferred stock without stockholder approval.

These provisions could:

•

have the effect of delaying, deferring or preventing a change in control of our company or a change in our management that stockholders may consider favorable or beneficial;



•

discourage proxy contests and make it more difficult for stockholders to elect directors and take other corporate actions; and



•

limit the price that investors might be willing to pay in the future for shares of our common stock.

Item 1B.    Unresolved Staff Comments.

        None.

Item 2.    Properties.

        Our principal executive offices are located in leased facilities in Burlington, Massachusetts, consisting of approximately 75,000 square feet of office space. Our lease expires on January 31, 2015. These facilities accommodate our product development, sales, marketing, operations and finance and administrative functions. Subject to the terms and conditions of the lease, we may extend the term of the lease for two successive terms of five years each at 95% of the then-current market rate. As of June 30, 2011, under the lease, we had total future non-cancelable lease obligations of $7.5 million. We also will pay additional rent for our proportionate share of operating costs and taxes.

        Prior to September 1, 2007, our principal offices occupied 110,843 square feet of office space in Cambridge, Massachusetts. The lease for this office space expires on September 30, 2012. As of June 30, 2011, we had multiple agreements, which expire through 2012, to sublease the former office space. We also lease space for our Houston, Texas facilities. This lease encompasses 76,315 square feet and expires in July 2016. We have an agreement, which expires in July 2016, to sublease approximately 8,000 square feet of this space. In addition to our Burlington and Houston locations, we also lease office space in Shanghai, Reading (UK), Singapore and Tokyo to accommodate sales, services and product development functions.

        In the remainder of our other locations, the majority of our leases has lease terms of one year or less that are generally based on the number of workstations required. We believe this facilities strategy provides us with significant flexibility to adjust to changes in our business environment. We do not own any real property. We believe that our leased facilities are adequate for our anticipated future needs.

Item 3.    Legal Proceedings.

ATME Arbitration and Litigation

        Prior to October 6, 2009, we had an exclusive reseller relationship covering certain countries in the Middle East with AspenTech Middle East W.L.L., a Kuwaiti corporation (now known as Advanced Technology Middle East W.L.L.) that we refer to below as ATME. Under the reseller agreement, we had the right to terminate for, among other things, a material breach in the event of ATME's willful misconduct or fraud. Effective October 6, 2009, we terminated the reseller relationship for material breach by ATME based on certain actions of ATME.

28

---

Table of Contents

        On November 2, 2009, ATME commenced an action in the Queen's Bench Division (Commercial Court) of the High Court of Justice (England & Wales) captioned In The Matter Of An Intended Arbitration Between AspenTech Middle East W.L.L. and Aspen Technology, Inc., 2009 Folio 1436, seeking preliminary injunctive relief restraining us from taking any steps to impede ATME from serving as our exclusive reseller in the countries covered by the reseller agreement with ATME. We filed evidence in opposition to that request for relief on November 12, 2009. At a hearing on November 13, 2009, the court dismissed ATME's application for preliminary injunctive relief. The court sealed an Order to this effect on November 23, 2009, and further ordered that ATME pay our costs of claim.

        Relatedly, on November 11, 2009, we filed a request for arbitration against ATME in the International Court of Arbitration of the International Chamber of Commerce, captioned Aspen Technology, Inc. v. AspenTech Middle East W.L.L., Case No. 16732/VRO. Our request for arbitration asserted claims against ATME seeking a declaration that ATME committed a material breach of our agreement and that our termination of our agreement was lawful, and seeking damages for ATME's willful misconduct in connection with the reseller relationship. On November 18, 2009, ATME filed its answer to that request for arbitration and asserted counterclaims against us seeking a declaratory judgment that we unlawfully terminated our agreement with ATME and seeking damages for breach of contract by reason of our purported unlawful termination of our agreement. Our reply to those counterclaims was filed on December 18, 2009. Pursuant to a procedural order issued by the arbitral tribunal, a hearing was conducted between January 24, 2011 and February 2, 2011, and a supplemental hearing took place in June 2011.

        We expect a determination to be made in the first half of fiscal 2012 with respect to the pending arbitration. However, we can provide no assurance as to the actual timing or outcome of the arbitration. In general, there is no provision for either party to appeal the determination reached. The reseller agreement with ATME contained a provision whereby we could be liable for a termination fee if the agreement were terminated other than for material breach. This fee is to be calculated based on a formula contained in the reseller agreement that we believe was originally developed based on certain assumptions about the future financial performance of ATME, as well as ATME's actual financial performance. Based on the formula and the financial information provided to us by ATME, which we have not verified independently, a calculation based on the formula would result in a termination fee of between $60 million and $77 million. Under the terminated reseller agreement, no termination fee is owed on termination for material breach. If we are found to have breached the terms of our agreement with ATME, we could be liable for damages including the termination fee, the amount of which may be greater or less than the number indicated above. We intend to continue to pursue our claims against ATME, and to defend the counterclaim by ATME, vigorously.

        On March 11, 2010, a Kuwaiti entity (known as ATME Group and affiliated with ATME) filed a lawsuit in a Kuwaiti court naming as defendants ATME, us and a reseller newly appointed by us in Kuwait. In this lawsuit, ATME Group claims that it was an exclusive reseller for ATME in Kuwait and that it therefore is entitled to damages resulting from purported customer contracts in Kuwait. We intend to defend this action vigorously.

Class Action and Opt-out Claims

        In March 2006, we settled class action litigation, including related derivative claims, arising out of our originally filed consolidated financial statements for fiscal 2000 through 2004, the accounting for which we restated in March 2005. Certain members of the class (representing 1,457,969 shares of common stock (or less than 1% of the shares putatively purchased during the class action period)) opted out of the settlement and had the right to bring their own state or federal law claims against us, referred to as "opt-out" claims. Opt-out claims were filed on behalf of the holders of approximately 1.1 million of such shares. All but one of these actions were settled and/or dismissed. The remaining action is discussed below.

29

---

Table of Contents

        380544 Canada, Inc., et al. v. Aspen Technology, Inc., was filed on February 15, 2007 in the federal district court for the Southern District of New York and docketed as Civ. A. No. 1:07-cv-01204-JFK in that court. The claims in this action include claims against us and one or more of our former officers alleging securities and common law fraud, breach of contract, deceptive practices and/or rescissory damages liability, based on the restated results of one or more fiscal periods included in our restated consolidated financial statements referenced in the class action. This action was brought by persons who purchased 566,665 shares of our common stock in a private placement. Certain motions to dismiss filed by other defendants were resolved on May 5, 2009. The claims in the 380544 Canada action are for damages totaling at least $4.0 million, not including claims for attorneys' fees. We plan to defend the 380544 Canada action vigorously.

        We can provide no assurance as to the outcome of this case or the likelihood of the filing of additional opt-out claims, and these claims may result in judgments against us for significant damages. Regardless of the outcome, such litigation has resulted in the past, and may continue to result in the future, in significant legal expenses and may require significant attention and resources of management, all of which could result in losses and damages that have a material adverse effect on our business.

Other Proceedings

        In the ordinary course of business, we also from time to time pursue lawsuits and claims to enforce our intellectual property rights and to address other intellectual property, commercial and miscellaneous matters. These matters include claims we asserted against M3 Technology, Inc. in July 2010 for misappropriation of our trade secrets and infringement of our copyrights, in an action that we commenced in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas captioned Aspen Technology, Inc. v. Tekin A. Kunt and M3 Technology, Inc. which is docketed as Civ. A. No. 4:10-cv-1127 in that court.

        In addition, we are also from time to time involved in other lawsuits, claims, investigations, proceedings and threats of litigation. These include an April 2004 claim by a customer for approximately $5.0 million that certain of our software products and implementation services failed to meet the customer's expectations.

        The results of litigation and claims cannot be predicted with certainty, and unfavorable resolutions are possible and could materially affect our results of operations, cash flows or financial position. In addition, regardless of the outcome, litigation could have an adverse impact on us because of litigation fees and costs, diversion of management resources and other factors.

        While the outcome of the proceedings and claims identified above cannot be predicted with certainty, there are no other such matters, as of June 30, 2011, that, in the opinion of management, might have a material adverse effect on our financial position, results of operations or cash flows.

Item 4.    (Removed and Reserved.)

30

---

Table of Contents

PART II

Item 5.    Market for Registrant's Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities.

Market Information

        Our common stock currently trades on The NASDAQ Global Select Market under the symbol "AZPN." Our common stock was traded on The NASDAQ Global Select Market (and its predecessors, the NASDAQ National Market and NASDAQ Global Market) from our initial public offering in 1994 through February 18, 2008, and then was quoted on the over the counter Pink OTC Markets under the symbol "AZPN.PK" until being relisted on The NASDAQ Global Select Market on February 10, 2010. The following table sets forth, for the periods indicated, the high and low sales prices per share of our common stock as reported by The NASDAQ Global Select Market or the Pink OTC Markets, as applicable:

Holders

        On August 15, 2011, there were 734 holders of record of our common stock. The number of record holders does not include persons who held our common stock in nominee or "street name" accounts through brokers.

Dividends

        We have never declared or paid cash dividends on our common stock. We do not anticipate paying cash dividends on our common stock in the foreseeable future. Any future determination relating to our dividend policy will be made at the discretion of the board of directors and will depend on a number of factors, including our future earnings, capital requirements, financial condition and future prospects and such other factors as the board of directors may deem relevant.

31

---

Table of Contents

Purchases of Equity Securities by the Issuer

        The following table sets forth, for the month indicated, our purchases of common stock in the fourth quarter of fiscal 2011:

Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities

Securities Authorized for Issuance Under Equity Compensation Plans

        The following table provides information about the securities authorized for issuance under our equity compensation plans as of June 30, 2011:

        Equity compensation plans approved by security holders consist of our 2005 stock incentive plan and our 2010 equity incentive plan.

        The securities remaining available for future issuance under equity compensation plans approved by our security holders as of June 30, 2011 consisted of:

•

862,030 shares of common stock issuable under our 2005 stock incentive plan; and



•

5,770,426 shares of common stock issuable under our 2010 equity incentive plan.

        Options issuable under the 2005 stock incentive plan have a maximum term of seven years. Options issuable under the 2010 equity incentive plan have a maximum term of ten years.

32

---

Table of Contents

Stockholder Return Comparison

        The information included in this section is not deemed to be "soliciting material" or to be "filed" with the SEC or subject to Regulation 14A or 14C under the Securities Exchange Act or to the liabilities of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act, and will not be deemed to be incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Act or the Securities Exchange Act, except to the extent we specifically incorporate it by reference into such a filing.

        The graph below matches the cumulative 5-year total return of holders of Aspen Technology, Inc.'s common stock with the cumulative total returns of the NASDAQ Composite index and the NASDAQ Computer & Data Processing index. The graph assumes that the value of the investment in the company's common stock and in each of the indexes (including reinvestment of dividends) was $100 on June 30, 2006 and tracks it through June 30, 2011.

COMPARISON OF 5 YEAR CUMULATIVE TOTAL
Among Aspen Technology, Inc., the NASDAQ Composite Index
and the NASDAQ Computer & Data Processing Index

        The stock price performance included in this graph is not necessarily indicative of future stock price performance.

33

---

Table of Contents

Item 6.    Selected Financial Data.

        The following table presents selected consolidated financial and other data for Aspen Technology, Inc. The consolidated statement of operations data set forth below for fiscal 2011, 2010 and 2009 and the consolidated balance sheet data as of June 30, 2011, and 2010, are derived from our consolidated financial statements included beginning on page F-1 of this Form 10-K. The consolidated statement of operations data for fiscal 2008 and 2007 and the consolidated balance sheet data as of June 30, 2009, 2008, and 2007 are derived from our consolidated financial statements that are not included in this Form 10-K. The data presented below should be read in conjunction with our Consolidated Financial Statements and accompanying notes beginning on page F-1 and "Item 7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations."

34

---

Table of Contents

Item 7.    Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations.

        You should read the following discussion in conjunction with our consolidated financial statements and related notes beginning on page F-1. In addition to historical information, this discussion contains forward-looking statements that involve risks and uncertainties. You should read "Item 1A. Risk Factors" for a discussion of important factors that could cause our actual results to differ materially from our expectations.

        Our fiscal year ends on June 30, and references to a specific fiscal year are the twelve months ended June 30 of such year (for example, "fiscal 2011" refers to the year ended June 30, 2011).

Business Overview

        We are a leading global provider of mission-critical process optimization software solutions, which are designed to manage and optimize plant and process design, operational performance, and supply chain planning. Our aspenONE software and related services have been developed specifically for companies in the process industries. Customers use our solutions to improve their competitiveness and profitability by increasing throughput and productivity, reducing operating costs, enhancing capital efficiency, and decreasing working capital requirements.

        We have more than 1,500 customers globally. Our customers include manufacturers in process industries such as energy, chemicals, pharmaceuticals, consumer packaged goods, power, metals and mining, pulp and paper, and biofuels, as well as engineering and construction firms that help design and build process manufacturing plants. As of June 30, 2011, our installed base included 19 of the 20 largest petroleum companies, all of the 20 largest chemical companies, and 15 of the 20 largest pharmaceutical companies. Customers outside the United States accounted for a majority of our total revenue in each of fiscal 2011, 2010 and 2009, and no single customer represented 10% or more of our total revenue in fiscal 2011, 2010 or 2009.

Transition to the aspenONE Subscription Offering

        In fiscal 2010, we began offering our aspenONE software under a subscription-based licensing model, under which a customer can access all products within a licensed suite (aspenONE Engineering or aspenONE Manufacturing and Supply Chain). During the license term, a customer is entitled to receive post contract support, which we refer to as SMS, as well as any software products and upgrades introduced into the licensed suite. Revenue is recognized over the term of a license agreement on a subscription, or "daily ratable," basis. We typically issue invoices annually, and we record each invoiced payment as deferred revenue and then recognize revenue from that payment due date over the applicable period. We also continue to offer our customers the ability to license specifically defined sets of aspenONE products, referred to as point products, which in July 2009 we began licensing with SMS included for the term of the arrangement. Revenue is recognized on these arrangements over the contract term, as payments become due.

        Prior to fiscal 2010, we offered term or perpetual licenses to specific aspenONE products or specifically defined sets of aspenONE products, which we refer to as point products. The majority of our license revenue was recognized under an "upfront revenue model," in which the net present value of the aggregate license fees was recognized as revenue upon shipment of the point products. We typically invoiced customers annually and recorded the net present value of uninvoiced payments as installments receivable. Customers typically received one year of SMS bundled with their license agreements and then could elect to renew SMS annually. Revenue from SMS was recognized ratably over the period which the SMS was delivered.

35

---

Table of Contents

        Our aspenONE subscription offering has not changed the method or timing of our customer billing or cash collections and our net cash provided by operating activities increased in each of fiscal 2011 and 2010. The principal accounting implications of the change in our licensing model are as follows:

•

The majority of our license revenue is no longer recognized on an upfront basis. As the result of the transition to our aspenONE subscription offering, our license revenue for fiscal 2011 and 2010 was significantly less than the level achieved in the fiscal years preceding our licensing model change. We expect that our revenue will continue to increase as customers renew their previous upfront licensing arrangements under our subscription-based licensing model. We do not expect to recognize levels of revenue comparable to prior fiscal years until a significant majority of our existing license agreements have been renewed under our subscription-based licensing model. Because the timing of our incurrence of operating costs has not changed, the lower levels of revenue expected over the next few years may result in operating losses.



•

The amount of our installments receivable will continue to decrease, as license agreements executed under our upfront revenue model reach the end of their terms. Uninvoiced payments are not recorded on our consolidated balance sheet under the subscription-based licensing model.



•

The amount of our deferred revenue will continue to increase over time, as installments for license transactions executed under our aspenONE subscription offering are deferred and recognized on a subscription basis.

        For additional information about the recognition of revenue under the upfront revenue model and our subscription offering, see "—Revenue." Because of the accounting implications of our aspenONE subscription offering, we believe that, for the next several years, a number of performance indicators based on U.S. generally accepted accounting principles, or GAAP, will be of reduced value in assessing our performance, growth and financial condition. Accordingly, we are focusing on a number of other business metrics, including those described under "—Key Business Metrics."

Future Impact of Enhanced SMS Offering

        In July 2011, we released an enhanced SMS offering to provide more value to our customers. As part of this offering, customers receive 24x7 support, faster response times and dedicated technical advocates. The enhanced SMS offering is being provided to both (i) aspenONE subscription customers and (ii) customers who have licensed point products on a term basis with SMS included for the term of the arrangement.

        We do not have a history of selling this new SMS offering to customers on a stand-alone basis and cannot establish vendor-specific evidence of fair value, or "VSOE". As a result, beginning in July 2011, the revenue associated with point product arrangements that include the enhanced SMS offering is being recognized on a "daily ratable" basis, consistent with the revenue recognition of fees on our aspenONE subscription offering arrangements. Beginning in fiscal 2012, the ratable revenue from both aspenONE subscription arrangements and point product arrangements with enhanced SMS will be presented as "subscription and software revenue."

        We expect the impact of the loss of VSOE to result in moderately lower revenue in fiscal 2012 due to timing. We currently recognize software revenue on point product arrangements over the contract term when the related installments become due. However, in fiscal 2012, we are recognizing revenue on a daily ratable basis, beginning when the installment becomes due. As a result of this change, only a portion of the revenue associated with the installment will be recognized during fiscal 2012.

        The new SMS offering did not impact our results of operations or income statement presentation for fiscal 2011, 2010, or 2009.

36

---

Table of Contents

Revenue

        We generate revenue primarily from the following sources:

•

Software licenses.  We provide integrated process optimization software solutions designed specifically for the process industries. We license our software products, together with SMS, primarily on a term basis, and we offer extended payment options for our term license agreements that generally require annual payments, which we also refer to as installments.



•

SMS and other.  Our SMS business consists primarily of providing customer technical support and access to software fixes and upgrades. We provide customer technical support services throughout the world from our three global call centers as well as via email and through our support website. Our training business provides customers with a variety of training solutions, including on-site, Internet-based and customized training.



•

Professional services.  We offer professional services that include implementing and integrating our technology with customers' existing systems in order to improve their plant performance and gain better operational data. Customers who use our professional services typically engage us to provide those services over periods of up to 24 months. We charge customers for professional services on a time-and-materials or fixed-price basis.

        Before we can recognize revenue, the following four basic criteria generally must be met:

•

Persuasive evidence of an arrangement—As evidence of the existence of an arrangement, we use a contract signed by the customer for software licenses and SMS and we use a signed contract and a statement of work for professional services.



•

Delivery of product—Software and the corresponding access keys are generally delivered to customers via disk media with standard shipping terms of free carrier, our warehouse. Our software license agreements do not contain conditions for acceptance.



•

Fee is fixed or determinable—We assess whether a fee is fixed or determinable at the outset of the arrangement. In addition, we assess whether contract modifications to an existing term arrangement constitute a concession. Our software license agreements do not include a right of return or exchange.



•

Collection of fee is probable—We assess the probability of collecting from each customer at the outset of the arrangement based on a number of factors, including the customer's payment history, its current creditworthiness, economic conditions in the customer's industry and geographic location, and general economic conditions. If in our judgment collection of a fee is not probable, revenue is recognized as cash is collected, provided all other conditions for revenue recognition have been met.

        We have established vendor-specific objective evidence, or VSOE, of fair value for SMS and professional services, but not for our software products. Our VSOE determination is based upon the price charged to similarly situated customers when the elements are sold separately. We allocate the arrangement consideration among the elements included in our multi-element arrangements using the residual method. Under the residual method, the VSOE of the undelivered elements is deferred and the remaining portion of the arrangement fee for perpetual and term licenses is recognized as revenue upon delivery of the software, assuming all other revenue recognition criteria are met. If VSOE does not exist for an undelivered element in an arrangement, revenue is deferred until such evidence does exist for the undelivered elements, or until all elements are delivered, whichever is earlier.

        In July 2011, we released an enhanced SMS offering to provide more value to our customers, for which we do not have VSOE. As a result, beginning in fiscal 2012, we will no longer be able to separate the license and SMS components of our point product arrangements under the residual

37

---

Table of Contents

method. In fiscal 2012 and beyond, the revenue associated with point product arrangements bundled with enhanced SMS will be recognized on a "daily ratable" basis, consistent with the revenue recognition of fees on our aspenONE subscription offering arrangements.

Software License Revenue

Prior to Fiscal 2010

        Prior to fiscal 2010, we generally licensed point products pursuant to term or perpetual license agreements with contractual provisions intended to result in the "upfront" recognition of license revenue upon delivery of the point products, regardless of whether payment was made in period installments or at the outset of the arrangement. Under our upfront revenue model, we typically were able to demonstrate that the license fees were fixed or determinable for all arrangements, including those for term licenses containing extended payment terms, and we had an established history of collecting under the terms of these agreements without providing concessions to customers. A portion of the license fees generally was recorded as deferred revenue due to the inclusion of an undelivered element, SMS, and the amount of revenue allocated to SMS was based on the VSOE of fair value for SMS using the residual method. The net present value of the residual license fees typically was recognized upon delivery of the software.

        License revenue recognized under the upfront revenue model upon the delivery of the licensed software (both term and perpetual license agreements) was reported as software revenue in the consolidated statements of operations.

Fiscal 2010 and Beyond

        In July 2009, we began offering our aspenONE subscription offering, which provides customers with access to all products within the aspenONE suite(s) they license. During the term of a license agreement, a customer is entitled to receive SMS as well as any software products and upgrades that may be introduced into the licensed suite. For purposes of recognizing revenue, the license fees under these agreements are not fixed or determinable, because the agreements provide rights to future unspecified software products for no additional fee and therefore the economics of the arrangements are not comparable to our historical transactions with customers under the upfront revenue model. As a result, the amount of revenue recognized is limited to the amount of customer payments currently due, which generally results in license revenue being recognized over the term of the agreement on a subscription basis, beginning when the first payment is due, which typically is 30 days after execution of the agreement. For arrangements sold under the aspenONE subscription offering, the license and SMS components of the arrangement cannot be separated. As a result, all of the related revenue is reported as subscription revenue in the consolidated statements of operations.

        We also offer our customers the ability to license point products. In July 2009 we began licensing point products on a term basis with SMS included for the full license term. Under these arrangements, license revenue cannot be recognized under the upfront revenue model, as the aggregate fees are not considered fixed or determinable because the agreements include SMS for the full term of the license and therefore the economics of the arrangements are not comparable to our historical transactions with customers under the upfront revenue model. License revenue for these arrangements generally is recognized as payments become due over the term of the agreement. Throughout fiscal 2010 and 2011, revenue from point product licenses with SMS included for the license term was reported as software revenue in the consolidated statements of operations. The revenue related to the SMS component of point product licenses is reported in services and other revenue in the consolidated statements of operations.

        Beginning in July 2011, the revenue associated with point product arrangements bundled with enhanced SMS is recognized on a "daily ratable" basis, consistent with the revenue recognition of fees

38

---

Table of Contents

on our aspenONE subscription offering arrangements. In fiscal 2012 and beyond, the ratable revenue from both aspenONE subscription arrangements and point product arrangements with enhanced SMS included for the term of the agreement will be presented in the consolidated statements of operations as "subscription and software revenue."

        We generally do not intend to enter into new or renewal term contracts that will qualify for revenue recognition upfront, upon delivery of the licensed software. We may, however, do so on a limited basis, as follows:

•

The incremental revenue associated with amendments to existing term license agreements that was recognized under the upfront revenue model will continue to be accounted for on an upfront basis, provided all other revenue recognition requirements have been met.



•

We anticipate that occasionally a customer may wish to license point products on a perpetual basis. If we agree to enter into a perpetual license agreement, the customer will not be entitled to receive software products that may be introduced and will receive SMS for only one year, subject to annual renewal at the election of the customer. Accordingly, we expect that the license fees for perpetual license agreements typically will continue to be recognized upon delivery of the software products using the residual method.

        We do not anticipate that any of the foregoing arrangements will generate a significant portion of our revenue in the future.

SMS

        Prior to fiscal 2010, SMS was typically included with the license agreement for the initial year of the license term and then could be renewed, typically on an annual basis, at the election of the customer. The fair value of SMS was deferred and subsequently recognized over the term of the SMS arrangement as services and other revenue in the consolidated statements of operations.

        Since July 2009, license agreements executed under our aspenONE subscription and point product offerings include SMS for the full term of the arrangement. For arrangements sold under the aspenONE subscription offering, the license and SMS components of the arrangement cannot be separated. As a result, all of the related revenue is reported as subscription revenue in the consolidated statements of operations. Throughout fiscal 2011 and 2010, the SMS component of point product licenses is reported in services and other revenue in the consolidated statements of operations. Standalone renewal SMS on perpetual arrangements is reported as services and other revenue in the consolidated statements of operations.

        Since we do not have VSOE for our enhanced SMS offering, in fiscal 2012 and beyond, the SMS component of point product arrangements will no longer be separable. Going forward, revenue from point product arrangements with enhanced SMS included for the term of the agreement will be presented in the consolidated statements of operations as "subscription and software revenue."

Professional Services

        We provide professional services on a time-and-materials or fixed-price basis. We recognize professional services fees for time-and-materials contracts based upon hours worked and contractually agreed-upon hourly rates. We recognize revenue from fixed-price engagements using the proportional performance method, based on the ratio of costs incurred, substantially all of which are labor-related, to the total estimated project costs. Project costs are based on standard rates, which vary by the consultant's professional level, plus all direct expenses incurred to complete the engagement that are not reimbursed by the client. Project costs are typically expensed as incurred. Reimbursable amounts received from customers for out-of-pocket expenses are recorded as revenue.

39

---

Table of Contents

        We generally recognize revenue from professional services as the services are performed, assuming all other revenue recognition criteria have been met. Revenue from committed professional service arrangements that are sold as a single arrangement with, or in contemplation of, a licensing transaction is deferred and recognized on a ratable basis over the longer of (a) the period the services are performed or (b) the term of the related software arrangement. Under the upfront model, this typically resulted in professional services revenue being recognized over the period the services were performed. Under the subscription-based licensing model, this typically results in professional services revenue being recognized over the term of the related software arrangement. Our typical contract term approximates five years. Revenue recognized with respect to professional services is reported as services and other revenue in the consolidated statements of operations.

Key Components of Operations

Revenue

        Subscription Revenue.    Subscription revenue relates to the licensing of our products under our aspenONE subscription offering, where SMS is included for the entire term of the arrangement and the customer receives the right to unspecified future software products that may be introduced during the term of the arrangement for no additional fee. For arrangements sold under the aspenONE subscription offering, the license and SMS components of the arrangement cannot be separated. As a result, all of the related revenue is recognized ratably, and is reported as subscription revenue in the consolidated statements of operations. Beginning in fiscal 2012, subscription and software revenue will also include the fees from point product arrangements with SMS included for the term of the arrangement, for which we have not established VSOE.

        Software Revenue.    Software revenue consists of all license transactions that do not contain rights to future unspecified software products for no additional fee. Specifically, software revenue includes:

•

license revenue recognized under the upfront revenue model upon the delivery of the licensed software (that is, both perpetual and term license agreements);



•

license revenue recognized over the term of the license agreements for term agreements, including point product licenses with SMS included for the license term. Beginning in fiscal 2012, revenue from point product arrangements with SMS included for the license term will be recorded as subscription and software; and



•

other license revenue derived from transactions that are being recognized over time as the result of not previously meeting one or more of the requirements for recognition under the upfront revenue model.

        Services and Other Revenue.    Our services and other revenue consists primarily of revenue related to professional services, SMS from point product arrangements and standalone SMS renewals (excluding SMS on our aspenONE subscription arrangements) and training. Beginning in fiscal 2012, SMS revenue will also exclude fees from point product arrangement where we have not established VSOE for the SMS deliverable.

        The amount and timing of this revenue depend on a number of factors, including:

•

whether the professional services arrangement was sold as a single arrangement with, or in contemplation of, a new aspenONE licensing transaction;



•

the number, value and rate per hour of service transactions booked during the current and preceding periods;

40

---

Table of Contents

•

the number and availability of service resources actively engaged on billable projects;



•

the timing of milestone acceptance for engagements contractually requiring customer sign-off;



•

the timing of negotiating and signing maintenance renewals;



•

the timing of collection of cash payments when collectability is uncertain; and



•

the size of the installed base of license contracts.

Cost of Revenue

        Cost of Subscription and Software.    The cost of subscription and software revenue consists of royalties, amortization of capitalized software costs, distribution fees, the costs of providing SMS on arrangements where the related revenue is recorded as subscription revenue, and costs related to delivery of software.

        Cost of Services and Other.    Our cost of services and other revenue consists primarily of personnel-related and external consultant costs associated with providing professional services, SMS on arrangements not recognized on a subscription basis and training to customers.

Operating Expenses

        Selling and Marketing Expense.    Selling expenses consist primarily of the personnel and travel expenses related to the effort expended to license our products and services to current and potential customers, as well as for overall management of customer relationships. Marketing expenses include expenses needed to promote our company and our products and to acquire market research and measure customer opinions to help us better understand our customers and their business needs.

        Research and Development Expense.    Research and development expenses primarily consist of personnel and external consultant expenses related to the creation of new products and to enhancements and engineering changes to existing products.

        General and Administrative Expense.    General and administrative expenses include the costs of corporate and support functions, such as executive leadership and administration groups, finance, legal, human resources and corporate communications, and other costs such as outside professional and consultant fees and provision for bad debts.

        Restructuring Charges.    Restructuring charges result from the closure or consolidation of our facilities, or from qualifying reductions in headcount.

Other Income and Expenses

        Interest Income.    Interest income is recorded for the accretion of interest on the installment payments of our term software license contracts when revenue is recognized upfront at net present value, and to a lesser extent from the investment of cash balances in short-term instruments.

        Interest Expense.    Interest expense consists of charges primarily related to our secured borrowings. Secured borrowings are derived from our borrowing arrangements with unrelated financial institutions.

        Other Income (Expense), Net.    Other income (expense), net is comprised primarily of foreign currency exchange gains (losses) generated from the settlement and remeasurement of transactions denominated in currencies other than the functional currency of our operating units. We may enter into foreign currency forward contracts to attempt to minimize the adverse impact related to unfavorable exchange rate movements, although we have not done so since fiscal 2008. Historically, our foreign currency forward contracts have not been designated as hedging instruments and, therefore, do not

41

---

Table of Contents

qualify for fair value or cash flow hedge treatment under the criteria of Accounting Standards Codification, or ASC, Topic 815, Derivatives and Hedging. Therefore, any unrealized gains and losses on the foreign currency forward contracts, as well as the underlying transactions we are attempting to shield from exchange rate movements, would be recognized as a component of other income (expense), net.

        Provision for Income Taxes.    Provision for income taxes is comprised of the taxes currently payable as a result of domestic and foreign operations and the net tax effects of book-tax timing differences. We record interest and penalties related to income tax matters as income tax expense. We expect the amount of income tax expense, if any, to vary each reporting period depending upon fluctuations in our taxable income and our ability to utilize tax benefits from net loss carry-forwards.

Key Business Metrics

Background

        With the adoption of our aspenONE subscription offering, our revenue for fiscal 2011 and 2010 was significantly less than in the years preceding our model change. We expect that our revenue will increase as customers renew their licensing arrangements under our subscription-based licensing model. We do not expect to recognize levels of revenue comparable to prior fiscal years until a significant majority of our existing license agreements has been renewed under our subscription-based licensing model. As a result, we believe that, for the next few years, a number of our performance indicators based on U.S. generally accepted accounting principles or GAAP, including revenue, gross profit, operating income (loss) and net income (loss), will be of limited value in assessing our performance, growth and financial condition. Accordingly, we instead are focusing on certain non-GAAP and other business metrics, including the key metrics set forth below, to track our business performance. None of these metrics should be considered as an alternative to any measure of financial performance calculated in accordance with GAAP.

        To supplement our statements of cash flows presented on a GAAP basis, we use the non-GAAP measure of free cash flow to analyze cash flows generated from our operations. Management believes that this financial measure is useful to investors because it permits investors to view our performance using the same tools that management uses to gauge progress in achieving our goals. We believe this measure is also useful to investors because it is an indication of cash flow that may be available to fund further investments in future growth initiatives and it is also useful as a basis for comparing our performance with that of our competitors. To supplement our presentation of total cost of revenue and total operating costs presented on a GAAP basis, we use a non-GAAP measure of adjusted total costs, which excludes certain non-cash and non-recurring expenses. Management believes that this financial measure is useful to investors because it demonstrates the cash operating costs of the business. The presentation of these non-GAAP measures is not meant to be considered in isolation or as an alternative to cash flows from operating activities as a measure of liquidity or as an alternative to total cost of revenue and total operating costs as a measure of our total costs.

Total Term Contract Value

        Total term contract value, or TCV, is an estimate of the renewal value, as of a specific date, of our active portfolio of term license agreements. TCV is calculated by multiplying the terminal annual payment for each active term license agreement by the original length of the existing license term, and then aggregating this amount for all active term license agreements. Accordingly, TCV represents the full renewal value of all of our current term license agreements under the hypothetical assumption that all of those agreements are simultaneously renewed for the identical license terms and at the same terminal annual payment amounts. TCV includes the value of SMS for any multi-year license agreements for which SMS is committed for the entire license term. TCV does not include any

42

---

Table of Contents

amounts for perpetual licenses, professional services, training or standalone renewal SMS. TCV is calculated using constant currency assumptions for agreements denominated in currencies other than U.S. dollars in order to remove the impact of currency fluctuations between comparison dates.

        We also estimate a license-only TCV, which we refer to as "TLCV," by removing the SMS portion of TCV using our historic estimated selling price for SMS. Our portfolio of active license agreements currently reflect a mix of (a) license agreements that include SMS for the entire license term and (b) legacy license agreements that do not include SMS. TLCV provides a consistent basis for assessing growth, particularly while customers are continuing to transition to arrangements that include SMS for the term of the arrangement.

        We believe TCV and TLCV are useful metrics for analyzing our business performance, particularly while we are transitioning to our aspenONE subscription offering and revenue comparisons between fiscal periods do not reflect the actual growth rate of our business. Comparing TCV and TLCV for different dates provides insight into the growth and retention rate of our business during the period between those dates.

        TCV and TLCV increase as the result of:

•

new term license agreements with new or existing customers;



•

renewals or modifications of existing license agreements that result in higher license fees due to price escalation or an increase in the number of tokens (units of software usage) or products licensed; and



•

renewals of existing license agreements that increase the length of the license term.

        The renewal of an existing license agreement will not increase TCV and TLCV unless the renewal results in higher license fees or a longer license term. TCV and TLCV are adversely affected by customer non-renewals and by renewals that result in lower license fees or a shorter license term. Our standard license term historically has been between five and six years, and we do not expect this standard term to change in the future. Many of our contracts have escalating annual payments throughout the term of the arrangement. By calculating TCV and TLCV based on the terminal year annual payment, we are typically using the highest annual fee from the existing arrangement to calculate the hypothetical renewal value of our portfolio of term arrangements.

        We estimate that TLCV grew by approximately 11.7% during fiscal 2011 from $1.14 billion at June 30, 2010 to $1.28 billion at June 30, 2011, principally as the result of an increase in the number of tokens or products licensed. We estimate that TCV grew 16.9% during fiscal 2011 from $1.22 billion at June 30, 2010 to $1.42 billion at June 30, 2011.

Future Cash Collections and Billings Backlog

        Future cash collections is the sum of billings backlog, accounts receivable, undiscounted installments receivable and undiscounted collateralized receivables. Billings backlog represents the aggregate value of uninvoiced bookings from prior and current periods that is not reflected on our consolidated balance sheets.

        Prior to fiscal 2010, the majority of bookings was recognized as revenue in the period booked and reflected on our balance sheet as installments receivable, or if sold, as collateralized receivables. Installments receivable and collateralized receivables were discounted to net present value at prevailing market rates at the time of the transaction. Amounts collected for collateralized receivables are applied to pay the related secured borrowings and are not available for any other expenditures.

        Under our aspenONE subscription offering and for point product arrangements with SMS included for the entire term of the arrangement, extended contractual payments are not considered fixed or

43

---

Table of Contents

determinable and, as a result, are not included in installments receivable or collateralized receivables. These future payments are included in billings backlog, which is not reflected on our consolidated balance sheets. We believe future cash collections is a useful metric because it provides insight into the cash generation capability of our business. Under the upfront revenue model, we did not previously monitor billings backlog or future cash collections since we believed that accounts receivable, installments receivable, collateralized receivables and certain other measures were appropriate indicators of estimated cash generation at that time.

        Since a substantial majority of our future bookings will reflect arrangements which include SMS for the term of the arrangement, we expect billings backlog to grow over time and expect installments receivable and collateralized receivables to decline. When all customers have transitioned to arrangements which include SMS for the term of the arrangement, future cash collections will include all contractually committed sources of cash associated with our licensing and SMS business. The only sources of cash that will continue to be excluded from future cash collections will be amounts attributable to professional services, training and any remaining standalone SMS.

        The following table provides our future cash collections as of the dates presented:

        The growth in billings backlog and future cash collections in fiscal 2011 reflected our customers' continued adoption of our subscription-based licensing model. We are actively engaged in transitioning customers from perpetual license arrangements to our subscription-based licensing model. Prior to fiscal 2008, we licensed our aspenONE Manufacturing and Supply Chain suite primarily on a perpetual basis, and as we convert these customers to our subscription-based licensing model, their licensing fees and SMS will become part of billings backlog and future cash collections.

        Installments and collateralized receivables are shown at net present value on our consolidated balance sheets. Future cash collections excludes the unamortized discount on installment and collateralized receivables. Amounts collected for collateralized receivables are applied to pay the related secured borrowings and are not available for any other expenditures. We are providing the following reconciliation for the periods presented to reconcile to undiscounted installment and

44

---

Table of Contents

collateralized receivables, as included in our future cash collections metric, with GAAP installment receivables, net and GAAP collateralized receivables, net:

Bookings

        Bookings are a measure of the business closed during a period and represent the amount of contractually committed subscription and software fees, including any bundled SMS. Bookings do not include (a) fees for professional services, training or standalone renewal SMS or (b) any amount of subscription and/or software fees from pre-existing license agreements that were replaced by new arrangements prior to their scheduled expiration date. The contractual arrangements that contribute to bookings represent binding payment commitments by customers over periods that typically range from five to six years, although individual customer commitments can be for longer or shorter periods.

        The following table presents our bookings for fiscal 2011 and 2010, following the introduction of our aspenONE subscription offering:

        Period over-period bookings comparisons may not be particularly meaningful. The amount of bookings in a period is a function of (a) the volume, duration and value of contracts renewed during the period and (b) the amount of bookings that contribute to growth of TCV and TLCV (as described above). Contract renewals may occur on or near the expiration date of the existing contract (natural renewal), or alternatively, customers may elect to renew their contracts substantially in advance of the expiration date (early renewal). The timing and value of contract renewals has a significant impact on quarter-over-quarter and year-over-year comparisons of bookings. Therefore, short-term bookings trends are not indicative of the growth of the business.

        Fiscal 2011 and 2010 growth and renewal bookings were both strong, demonstrating our customer's acceptance of our aspenONE subscription model. Because of the limitations of period-over-period bookings comparisons, we primarily focus on bookings' contribution to growth in TCV, TLCV, billings backlog and future cash collections as future indicators of revenue and cash flow growth.

45

---

Table of Contents

Adjusted Total Costs

        The following table presents our total cost of revenue and total operating expenses, as adjusted for stock-based compensation expense, for the indicated periods:

        Total expenses decreased $23.0 million in fiscal 2011 compared to 2010 and increased $8.1 million in fiscal 2010 compared to 2009. Adjusted total costs, which consist of total cost of revenue and total operating expenses, adjusted to exclude stock-based compensation, decreased by $17.4 million in fiscal 2011 compared to 2010 and $2.5 million in fiscal 2010 compared to 2009.

Stock-Based Compensation Expense

        Stock-based compensation expense decreased $5.6 million in fiscal 2011 compared to 2010 and increased $10.6 million in fiscal 2010 compared to 2009. The size and vesting characteristics of our fiscal 2010 annual grant caused the increased level of stock-based compensation expense for fiscal 2010 compared to 2011 and 2009. During fiscal 2008, 2009 and for a portion of fiscal 2010, we were unable to issue equity awards to our directors and employees. In the second quarter of fiscal 2010, we became current with our SEC filings and we issued 2.7 million restricted stock units and 0.3 million stock options to our directors and employees. A portion of these awards vested upon issuance. For additional information about stock-based compensation program, see Note 9 to our Consolidated Financial Statements, "Stock-based Compensation."

Fiscal 2011 Compared to Fiscal 2010

        The most significant components of the period-over-period decrease in adjusted total costs were decreased professional services costs (excluding stock-based compensation expenses) of $11.2 million, reduced finance related consultant and audit fees of $9.6 million, and lower royalty expense. These expense decreases were partially offset by increased legal and related expenses of $7.9 million. Legal expenses in the period primarily relate to the ATME matter and proceedings we have instituted to enforce our intellectual property rights. Please refer to Part I, Item 3, "Legal Proceedings," for more information on specific matters. Legal expenses for fiscal 2011 also include expenses related to the secondary offering of our common stock, which was effective as of September 22, 2010. For additional information on the comparison of fiscal 2011 to 2010 expenses, see "—Results of Operations."

Fiscal 2010 Compared to Fiscal 2009

        The most significant components of the period-over-period decrease in adjusted total costs were lower expenses for finance related consultant and audit fees of $8.1 million, royalties of $5.0 million, payroll and benefits of $3.1 million, and third-party commissions of $1.2 million. These expense decreases were partially offset by increased expenses for sales commissions of $6.9 million, legal and

46

---

Table of Contents

related expenses of $4.9 million and bonuses of $5.0 million. During fiscal 2010 we met all of our bonus criteria and accrued 100% of our bonus plan, as compared to 50% in fiscal 2009.

Free Cash Flow

        Free cash flow is calculated as net cash provided by operating activities less the sum of (a) purchase of property, equipment, and leasehold improvements and (b) capitalized computer software development costs.

        Customer collections and, consequently, cash flow from operating activities and free cash flow are primarily driven by license and services billings, rather than recognized revenue. As a result, the transition to our aspenONE subscription offering has not had an adverse impact on cash receipts. Until existing license contracts are renewed and license-related revenue returns to prior year levels, we believe free cash flow is a more relevant measure of our financial performance than income statement profitability measures such as total revenue, gross profit, operating profit and net income. Additionally, we also believe that free cash flow is often used by security analysts, investors and other interested parties in the evaluation of software companies.

        The following table provides a reconciliation of net cash flow to free cash flow provided by operating activities for the periods presented:

        We believe we will continue to realize improved free cash flow as we benefit from the continued growth of our portfolio of term license contracts, combined with continued focus on cost management and as customers continue to renew contracts that were previously paid upfront. As part of our historical contract arrangements, customers could elect to pay for their term licenses upfront rather than over the contract term. The upfront payment would normally be equal to the net present value of the annual cash payments, typically discounted at an 8% rate. Prior period practices of upfront payments resulted in increased cash flow variability, both in the period of the payment, and the subsequent years of the contract term. We have moved away from upfront payments in recent years, and as a result, we expect cash flows to continue to normalize over the next several years.

47

---

Table of Contents

Results of Operations

Comparison of Fiscal 2011 to Fiscal 2010

        The following table sets forth the results of operations, percentage of net revenue and the period-over-period percentage change in certain financial data for fiscal 2011 and 2010:

Revenue

        Total revenue increased by $31.8 million compared to the prior year. The increase was due to higher subscription and software revenue of $49.7 million, partially offset by lower services and other revenue of $17.9 million.

48

---

Table of Contents

Subscription Revenue

        The increase in subscription revenue for fiscal 2011 is a result of a larger base of aspenONE subscription bookings from previous periods being recognized as revenue on a subscription basis in the current year. The modest amount of subscription revenue for the prior year was a result of subscription arrangements not being offered prior to fiscal 2010. We expect subscription revenue to continue to increase as customers renew existing contracts under our aspenONE subscription offering and subscription contracts become a more significant portion of our term license portfolio.

Software Revenue

        The period-over-period increase in software revenue for fiscal 2011 resulted from increased revenue of $10.5 million from point product arrangements with SMS included for the entire term and $0.4 million from perpetual arrangements, partially offset by decreased revenue of $8.6 million from legacy software arrangements.

        In fiscal 2011, revenue from legacy software arrangements totaled $22.8 million. Of the total legacy revenue, $21.1 million, or 93%, related to revenue that was not recorded in prior periods due to the arrangement not meeting all of the requirements for upfront revenue recognition. Amendments to legacy term arrangements that qualified for upfront revenue recognition in fiscal 2011 totaled $1.7 million.

        We expect legacy software revenue to continue to decrease and be replaced with subscription revenue as legacy arrangements are renewed on our subscription-based license model. We do not expect point products licensed on a perpetual basis to be a significant source of revenue.

Services and Other Revenue

49

---

Table of Contents

Professional Services Revenue

        The period-over-period decrease in professional services revenue for fiscal 2011 primarily relates to decreased customer demand for professional services and higher professional services revenue deferrals. We often compete with a number of qualified competitors when bidding for professional service contracts, particularly in developed markets where our products are well established. Having a robust network of providers that can provide professional services to support the deployment and utilization of our software is beneficial to our licensing and SMS businesses. However, this competitive environment has had an unfavorable impact on our professional services business.

        Under the aspenONE subscription offering, revenue from committed professional service arrangements that are sold as a single arrangement with, or in contemplation of, a new aspenONE licensing transaction is deferred and recognized on a ratable basis over the longer of (a) the period the services are performed or (b) the term of the related software arrangement. As our typical contract term approximates five years, professional services revenue on these types of arrangements will usually be recognized over a longer period than under the upfront revenue model. For fiscal 2011, we had net deferrals of $2.8 million for professional services bundled with aspenONE transactions.

        The timing of revenue recognition on certain large arrangements can also impact the comparability of professional services revenue from period to period. In fiscal 2011, we deferred the recognition of $3.2 million of professional services revenue on certain large arrangements that did not meet the requirements for revenue recognition. By comparison, in fiscal 2010, we recognized approximately $4.5 million of previously deferred professional services revenue due to a large project achieving certain milestones.

SMS and Other Revenue

        SMS and other revenue decreased for fiscal 2011, primarily due to customers transitioning to the aspenONE subscription offering, and, to a lesser extent, the continued trend of customers electing to replace perpetual license arrangements with new term contracts. Under the aspenONE subscription offering, SMS is included in subscription revenue, whereas it was presented as services and other revenue under the upfront revenue model.

Expenses

Cost of Subscription and Software Revenue

        The period-over-period decrease in cost of subscription and software revenue for fiscal 2011 was primarily due to the reversal of a previously accrued liability resulting from the expiration of a technology vendor relationship. This reduction in expense was partially offset by a larger percentage of SMS services being provided to customers under aspenONE subscription offerings.

        We allocate the portion of SMS costs associated with providing support services on our subscription products to cost of subscription and software revenue, in order to match the expense with the related revenue. Prior to the introduction of the aspenONE subscription offering in fiscal 2010, the costs associated with providing SMS were all included in cost of services and other revenue. As more

50

---

Table of Contents

customers transition to the subscription-based licensing model, more of the related SMS costs will be included in cost of subscription and software.

        After excluding the impact of the reversal of the previously accrued liability for fiscal 2011, our subscription and software gross margins were 91%, which was slightly higher than fiscal 2010.

Cost of Services and Other Revenue

        Our services and other revenue gross margins increased to 50.1% in fiscal 2011, compared with 46.9% in fiscal 2010, primarily as a result of lower expense in our professional services business, partially offset by higher professional service revenue deferrals and the impact of higher margin SMS revenue migrating to subscription revenue under the aspenONE subscription model.

        Going forward, we expect the revenues and costs related to our SMS business to continue to migrate to cost of subscription and software revenue under the subscription-based model. Because SMS revenue has a higher gross profit margin than our professional services business we expect the reported gross profit margin of services and other revenue to decline.

Cost of Professional Services Revenue

        The largest component of the reduction in cost of services and other revenue for fiscal 2011 pertained to our professional services business, which accounted for $11.6 million of the period-over-period decrease. The decrease was primarily related to the reduction of staffing levels in the professional services organization and the timing of expense recognition on certain projects. We reduced our staffing levels in fiscal 2010 to better align our cost structure with the decreased demand for professional services. We received a full year of cost benefit related to these reductions in fiscal 2011.

        The timing of expense recognition on professional service arrangements can also impact the comparability of cost of professional services revenue from period to period. In fiscal 2011, we deferred costs of $1.6 million on a large arrangement where we are also deferring the related revenue. Also contributing to the period-over-period decrease in costs was a loss accrual of approximately $3.0 million related to a large professional service arrangement which was recognized in the fourth quarter of fiscal 2010.

Cost of SMS and Other Revenue

        Cost of SMS and other revenue decreased $0.9 million in fiscal 2011, primarily due to the migration of SMS costs on our aspenONE subscription arrangements to cost of subscription and software revenue. As the subscription business grows, we expect the cost of SMS revenue to continue to migrate from cost of services and other revenue to cost of subscription and software revenue. Eventually, we expect the majority of the costs of our SMS business to be presented in cost of subscription and software revenue.

51

---

Table of Contents

Selling and Marketing Expense

        The period-over-period decrease in selling and marketing expense for fiscal 2011 primarily resulted from lower compensation expense of $4.0 million, including lower commissions, and lower stock-based compensation expense of $2.1 million.

Research and Development Expense

        The period-over-period increase in research and development expense for fiscal 2011 primarily resulted from higher compensation related costs of $3.7 million, partially offset by higher capitalized software development costs of $1.1 million and lower stock-based compensation expense of $0.7 million.

General and Administrative Expense

        The period-over-period decrease in general and administrative expense for fiscal 2011 is primarily attributable to cost reductions for financial consultants of $6.5 million, lower audit and related expenses of $3.1 million, lower stock-based compensation of $2.3 million and net credits to our provision for doubtful account due to the collection of previously reserved receivables. These expense reductions were partially offset by higher legal and related costs of $7.9 million and, to a lesser extent, higher payroll and benefit related expenses.

        The decrease in consultants and contractors fees is the result of our effort throughout fiscal 2010 to hire full-time finance personnel to replace and further reduce our reliance on more costly external consultants. In fiscal 2010, significant audit costs were incurred associated with the audit and filing of all of our fiscal 2009 Form 10-Q's and Form 10-K. By comparison, our fiscal 2011 audit and related expenses were for current period filings. Legal expenses in the period primarily relate to the ATME matter and proceedings we have instituted to enforce our intellectual property rights. Please refer to Part I, Item 3, "Legal Proceedings," for more information on specific matters.

52

---

Table of Contents

Restructuring Charges

        There were no new restructuring events in fiscal 2011. The activity in restructuring charges in fiscal 2011 resulted from accretion and adjustments to existing facilities-related restructuring plans.

Interest Income

        The period-over-period decrease in interest income for fiscal 2011 was primarily attributable to the continued decrease of our collateralized and installment receivables portfolios. We expect interest income to continue to decrease going forward.

Interest Expense

        The period-over-period decrease in interest expense for fiscal 2011 was primarily attributable to lower average secured borrowing balances, resulting from the continued pay-down of our existing secured borrowing arrangements. We expect interest expense to continue to decrease going forward.

Other Income (Expense), Net

        Other income (expense), net is comprised primarily of unrealized and realized foreign currency exchange gains and losses generated from the settlement and remeasurement of transactions denominated in currencies other than the functional currency of our operating units. Other income (expense), net also includes miscellaneous non-operating gains and losses.

        For fiscal 2011, other income, net, included $3.3 million of currency gains, partially offset by write-off of a cost method investment. For fiscal 2010, other expenses, net, included $2.6 million of currency losses.

53

---

Table of Contents

Provision for Income Taxes

        The period-over-period decrease in the provision for income taxes was primarily due to the reversal of a significant portion of our U.S. valuation allowance in fiscal 2011. We made cash payments totaling $5.9 million in fiscal 2011, which were offset by cash refunds of $8.0 million. These payments were comprised of foreign payments of $5.7 million and U.S tax payments of $0.2 million.

        Based on our evaluation of the realizability of our U.S. federal net operating loss carryforwards (NOLs), foreign tax credits, and R&D credits through the generation of future taxable income, a significant portion of the U.S. valuation allowance was reversed in the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2011. While we are currently operating at a taxable loss and have a history of losses, we have been able to forecast sufficient future operating results to utilize our deferred tax assets. In weighing the cumulative losses against our ability to forecast operating results and the incremental growth in our installed base of customers and acceptance of our subscription-based licensing model, we believe it is more likely than not that we will utilize these assets. Based on our current forecast, we expect that we will utilize all of our net operating losses ("NOLs"), foreign tax credits, and a portion of our R&D credits by fiscal year 2015, based on a "with and without" approach.

        We have retained a small valuation allowance in the U.S. for the deferred tax asset related to our unrealized capital losses. We do not have any investments currently on our balance sheet that would give rise to a capital gain, and as a result, we believe that it is more likely than not that we will not receive a benefit from this deferred tax asset. We have also retained a valuation allowance on certain foreign subsidiarys' NOL carryfowards where it is more likely than not that a benefit will not be realized. At June 30, 2011, our total valuation allowance was $8.0 million.

54

---

Table of Contents

Comparison of Fiscal 2010 to Fiscal 2009

        The following table sets forth the results of operations, percentage of net revenue and the period-to-period percentage change in certain financial data for fiscal 2010 and 2009:

Revenue

        Total revenue in fiscal 2010 decreased primarily due to our transition to the aspenONE subscription offering. Total revenue from customers outside the United States was $102.8 million, or 61.8% of total revenue, and $213.9 million, or 68.7% of total revenue, for fiscal 2010 and 2009, respectively. The geographical mix of revenue can vary from period to period.

55

---

Table of Contents

Subscription Revenue

        Subscription agreements were not offered prior to fiscal 2010. The relatively small amount of subscription revenue recognized in the current year is a reflection of both the ratable recognition of these arrangements and the short time span that the aspenONE subscription offering has been available. We expect subscription revenue to increase as customers renew existing contracts under our aspenONE subscription offering and subscription contracts become a more significant portion of our term license portfolio.

Software Revenue

        The decrease in software revenue was primarily attributable to the changes to our business model described above. Prior to July 2009, the substantial majority of our license revenue was recognized on an upfront basis. Going forward, we expect that most of our software revenue will be recognized over the contract term, either on a subscription basis or as payments become due.

        The period-over-period decrease in software revenue for fiscal 2010 primarily resulted from decreased revenue of $146.3 million from upfront software arrangements. Decreases in revenue for the period were partially offset by increased revenue of $9.6 million from point product arrangements with SMS included for the entire term.

        In fiscal 2010, revenue from legacy software arrangements totaled $33.3 million. Of the total legacy revenue, $28.4 million, or 85%, related to revenue that was not recorded in prior periods due to the arrangement not meeting all of the requirements for upfront revenue recognition. Perpetual license revenue totaled $1.9 million in fiscal 2010.

Services and Other Revenue

56

---

Table of Contents