UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM N-CSR

CERTIFIED SHAREHOLDER REPORT OF REGISTERED

MANAGEMENT INVESTMENT COMPANIES

Investment Company Act file number: 811-10183

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

(Exact name of registrant as specified in charter)

5 Park Plaza, Suite 1900

Irvine, CA 92614

(Address of principal executive offices)(Zip code)

(Name and Address of Agent for Service)	Copy to:
Elizabeth M. Forget	Robert N. Hickey, Esq.
President Met Investors Series Trust 5 Park Plaza, Suite 1900 Irvine, CA 92614	Sullivan & Worcester LLP 1666 K Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20006

Registrant’s telephone number, including area code: (800) 848-3854

Date of fiscal year end: December 31

Date of reporting period: December 31, 2009

Item 1: Report to Shareholders.

Simplify your life…

with MetLife eDelivery^® while helping MetLife preserve the planet’s natural resources.

(see details on inside cover)

Met Investors Series Trust American Funds Balanced Allocation Portfolio Annual Report December 31, 2009

• get rid of all that paper?

• access important documents whenever you want?

• conveniently receive valuable information online?

Get it all with MetLife eDelivery!

MetLife’s eDelivery service is your resource for electronic delivery of your variable annuity or variable life prospectuses, semiannual and annual reports, and other information. Available to variable product clients of Metropolitan Life Insurance Company, First MetLife Investors Insurance Company, General American Life Insurance Company, MetLife Investors Insurance Company, MetLife Investors USA Insurance Company, MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut and New England Life Insurance Company.*

Why sign up for MetLife eDelivery?

It’s Free** – No cost to enroll or use the service.

It’s Paperless – We’ll email you when your documents are available.

It’s Easy – Enrollment takes just a few minutes.

How do you sign up?

Just type in www.metlife.esourcelink.net to get to MetLife’s online registration form. You will need your policy/account numbers, which can be found on your statements. The form takes only a few minutes to complete. Please note, for jointly owned contracts, both owners will need to register in order to eliminate paper delivery.

  * Not all MetLife products offer eDelivery at this time. ** Your internet provider may impose fees for this service. L0210086208[0911]

Letter from the President

Letter to Policy Holders

February 1, 2010

2009 can best be described as a year of recovery. The year began with the stock market in a broad decline and the economy mired in a deep recession. However, investors’ sentiment improved dramatically during the year as fiscal and monetary authorities took measures to jump start the economy which helped spark a strong market rally in equities and corporate bonds.

The Barclays Capital U.S. Aggregate Bond Index returned 5.9% during 2009. While this was similar to the 5.2% return experienced in 2008, the two years could not have been more different. In 2008, fear drove investors toward the safety of U.S. Treasury securities and away from the risk of corporate bonds, especially those rated below investment grade. In contrast, investors were more willing to embrace risk in 2009. This produced an enormous recovery in below investment grade bonds; the Barclays Capital U.S. Corporate High Yield Index returned over 58% in 2009 after falling 26% in 2008. The Barclays Capital U.S. Treasury Index returned 13.7% in 2008, but declined 3.6% in 2009.

Stock investors also became less pessimistic in 2009. While the stock market indices are still far from the record levels reached in 2007, investors were rewarded in 2009 as stocks returned 26.5% as measured by the Standard & Poor’s 500 Index, its best return since 2003. Foreign stocks, as measured by the MSCI EAFE Index, returned 31.8% during 2009.

On the following pages, you will find a complete review of your Portfolio and its investment performance.

MetLife is committed to building your financial freedom. We appreciate your trust and will continue to focus our efforts on meeting your investment needs.

Sincerely,

Elizabeth M. Forget

President

Met Investors Series Trust

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

American Funds Balanced Allocation Portfolio

Managed by MetLife Advisers, LLC

Portfolio Manager Commentary*

Performance

For the year ended December 31, 2009, the American Funds Balanced Allocation Portfolio had a return of 30.06% and 29.33% for Class B and C Shares, respectively, versus 23.79% its benchmark, the Dow Jones Moderate Index¹.

Market Environment/Conditions

After contracting sharply in the last half of 2008 and the first half of 2009, the Gross Domestic Product expanded at an annualized rate of 3.9% over the last six months of 2009 as companies began to replenish their inventories. Even with this strong second half, the U.S. economy still shrank 2.4% during 2009, its worst performance since 1946. Some economic indicators (the Consumer Confidence Index and the Purchasing Managers Index for example) showed improvement over the course of the year, but two important economic statistics have remained sluggish: the Unemployment Rate topped 10% in October and the percentage of mortgages that are more than 90 days delinquent exceeded 24% at the end of December, compared to 16% a year ago, and 8% two years ago. To combat this economic crisis the, US government applied a two-pronged approach: the Federal Reserve kept the fed funds target rate in the 0.00% to 0.25% range (monetary policy) and the government continued their stimulus spending (fiscal policy).

The Barclays Capital U.S. Aggregate Bond Index returned 5.9% during 2009. Overall, the yield curve shifted slightly higher and steepened during 2009 as the yield on the 5-Year Treasury Bond rose 1.1% from 1.6% to 2.7% and the yield on the 30-Yr Treasury Bond rose 2.0% from 2.6% to 4.6%. More importantly though was the significant tightening of the yield spread between “safe” treasury securities and “risky” corporate and other credit based securities. In this environment, corporate and other spread sector bonds significantly outperformed treasury securities. This produced an enormous recovery in below investment grade bonds: the Barclays Capital US Corporate High Yield Index returned over 58% in 2009 after falling 26% in 2008.

Stocks returned 26.5% in 2009 as measured by the Standard & Poor’s 500 Index, its best calendar year return since 2003. Growth style stocks generally did better than value style stocks across all capitalization ranges. Information Technology, Materials, and Consumer Discretionary were the best performing sectors for the full year, while Energy, Telecom, and Utilities lagged. However, performance within the Financial Services sector was especially notable for its dramatic rebound: after falling more than 50% early in the year, it was up over 140% from the post crisis low in early March to the end of the year for a full year return of 17.2%. Foreign stocks, as measured by the MSCI EAFE Index returned 31.8% during 2009.

Portfolio Review/Current Positioning

The American Funds Balanced Allocation Portfolio is structured to be broadly diversified across and within a wide variety of fixed income and equity asset classes to add value and control risk over the long term. The Portfolio strives to achieve its objectives through investment in the various funds of the American Funds Insurance Series (AFIS). Although the Portfolio’s broad asset allocation goal of 35% to fixed income and 65% to equities did not change, there were several very modest changes to the narrower asset class goals during the course of the year. This included the elimination of a formal goal for cash—although we still expect the Portfolio will hold some residual cash through the underlying portfolios—and a very slight reduction in the goals for the riskier, non-core fixed income securities, such as high-yield bonds. To achieve these new asset class goals and to improve the overall diversification of the Portfolio, several adjustments to the underlying portfolio targets were made as part of the May 1, 2009 restructuring.

In contrast to 2008 when risk was shunned, investors were rewarded for taking on risk during 2009: stocks generally outperformed bonds, while bond issues with lower credit quality ratings outperformed bonds with higher credit quality ratings, growth stocks outperformed value stocks, foreign stocks outperformed domestic stocks, and emerging market country stocks outperformed developed country stocks. Thus, with a 65% goal for common stocks, the underlying equity portfolios were the biggest contributor to the Portfolio’s absolute performance. Within its fixed income segment, the Portfolio held a higher overall percentage in “spread” products (including investment grade corporate bonds, mortgage backed securities, and high yield securities) than was held in a broad bond market index, such as the Barclays Capital Aggregate Index.

Even with a significant holding of cash (ranging from 5% to 10%) in the underlying equity portfolios for most of the year, the underlying equity portfolios had strong performance and contributed to both relative and absolute performance. A modest overall tilt to growth style stocks and a slight overweight to foreign securities relative to its target also helped the Portfolio’s relative performance. Within foreign equities, the Portfolio’s exposure to small cap foreign stocks and emerging market stocks through the AFIS Global Small Capitalization Fund and the AFIS New World Fund was a key contributor as these segments both significantly outperformed the return of large foreign stocks from developed counties as represented by the MSCI EAFE Index. The AFIS Growth Fund’s good performance for the year was driven by both good sector weightings and solid stock selection. Within the Energy sector, it underweighted the sluggish energy giant Exxon Mobil and held Canadian oil producer Pacific Rubiales Corp., which rose over 500% during the year. The AFIS Growth—Income Fund also had strong performance due primarily to advantageous sector weightings: overweighting the strong Consumer Discretionary and Information Technology sectors and the relatively weak Consumer Staples and Financial Services sectors.

While high yield bond exposure was slightly below its stated target allocation of 5%, the Portfolio’s overall exposure to credit based bonds (also including investment grade corporate bonds) helped relative performance. Among the fixed income underlying portfolios, the 2009 returns were directly related to the level of credit exposure: the higher the credit exposure and less held in the safety of U.S. Treasury

1

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

American Funds Balanced Allocation Portfolio

Managed by MetLife Advisers, LLC

Portfolio Manager Commentary* (continued)

Securities, the better the performance. AFIS High-Income Bond Fund was the best absolute performer among the underlying bond portfolios, while the AFIS U.S. Government / AAA Rated Securities Fund posted a nearly flat return in response to the rise in treasury yields.

Investment Committee

MetLife Advisers, LLC

*This commentary may include statements that constitute “forward-looking statements” under the U.S. securities laws. Forward-looking statements include, among other things, projections, estimates, and information about possible or future results related to the Portfolio, market or regulatory developments. The views expressed above are not guarantees of future performance or economic results and involve certain risks, uncertainties and assumptions that could cause actual outcomes and results to differ materially from the views expressed herein. The views expressed above are subject to change at any time based upon economic, market, or other conditions and the advisory firm undertakes no obligation to update the views expressed herein. Any discussions of specific securities should not be considered a recommendation to buy or sell those securities. The views expressed above (including any forward-looking statement) may not be relied upon as investment advice or as an indication of the Portfolio’s trading intent. Information about the Portfolio’s holdings, asset allocation or country diversification is historical and is not an indication of future Portfolio composition, which may vary. Direct investment in any index is not possible. The performance of any index mentioned in this commentary has not been adjusted for ongoing management, distribution and operating expenses, and sales charges applicable to mutual fund investments. In addition, the returns do not reflect additional fees charged by separate accounts or variable insurance contracts that an investor in the Portfolio may pay. If these additional fees were reflected, performance would have been lower.

Portfolio Composition as of December 31, 2009

Top Holdings

	Percent of Net Assets
American Funds Growth-Income Fund (Class 1)	39.8%
American Funds Growth Fund (Class 1)	21.5%
American Funds U.S. Government/AAA - Rated Securities Fund (Class 1)	12.2%
American Funds Bond Fund (Class 1)	6.7%
American Funds International Fund (Class 1)	6.0%
American Funds High-Income Bond Fund (Class 1)	5.9%
American Funds Global Small Capitalization Fund (Class 1)	3.1%
American Funds New World Fund (Class 1)	3.0%
American Funds Global Bond Fund (Class 1)	1.9%

2

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

American Funds Balanced Allocation Portfolio

American Funds Balanced Allocation Portfolio managed by

MetLife Advisers, LLC vs. Dow Jones Moderate Index¹

	Average Annual Return (for the year ended 12/31/09)2
	1 Year	Since Inception3
American Funds Balanced Allocation Portfolio—Class B	30.06%	-4.79%
Class C	29.33%	-5.12%
Dow Jones Moderate Index1	23.79%	-3.36%

The performance of Class B shares will differ from that of the other class because of the difference in expenses paid by policyholders investing in the different share classes.

¹ The Dow Jones Moderate Index is a benchmark designed for asset allocation strategists who are willing to take 60% of the risk of the global securities market. It is a total returns index that is a time-varying weighted average of stocks, bonds, and cash using a combination of various indices (both domestic and foreign) from Barclays and Dow Jones.

²“Average Annual Return” is calculated including reinvestment of all income dividends and capital gain distributions.

³Inception of the Class B and Class C shares is 4/28/08. Index returns are based on an inception date of 4/28/08.

Past performance does not guarantee future results. The investment return and principal value of an investment in the Portfolio will fluctuate, so that shares, on any given day or when redeemed, may be worth more or less than their original cost. Performance numbers are net of all Portfolio expenses but do not include any insurance, sales, or administration charges of variable annuity or life insurance contracts. If these charges were included, the returns would be lower. The Indexes do not include fees or expenses and are not available for direct investment.

3

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

American Funds Balanced Allocation Portfolio

Understanding Your Portfolio’s Expenses

Shareholder Expense Example

As a shareholder of the Portfolio, you incur ongoing costs, including management fees; distribution and service (12b-1) fees; and other Portfolio expenses. This example is intended to help you understand your ongoing costs (in dollars) (referred to as “expenses”) of investing in the Portfolio and compare these costs with the ongoing costs of investing in other mutual funds. The example is based on an investment of $1,000 invested at the beginning of the period and held for the entire period, July 1, 2009 through December 31, 2009.

Actual Expenses

The first line for each share class of the Portfolio in the table below provides information about actual account values and actual expenses. You may use the information in this line, together with the amount you invested in the particular share class of the Portfolio, to estimate the expenses that you paid over the period. Simply divide your account value by $1,000 (for example, an $8,600 account value divided by $1,000 = 8.6), then multiply the result by the number in the first line under the heading entitled “Expenses Paid During Period” to estimate the expenses you paid on your account during this period.

Hypothetical Example for Comparison Purposes

The second line for each share class of the Portfolio in the table below provides information about hypothetical account values and hypothetical expenses based on the Portfolio’s actual expense ratio and an assumed rate of return of 5% per year before expenses, which is not the Portfolio’s actual return. The hypothetical account values and expenses may not be used to estimate the actual ending account balance or expenses you paid for the period. You may use this information to compare the ongoing costs of investing in the Portfolio and other funds. To do so, compare this 5% hypothetical example with the 5% hypothetical examples that appear in the shareholder reports of the other funds.

Please note that the expenses shown in the table are meant to highlight your ongoing costs only and do not reflect any fees or charges of your variable insurance product or any additional expenses that participants in certain eligible qualified plans may bear relating to the operations of their plan. Therefore, the second line for each share class in the table is useful in comparing ongoing costs only, and will not help you determine the relative total costs of owning different funds. In addition, if these other costs were included, your costs would have been higher.

	Annualized Expense Ratio	Beginning Account Value 7/1/09		Ending Account Value 12/31/09		Expenses Paid During Period* 7/1/09-12/31/09
Class B(a)(b)
Actual	0.75%	$	1,000.00	$	1,185.80	$	4.13
Hypothetical	0.75%		1,000.00		1,021.42		3.82
Class C(a)(b)
Actual	1.05%	$	1,000.00	$	1,179.10	$	5.77
Hypothetical	1.05%		1,000.00		1,019.91		5.35

* Expenses paid are equal to the Portfolio’s annualized expense ratio for the most recent six month period, as shown above, multiplied by the average account value over the period, multiplied by the number of days (184 days) in the most recent fiscal half-year, divided by 365 (to reflect the one-half year period).

(a) The annualized expense ratio shown reflects an expense limitation agreement between MetLife Advisers, LLC and the Portfolio as described in Note 3 of the Notes to Financial Statements.

(b) The annualized expense ratio reflects the expenses of both the Portfolio and the Underlying Portfolios in which it invests.

4

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

American Funds Balanced Allocation Portfolio

PORTFOLIO OF INVESTMENTS

December 31, 2009

(Percentage of Net Assets)

Security Description	Shares	Value
Investment Company Securities - 100.1%
American Funds Bond Fund (Class 1)(a)	12,871,985	$	132,967,602
American Funds Global Bond Fund (Class 1)(a)	3,246,276		37,559,416
American Funds Global Small Capitalization Fund (Class 1)(a)	3,380,910		60,856,381
American Funds Growth Fund (Class 1)(a)	9,264,734		430,346,902
American Funds Growth-Income Fund (Class 1)(a)	25,349,369		795,209,712
American Funds High-Income Bond Fund (Class 1)(a)	11,233,261		117,836,903
American Funds International Fund (Class 1)(a)	6,966,373		119,612,629
American Funds New World Fund (Class 1)(a)	3,036,722		60,855,909
American Funds U.S. Government/AAA - Rated Securities Fund (Class 1)(a)	20,091,048		244,708,958
Total Investment Company Securities (Cost $1,786,378,222)			1,999,954,412
Total Investments - 100.1% (Cost $1,786,378,222)			1,999,954,412
Other Assets And Liabilities (net) - (0.1)%			(1,037,106	)
Net Assets - 100.0%		$	1,998,917,306

(a) A Portfolio of the American Funds Insurance Series.

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

5

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

American Funds Balanced Allocation Portfolio

Various inputs are used in determining the value of the Portfolio’s investments, which are as follows:

Level 1—unadjusted quoted prices in active markets for identical investments

Level 2—other significant observable inputs (including, but not limited to: quoted prices for similar investments in markets that are both active or inactive; inputs other than quoted prices that are observable such as interest rates, yield curves, credit risks, default rates, etc.)

Level 3—significant unobservable inputs based on the best information available in the circumstances, to the extent observable inputs are unavailable (including the Portfolio’s own assumptions in determining the fair value of investments)

The inputs or methodology used for valuing investments are not necessarily an indication of the risk associated with investing in them. For information about the Portfolio’s policy regarding valuation of investments and other significant accounting policies, please refer to Note 2 of the Notes to Financial Statements.

The following table summarizes the inputs used in determining the value the Portfolio’s investments as of December 31, 2009:

ASSETS VALUATION INPUTS

Description	Level 1		Level 2		Level 3		Total
Investment Company Securities	$	1,999,954,412	$	—	$	—	$	1,999,954,412
TOTAL INVESTMENTS	$	1,999,954,412	$	—	$	—	$	1,999,954,412

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

6

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

American Funds Balanced Allocation Portfolio

Statement of Assets and Liabilities

December 31, 2009

Assets
Investments at value (a)	$	1,999,954,412
Receivable for shares sold		2,403,522
Total assets		2,002,357,934
Liabilities
Payables for:
Due to Manager		1,722
Investments purchased		2,069,713
Shares redeemed		333,809
Accrued Expenses:
Management fees		113,744
Distribution and service fees - Class B		127
Distribution and service fees - Class C		900,562
Administration fees		2,000
Custodian and accounting fees		2,067
Deferred trustees’ fees		7,518
Other expenses		9,366
Total liabilities		3,440,628
Net Assets	$	1,998,917,306
Net Assets Represented by
Paid in surplus	$	1,780,293,602
Accumulated net realized loss		(22,391,081	)
Unrealized appreciation on investments		213,576,190
Undistributed net investment income		27,438,595
Net Assets	$	1,998,917,306
Net Assets
Class B	$	610,186
Class C		1,998,307,120
Capital Shares Outstanding
Class B		68,804
Class C		226,439,222
Net Asset Value, Offering Price and Redemption Price Per Share
Class B	$	8.87
Class C		8.82

(a) Identified cost of investments was $1,786,378,222.

Statement of Operations

For the Year Ended December 31, 2009

Investment Income
Dividends from Underlying Portfolios	$	34,332,897
Total investment income		34,332,897
Expenses
Management fees		1,131,456
Administration fees		23,985
Custodian and accounting fees		25,301
Distribution and service fees - Class B		759
Distribution and service fees - Class C		6,651,285
Audit and tax services		17,179
Legal		44,299
Trustees’ fees and expenses		21,139
Shareholder reporting		58,493
Insurance		10,772
Miscellaneous		4,010
Total expenses		7,988,678
Less expenses reimbursed by the Manager		(127,006	)
Net expenses		7,861,672
Net investment income		26,471,225
Net Realized and Unrealized Gain (Loss) on Investments
Net realized gain (loss) on:
Investments		(19,468,987	)
Capital gain distributions from Underlying Portfolios		1,598,753
Net realized loss on investments and capital gain distributions from Underlying Portfolios		(17,870,234	)
Net change in unrealized appreciation on:
Investments		339,311,667
Net realized and unrealized gain on investments		321,441,433
Net Increase in Net Assets from Operations	$	347,912,658

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

7

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

American Funds Balanced Allocation Portfolio

Statements of Changes in Net Assets

	Year Ended December 31, 2009			Period Ended December 31, 2008*
Increase (Decrease) in Net Assets:
Operations
Net investment income	$	26,471,225		$	12,565,377
Net realized gain (loss) on investments and capital gain distribution from Underlying Portfolios		(17,870,234	)		3,478,867
Net change in unrealized appreciation (depreciation) on investments		339,311,667			(125,735,477	)
Net increase (decrease) in net assets resulting from operations		347,912,658			(109,691,233	)
Distributions to Shareholders
From net investment income
Class B		—			(4,914	)
Class C		—			(19,689,491	)
From net realized gains
Class B		—			(8	)
Class C		—			(30,709	)
Net decrease in net assets resulting from distributions		—			(19,725,122	)
Capital Share Transactions
Proceeds from shares sold
Class B		450,667			1,153,811
Class C		1,190,947,234			691,107,710
Net asset value of shares issued through dividend reinvestment
Class B		—			4,922
Class C		—			19,720,200
Cost of shares repurchased
Class B		(53,984	)		(875,467	)
Class C		(85,890,143	)		(36,143,947	)
Net increase in net assets from capital share transactions		1,105,453,774			674,967,229
Net Increase in Net Assets		1,453,366,432			545,550,874
Net assets at beginning of period		545,550,874			—
Net assets at end of period	$	1,998,917,306		$	545,550,874
Undistributed net investment income at end of period	$	27,438,595		$	—

* For the period 4/28/08 (Commencement of operations) through 12/31/08.

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

8

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

American Funds Balanced Allocation Portfolio

Financial Highlights

Selected Per Share Data for the Years or Period Ended:
	Class B
	For the Years Ended December 31,
	2009			2008(b)
Net Asset Value, Beginning of Period	$	6.82		$	10.00
Income (Loss) from Investment Operations:
Net investment income(a)		0.24			0.08
Net realized/unrealized gain (loss) on investments		1.81			(3.00	)
Total from investment operations		2.05			(2.92	)
Less Distributions
Dividends from net investment income		—			(0.26	)
Distributions from net realized capital gains		—			(0.00	)+
Total distributions		—			(0.26	)
Net Asset Value, End of Period	$	8.87		$	6.82
Total Return		30.06	%		(29.20	)%
Ratio of expenses to average net assets after reimbursement(c)		0.35	%		0.35	%*
Ratio of expenses to average net assets before reimbursement and rebates(d)		0.36	%		0.78	%*
Ratio of net investment income to average net assets(e)		2.99	%		1.32	%*
Portfolio turnover rate		5.9	%		12.1	%
Net assets, end of period (in millions)	$	0.6		$	0.1

	Class C
	For the Years Ended December 31,
	2009			2008(b)
Net Asset Value, Beginning of Period	$	6.82		$	10.00
Income (Loss) from Investment Operations:
Net investment income(a)		0.17			0.36
Net realized/unrealized gain (loss) on investments		1.83			(3.28	)
Total from investment operations		2.00			(2.92	)
Less Distributions
Dividends from net investment income		—			(0.26	)
Distributions from net realized capital gains		—			(0.00	)+
Total distributions		—			(0.26	)
Net Asset Value, End of Period	$	8.82		$	6.82
Total Return		29.33	%		(29.20	)%
Ratio of expenses to average net assets after reimbursement(c)		0.65	%		0.65	%*
Ratio of expenses to average net assets before reimbursement and rebates(d)		0.66	%		0.70	%*
Ratio of net investment income to average net assets(e)		2.19	%		6.70	%*
Portfolio turnover rate		5.9	%		12.1	%
Net assets, end of period (in millions)	$	1,998.3		$	545.4

* Annualized

+ Rounds to less than $0.005 per share.

(a) Per share amounts based on average shares outstanding during the period.

(b) Commencement of operations—04/28/2008.

(c) The ratio of operating expenses to average net assets does not include expenses of the Underlying Portfolios in which the Portfolio invests.

(d) See Note 3 of the Notes to Financial Statements.

(e) Recognition of net investment income by the Portfolio is affected by the timing of the declaration of dividends by the Underlying Portfolios in which it invests.

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

9

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

American Funds Balanced Allocation Portfolio

Notes to Financial Statements—December 31, 2009

1. Organization

Met Investors Series Trust (the “Trust”) is registered as an open-end management investment company under the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended (the “1940 Act”). The Trust currently offers forty-eight Portfolios (the “Portfolios”), each of which operates as a distinct investment vehicle of the Trust. The portfolio included in this report is American Funds Balanced Allocation Portfolio (the “Portfolio”), which is non-diversified. Shares in the Trust are not offered directly to the general public and are currently available only to separate accounts established by certain affiliated life insurance companies.

The Trust is managed by MetLife Advisers, LLC (the “Manager”), an affiliate of MetLife, Inc.

The Trust has registered four classes of shares: Class A, B, C and E Shares. Class B and C Shares are currently offered by the Portfolio. Shares of each Class of the Portfolio represent an equal pro rata interest in the Portfolio and generally give the shareholder the same voting, dividend, liquidation, and other rights. Investment income, realized and unrealized capital gains and losses, the common expenses of the Portfolio and certain Portfolio-level expense reductions, if any, are allocated on a pro rata basis to each Class based on the relative net assets of each Class to the net assets of the Portfolio. Each Class of shares differs in its respective distribution expenses.

The Portfolio is designed on established principles of asset allocation and risk tolerance. The Portfolio will invest substantially all of its assets in certain funds of the American Funds Insurance Series (“AFIS”), which invest either in equity securities or fixed income securities, as applicable (“Underlying Portfolios”). AFIS is an open-end diversified investment management company advised by Capital Research and Management Company (“CRMC”), an indirect, wholly owned subsidiary of The Capital Group Companies, Inc.

2. Significant Accounting Policies

The financial statements have been prepared in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (“GAAP”) which require management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of income and expenses during the reporting period. Actual results could differ from these estimates.

The following is a summary of significant accounting policies consistently followed by the Trust in the preparation of its financial statements.

Valuation - Investments in the Underlying Portfolios are valued at their closing daily net asset value. The net asset value of the Portfolio is calculated based on the net asset values of the Underlying Portfolios in which the Portfolio invests. For information about the use of fair value pricing by the Underlying Portfolios that are funds of AFIS, please refer to the prospectus of the Underlying Portfolios.

Security Transactions - Security transactions are recorded on a trade date basis. Realized gains and losses are determined on investments and unrealized appreciation and depreciation are determined on the identified cost basis, which is the same basis used for federal income tax purposes.

Investment Income and Expenses - Interest income is recorded on an accrual basis. Discounts and premiums on securities purchased are amortized over the lives of the respective securities. Income and capital gain distributions from the Underlying Portfolios are recorded on the ex-dividend date.

Income Taxes - It is the Portfolio’s policy to comply with the requirements of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”), and regulations thereunder, applicable to regulated investment companies and to distribute, with respect to each taxable year, all of its taxable income to shareholders. Therefore, no federal income tax provision is required. The Portfolio files U.S. Federal and various state tax returns. No income tax returns are currently under examination. The Portfolio’s federal tax returns for the prior three fiscal years remain subject to examination by the Internal Revenue Service.

Dividends and Distributions to Shareholders - The Portfolio records dividends and distributions on the ex-dividend date. Net realized gains from security transactions (if any) are generally distributed annually to shareholders. The timing and characterization of certain income and capital gains distributions are determined in accordance with federal tax regulations that may differ from GAAP. Permanent book and tax basis differences relating to shareholder distributions will result in reclassification between under/over distributed net investment income, accumulated net realized gains/losses and paid in surplus. Book-tax differences are primarily due to futures transactions, foreign currency transactions, certain foreign withholding taxes, passive foreign investment companies (PFIC), partnerships, deferred trustees compensation, capital loss carryforwards and losses deferred due to wash sales, as applicable. These adjustments have no impact on net assets or the results of operations.

3. Investment Management Agreement and Other Transactions with Affiliates

Investment Management Agreement - The Trust has entered into a management agreement (the “Management Agreement”) with the Manager for investment management services in connection with the investment management of the Portfolio. The Manager is subject to the supervision and direction of the Board of Trustees (the “Board”) and has overall responsibility for the general management and administration of the Trust.

10

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

American Funds Balanced Allocation Portfolio

Notes to Financial Statements—December 31, 2009—(Continued)

Under the terms of the Portfolio’s Management Agreement, the Portfolio pays the Manager a monthly fee based upon annual rates applied to the Portfolio’s average daily net assets as follows:

Management Fees earned by the Manager for the period ended December 31, 2009	% per annum		Average Daily Net Assets
$1,131,456	0.100	%	First $500 Million
	0.075	%	$500 Million to $1 Billion
	0.050	%	Over $1 Billion

Prior to November 12, 2009, the management fee for the Portfolio was 10 basis points. The management fee earned for the period January 1, 2009 through November 11, 2009 was $950,545.

Transfer Agency Agreement - Metropolitan Life Insurance Company (“MLIC”) serves as the transfer agent for the Trust. MLIC is an affiliate of the Manager. MLIC receives no fees for its services to the Trust under the transfer agency agreement.

Expense Limitation Agreement - The Manager has entered into an expense limitation agreement with the Trust (“Expense Limitation Agreement”) in the interest of limiting expenses of the Portfolio. The Expense Limitation Agreement shall continue in effect with respect to the Portfolio until April 30, 2010. Pursuant to that Expense Limitation Agreement, the Manager has agreed to waive or limit its fees and to assume other expenses so that the total annual operating expenses of the Portfolio other than interest, taxes, brokerage commissions, other expenditures which are capitalized in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America, other extraordinary expenses not incurred in the ordinary course of the Portfolio’s business, and Underlying Portfolios’ fees and expenses, but including amounts payable pursuant to a plan adopted in accordance with Rule 12b-1 under the 1940 Act, are limited to the following expense ratios as a percentage of the Portfolio’s average daily net assets:

Maximum Expense Ratio under current Expense Limitation Agreement			Expenses Deferred in
			2008		2009
			Subject to repayment until December 31,
Class B	Class C		2013		2014
0.35%	0.65	%	$	100,635	$	127,006

The expenses reimbursed for the year ended December 31, 2009 are shown as expenses reimbursed in the Statement of Operations of the Portfolio.

If in any year in which the Management Agreement is still in effect, the estimated aggregate portfolio operating expenses of the Portfolio for the fiscal year are less than the Maximum Expense Ratios for that year, subject to approval by the Trust’s Board, the Manager shall be entitled to reimbursement by the Portfolio to the extent that the charge does not cause the expenses in such subsequent year to exceed the Maximum Expense Ratios as stated above. The Portfolio is not obligated to repay any expense paid by the Manager more than five years after the end of the fiscal year in which such expense was incurred.

Distribution Agreements and Plans - The Trust has distribution agreements with MetLife Investors Distribution Company (“MIDC” or the “Distributor”) in which MIDC serves as the Distributor for the Trust’s Class B and Class C Shares. MIDC is a wholly-owned subsidiary of MetLife Investors Group, Inc., an affiliate of the Manager. The Class B and Class C distribution plans provide that the Trust, on behalf of the Portfolio, may pay annually up to 0.50% and 1.00%, respectively, of the average net assets of the Portfolio attributable to its Class B and Class C Shares in respect to activities primarily intended to result in the sale of Class B and Class C Shares. However, under the Class B and Class C distribution agreements, payments to the Distributor for activities pursuant to the Class B and Class C distribution plans are currently limited to payments at an annual rate equal to 0.25% and 0.55% of average daily net assets of the Portfolio, attributable to its Class B and Class C Shares, respectively.

Under the terms of the Class B and Class C distribution plans and distribution agreements, the Portfolio is authorized to make payments monthly to the Distributor that may be used to pay or reimburse entities providing distribution and shareholder servicing with respect to the Class B and Class C Shares for such entities’ fees or expenses incurred.

Deferred Trustee Compensation - Each Trustee of the Trust who is not currently an employee of the Manager or any of its affiliates receives compensation from the Trust for his or her service to the Portfolio. A deferred compensation plan (the “Plan”) is available to the Trustees on a voluntary basis. Deferred amounts remain in the Trust until distributed in accordance with the provisions of the Plan. The value of a participating Trustee’s deferral account is based on theoretical investments of deferred amounts, on the normal payment dates, in certain portfolios of the Trust or Metropolitan Series Fund, Inc. as designated by the participating Trustee. Changes in the value of participants’ deferral accounts are reflected

11

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

American Funds Balanced Allocation Portfolio

Notes to Financial Statements—December 31, 2009—(Continued)

3. Investment Management Agreement and Other Transactions with Affiliates - continued

as Trustees’ fees and expenses in the Statement of Operations. The portion of the accrued obligations allocated to the Portfolio, if any, under the Plan are reflected as Deferred Trustees’ fees in the Statement of Assets and Liabilities.

4. Shares of Beneficial Interest

Transactions in shares of beneficial interest for the periods ended noted below were as follows:

	Beginning Shares	Sales	Reinvestments	Redemptions		Net Increase in Shares Outstanding	Ending Shares
Class B
12/31/2009	19,873	56,235	—	(7,304	)	48,931	68,804
04/28/2008-12/31/2008	—	117,726	727	(98,580	)	19,873	19,873
Class C
12/31/2009	79,942,996	157,527,172	—	(11,030,946	)	146,496,226	226,439,222
04/28/2008-12/31/2008	—	81,432,735	2,908,584	(4,398,323	)	79,942,996	79,942,996

The Portfolio is authorized to issue an unlimited number of shares.

5. Investment Transactions

Aggregate cost of purchases and proceeds of sales of investment securities, excluding short-term securities, for the period ended December 31, 2009 were as follows:

Purchases			Sales
U.S. Government	Non-Government		U.S. Government		Non-Government
$—	$	1,205,843,014	$	—	$	71,595,206

At December 31, 2009, the cost of securities for federal income tax purposes and the unrealized appreciation (depreciation) of investments for federal income tax purposes for the Portfolio were as follows:

Federal Income Tax Cost	Gross Unrealized Appreciation		Gross Unrealized Depreciation			Net Unrealized Appreciation
$1,809,946,638	$	215,003,768	$	(24,995,994	)	$	190,007,774

6. Contractual Obligations

The Trust has a variety of indemnification obligations under contracts with its service providers. The Trust’s maximum exposure under these arrangements is unknown. However, the Trust has not had prior claims or losses pursuant to these contracts and expects the risk of loss to be remote.

7. Market, Credit and Counterparty Risk

In the normal course of business, the Underlying Portfolios in which the Portfolio invests its assets invest in securities and enter into transactions where risks exist due to fluctuations in the market (market risk) or failure of the other party to a transaction to perform (credit risk). The value of securities held by the Underlying Portfolios may decline in response to certain events, including those directly involving the companies whose securities are owned by the Underlying Portfolios; conditions affecting the general economy; overall market changes; local, regional or global political, social or economic instability; and currency and interest rate and price fluctuations. The Underlying Portfolios may be exposed to counterparty risk, or the risk that an entity with which the Underlying Portfolios have unsettled or open transactions may default. The potential loss could exceed the value of the financial assets recorded in the financial statements. Financial assets, which potentially expose the Underlying Portfolios to credit risk, consist principally of cash due from counterparties and investments. The Underlying Portfolios restrict their exposure to credit losses by entering into master agreements with counterparties (approved brokers) with whom it undertakes a significant volume of transactions to include certain safeguards for derivatives and non-standard settlement trades. The credit risk associated with favorable contracts is

12

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

American Funds Balanced Allocation Portfolio

Notes to Financial Statements—December 31, 2009—(Continued)

7. Market, Credit and Counterparty Risk - continued

reduced by a master netting arrangement to the extent that if an event of default occurs, all amounts with the counterparty are terminated and settled on a net basis. The Underlying Portfolios’ overall exposure to credit risk on derivative instruments subject to master netting arrangements can change substantially within a short period, as it is affected by each transaction subject to the arrangement.

8. Transactions in Securities of Affiliated Issuers

The Asset Allocation Portfolio does not invest in the Underlying Portfolios for the purpose of exercising management or control; however, investments by the Asset Allocation Portfolio within its principal investment strategies may represent a significant portion of the Underlying Portfolio’s net assets. Transactions in the Underlying Portfolios during the year ended December 31, 2009 were as follows:

Underlying Portfolio	Number of shares held at December 31, 2008	Shares purchased during the period	Shares sold during the period		Number of shares held at December 31, 2009
American Funds Bond Fund (Class 1)	2,863,945	10,090,407	(82,367	)	12,871,985
American Funds Global Bond Fund (Class 1)*	1,609,077	2,445,622	(808,423	)	3,246,276
American Funds Global Small Capitalization Fund (Class 1)*	1,442,273	2,413,637	(475,000	)	3,380,910
American Funds Growth Fund (Class 1)*	3,411,843	6,151,802	(298,911	)	9,264,734
American Funds Growth-Income Fund (Class 1)*	8,268,900	17,137,272	(56,803	)	25,349,369
American Funds High-Income Bond Fund (Class 1)*	4,492,743	8,017,517	(1,276,999	)	11,233,261
American Funds International Fund (Class 1)	2,845,926	4,785,883	(665,436	)	6,966,373
American Funds New World Fund (Class 1)*	1,246,738	2,062,419	(272,435	)	3,036,722
American Funds U.S. Government/AAA - Rated Securities Fund (Class 1)*	6,729,277	14,566,366	(1,204,595	)	20,091,048

* The Portfolio had ownership of at least 25% of the outstanding voting securities of the Underlying Portfolio as of December 31, 2009. Once filed, the most recent Annual Report of the Underlying Portfolio will be available without charge, upon request, by calling (800) 848-3854 or on the Securities and Exchange Commission’s website at http://www.sec.gov.

Underlying Portfolio	Net Realized Gain(Loss) on Investments during the period			Net Realized Gain on Capital Gain Distributions from Affiliates during the period		Income earned from affiliate during the period		Ending Value
American Funds Bond Fund (Class 1)	$	(125,309	)	$	-	$	3,765,907	$	132,967,602
American Funds Global Bond Fund (Class 1)		(556,125	)		-		524,582		37,559,416
American Funds Global Small Capitalization Fund (Class 1)		(3,007,387	)		-		225,527		60,856,381
American Funds Growth Fund (Class 1)		(7,626,046	)		-		2,879,469		430,346,902
American Funds Growth-Income Fund (Class 1)		(644,253	)		-		11,367,798		795,209,712
American Funds High-Income Bond Fund (Class 1)		(2,704,395	)		-		7,102,137		117,836,903
American Funds International Fund (Class 1)		(3,826,398	)		383,916		1,672,502		119,612,629
American Funds New World Fund (Class 1)		(1,656,289	)		-		812,469		60,855,909
American Funds U.S. Government/AAA - Rated Securities Fund (Class 1)		677,215			247,467		6,949,876		244,708,958

9. Income Tax Information

The tax character of distributions paid for the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2008 were as follows:

Ordinary Income			Long-Term Capital Gains				Total
2009	2008		2009		2008		2009		2008
$—	$	13,532,500	$	—	$	6,192,622	$	—	$	19,725,122

13

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

American Funds Balanced Allocation Portfolio

Notes to Financial Statements—December 31, 2009—(Continued)

As of December 31, 2009, the components of distributable earnings (accumulated losses) on a federal income tax basis were as follows:

Undistributed Ordinary Income	Undistributed Long-Term Gain		Net Unrealized Appreciation		Total
$27,955,178	$	668,270	$	190,007,774	$	218,631,222

10. Recent Accounting Pronouncement

On January 21, 2010, the Financial Accounting Standards Board issued Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) 2010-06, “Improving Disclosures About Fair Value Measurements.” The ASU amends Accounting Standards Codification 820 to add new requirements for disclosures about transfers into and out of Levels 1 and 2. It also clarifies existing fair value disclosures about the level of disaggregation and about inputs and valuation techniques used to measure fair value. Additionally, the ASU amends disclosures about providing purchases, sales, issuances, and settlements on a gross basis relating to Level 3 measurements. The ASU guidance is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2009, and for interim periods within those fiscal years, except for the requirement to provide the Level 3 activity of purchases, sales, issuances, and settlements on a gross basis, which will be effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2010, and for interim periods within those fiscal years. Management is currently evaluating the impact the adoption of ASU 2010-06 will have on the Portfolio’s financial statements.

11. Subsequent Events

Management’s evaluation of the impact of all subsequent events on the Portfolio’s financial statements was completed through February 25, 2010, the date the financial statements were issued, and management has determined that as of that date there were no subsequent events requiring adjustments or disclosure in the Portfolio’s financial statements.

14

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

American Funds Balanced Allocation Portfolio

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

To the Shareholders and Board of Trustees of Met Investors Series Trust:

We have audited the accompanying statement of assets and liabilities, including the portfolio of investments, of the American Funds Balanced Allocation Portfolio, one of the portfolios constituting Met Investors Series Trust (the “Trust”), as of December 31, 2009, and the related statement of operations for the year then ended, and the statements of changes in net assets and the financial highlights for the year ended December 31, 2009 and for the period from April 28, 2008 (commencement of operations) to December 31, 2008. These financial statements and financial highlights are the responsibility of the Trust’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements and financial highlights based on our audits.

We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements and financial highlights are free of material misstatement. The Trust is not required to have, nor were we engaged to perform, an audit of its internal control over financial reporting. Our audits included consideration of internal control over financial reporting as a basis for designing audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the Trust’s internal control over financial reporting. Accordingly, we express no such opinion. An audit also includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements, assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. Our procedures included confirmation of securities owned as of December 31, 2009, by correspondence with the transfer agent. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.

In our opinion, the financial statements and financial highlights referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of the American Funds Balanced Allocation Portfolio of the Met Investors Series Trust as of December 31, 2009, the results of its operations for the year then ended, and the changes in its net assets and the financial highlights for the year ended December 31, 2009 and for the period from April 28, 2008 (commencement of operations) to December 31, 2008, in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.

Deloitte & Touche LLP

Boston, Massachusetts

February 25, 2010

15

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Trustees and Officers (Unaudited) December 31, 2009

The Trustees and executive officers of the Trust, their ages and their principal occupations during the past five years are set forth below. Unless otherwise indicated, the business address of each is 5 Park Plaza, Suite 1900 Irvine, California 92614. Each Trustee who is deemed an “interested person,” as such term is defined in the 1940 Act, is indicated by an asterisk. Those Trustees who are not “interested persons” as defined in the 1940 Act are referred to as “Independent Trustees.” Additional information about the Trustees is available in the Statement of Additional Information which is available without charge, upon request, by calling (800) 848-3854.

The Trustees
Name and Age	Position(s) Held with Registrant	Term of Office and Length of Time Served	Principal Occupation(s) During Past 5 Years	Number of Portfolios in Fund Complex+ overseen by Trustee	Other Directorships Held by Trustee
Interested Trustees
Elizabeth M. Forget* (43)	President and Trustee	Indefinite; From December 2000 to present	Since May 2007, Senior Vice President, MetLife, Inc.; since December 2000, President of MetLife Advisers, LLC and its predecessor; December 2003 to April 2007, Vice President, MetLife, Inc.	84	Director, Metropolitan Series Fund, Inc. since August 2006.
Independent Trustees
Stephen M. Alderman (50)	Trustee	Indefinite; From December 2000 to present	Since November 1991, Shareholder in the law firm of Garfield and Merel, Ltd.	48	None
Jack R. Borsting (80)	Trustee	Indefinite; From December 2000 to present	Since 2006, Professor and Dean Emeritus, Marshall School of Business, University of Southern California (USC); from 2001 to 2005, Professor of Business Administration and Dean Emeritus.	48	Director, Los Angeles Orthopedic Hospital, Trustee, The Rose Hills Foundation. Member, Army Science Board.
Robert Boulware (53)	Trustee	Indefinite; From March 2008 to present	From 2004 to 2009, Director of Norwood Promotional Products, Inc.; from 2007 to 2008, Director of Wealthpoint Advisors (a business development company); from 2007 to 2009, Director of Holladay Bank; from 1992-2006, President and Chief Executive Officer of ING Fund Distributor, LLC.	48	Since 2005, Director of Gainsco, Inc. (auto insurance).
Daniel A. Doyle (51)	Trustee	Indefinite; From February 2007 to present	From October 2000 to June 2009, Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of ATC Management, Inc. (public utility); since June 2009, independent business consultant.	48	Director, Wisconsin Sports Development Corporation
Susan C. Gause (57)	Trustee	Indefinite; From March 2008 to present	From 2000 to December 2002, Chief Executive Officer of Allianz Dresdner Asset Management; since 2003, private investor.	48	None

16

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Trustees and Officers (Unaudited)—(Continued) December 31, 2009

Name and Age	Position(s) Held with Registrant	Term of Office and Length of Time Served	Principal Occupation(s) During Past 5 Years	Number of Portfolios in Fund Complex+ overseen by Trustee	Other Directorships Held by Trustee
Independent Trustees - continued
Dawn M. Vroegop (43)	Trustee	Indefinite; From December 2000 to present	From September 1999 to September 2003, Managing Director, Dresdner RCM Global Investors.	84	Director, Metropolitan Series Fund, Inc. since May 2009; from 2003 to present, Director and Finance Committee Chair, City College of San Francisco Foundation

The Executive Officers
Name and Age	Position(s) Held with Registrant	Term of Office and Length of Time Served	Principal Occupation(s) During Past 5 Years
Jeffrey L. Bernier (38)	Vice President	From February 2009 to present	Since December 2007, Vice President, Metropolitan Life Insurance Company; since 2008 Senior Vice President of MetLife Advisers, LLC and its predecessor; from July 2004 to December 2007, Director and Senior Investment Analyst of Investment Management Services for John Hancock Financial Services.
Jeffrey A. Tupper (39)	Chief Financial Officer, Treasurer	From August 2002 to present	Since February 2009, Vice President, MetLife Advisers, LLC. Since October 2006, Assistant Vice President, MetLife Group, Inc. Since February 2001, Assistant Vice President of MetLife Investors Insurance Company.
Richard C. Pearson (66)	Vice President and Secretary	From December 2000 to present	Since June 2001, President or Executive Vice President of MetLife Investors Distribution Company; since January 2001, Executive Vice President, General Counsel and Secretary of MetLife Investors Group, Inc. and Vice President, Secretary and Associate General Counsel of its affiliated life insurance companies; since November 2000, Senior Vice President and General Counsel of MetLife Advisers, LLC and its predecessor.
Jeffrey P. Halperin (42)	Chief Compliance Officer	From November 2006 to present	Since March 2006, Vice President, Corporate Ethics and Compliance Department, MetLife, Inc.; from October 2002 to March 2006, Assistant Vice President; from November 2005 to August 2006, Interim Chief Compliance Officer, Met Investors Series Trust; since April 2007, Chief Compliance Officer, Metropolitan Series Funds; from August 2006 to April 2007, Interim Chief Compliance Officer, Metropolitan Series Funds; since August 2006, Chief Compliance Officer, MetLife Advisers, LLC and its predecessor; since November 2006, Chief Compliance Officer, MetLife Investment Advisors Company, LLC.

+ The Fund Complex includes the Trust (48 portfolios) and Metropolitan Series Fund, Inc. (36 portfolios).

* Ms. Forget is an “interested person” of the Trust as a result of her affiliation with the Manager and the Distributor.

Quarterly Portfolio Schedule

The Trust files Form N-Q for the first and third quarters of each fiscal year. The Trust’s Forms N-Q will be available on the Securities and Exchange Commission’s website at http://www.sec.gov. The Trust’s Forms N-Q may be reviewed and copied at the Securities and Exchange Commission’s

17

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Trustees and Officers (Unaudited)—(Continued) December 31, 2009

Public Reference Room in Washington, D.C. and information on the operation of the Public Reference Room may be obtained by calling 1-800-SEC-0330. Once filed, the most recent Form N-Q will be available without charge, upon request, by calling (800) 848-3854.

Proxy Voting Policies and Procedures

A description of the policies and procedures that the Trust uses to determine how to vote proxies relating to portfolio securities is available without charge, upon request, by calling (800) 848-3854 and on the Securities and Exchange Commission’s website at http://www.sec.gov.

Proxy Voting Record

The Trust, on behalf of each of its Portfolios, has filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission its proxy voting record for the 12-month period ending June 30 on Form N-PX. Form N-PX must be filed by the Trust each year by August 31. Once filed, the most recent Form N-PX will be available without charge, upon request, by calling (800) 848-3854 or on the Securities and Exchange Commission’s website at http://www.sec.gov.

18

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

American Funds Balanced Allocation Portfolio

Board of Trustees’ Consideration of Advisory Agreement

At an in-person meeting of the Board of Trustees (the “Board”) of the Met Investors Series Trust (the “Trust”) held on November 10-11, 2009, the Board, including a majority of the Trustees who are not considered to be “interested persons” of the Trust (the “Independent Trustees”) under the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended (the “1940 Act”), approved for an annual period the continuation of the Trust’s advisory agreement (the “Advisory Agreement”) with MetLife Advisers, LLC (the “Adviser”) and the applicable sub-advisory agreements (each a “Sub-Advisory Agreement”, and collectively with the Advisory Agreement, the “Agreements”) between the Adviser and the investment sub-advisers (each a “Sub-Adviser”, and collectively, the “Sub-Advisers”) for each of the series of the Trust, including the American Funds Balanced Allocation Portfolio (each a “Portfolio,” and collectively, the “Portfolios”).¹ As the Adviser has the day to day responsibility for managing the American Funds Balanced Allocation Portfolio’s investments, the Board only approved an Advisory Agreement with respect to the American Funds Balanced Allocation Portfolio.

In considering the Agreements, the Board reviewed a variety of materials provided by the Adviser and the Sub-Advisers relating to each Portfolio, the Adviser and each Sub-Adviser, including comparative performance, fee and expense information for an appropriate peer group of similar mutual funds, performance information for relevant benchmark indices and other information regarding the nature, extent and quality of services provided by the Adviser and the Sub-Advisers under their respective Agreements. The Board also took into account information provided to the Board in its meetings throughout the year with respect to the services provided by the Adviser and the Sub-Advisers, including quarterly performance reports prepared by management containing reviews of investment results, and periodic presentations from the Sub-Advisers with respect to the Portfolios they manage. The Independent Trustees also assessed reports provided by independent consultants, who reviewed and provided analyses regarding investment performance, fees and expenses, profitability and other information provided by, or at the direction of, the Adviser and the Sub-Advisers, as more fully discussed below.

The Independent Trustees were separately advised by independent legal counsel throughout the process. Prior to voting, the Independent Trustees also received a memorandum from their independent counsel discussing the legal standards for their consideration of the proposed continuation of the Agreements. The Board met in person with personnel of the Adviser prior to the November meeting for the specific purpose of considering the proposed continuation of the Agreements. The Independent Trustees also discussed the proposed continuation of the Agreements in private sessions with their independent legal counsel at which no representatives of management were present.

In considering whether to approve the renewal of the Advisory Agreement with the Adviser and any applicable Sub-Advisory Agreements with respect to each Portfolio, the Board reviewed and analyzed the factors it deemed relevant, including: (1) the nature, extent and quality of the services to be provided to the Portfolios by the Adviser and the Sub-Advisers; (2) the performance of the Portfolios as compared to a peer group and an appropriate index; (3) the Adviser’s and each of the Sub-Adviser’s personnel and operations; (4) the financial condition of the Adviser and of the Sub-Advisers; (5) the level and method of computing each Portfolio’s advisory and sub-advisory fees; (6) the profitability of the Adviser under the Advisory Agreement and of the Sub-Advisers under the Sub-Advisory Agreements; (7) any “fall-out” benefits to the Adviser, the Sub-Advisers and their affiliates (i.e., ancillary benefits realized by the Adviser, the Sub-Advisers or their affiliates from the Adviser’s or Sub-Advisers’ relationship with the Trust); (8) the anticipated effect of growth in size on each Portfolio’s performance and expenses; (9) fees paid to the Sub-Advisers by comparable institutional and retail accounts; and (10) possible conflicts of interest. The Board also considered the nature, quality, and extent of the services to be provided to the Portfolios by the Adviser’s affiliates, including distribution services.

Nature, extent and quality of services. In considering the nature, extent and quality of the services to be provided by the Adviser to the Portfolios, the Board took into account the extensive responsibilities that the Adviser has as investment manager to the Portfolios, including the provision of investment advice to: (i) MetLife Aggressive Strategy Portfolio, MetLife Balanced Strategy Portfolio, MetLife Defensive Strategy Portfolio, MetLife Growth Strategy Portfolio, and MetLife Moderate Strategy Portfolio (together, the “Asset Allocation Portfolios”), (ii) American Funds Balanced Allocation Portfolio, American Funds Growth Allocation Portfolio, and American Funds Moderate Allocation Portfolio (together, the “American Funds of Funds”), and (iii) the Met/Franklin Templeton Founding Strategy Portfolio, the selection of the Sub-Advisers for the other Portfolios and oversight of the Sub-Advisers’ compliance with fund policies and objectives, review of brokerage matters including with respect to trade allocation and best execution, oversight of general fund compliance with federal and state laws, and the implementation of Board directives as they relate to the Portfolios. The Adviser’s role in coordinating the activities of the Portfolios’ other service providers was also considered. The Board also evaluated the expertise and performance of the investment personnel with respect to the Asset Allocation Portfolios, the American Funds of Funds and the Met/Franklin Templeton Founding Strategy Portfolio and of the personnel overseeing the Sub-Advisers of the other Portfolios, and compliance with each Portfolio’s investment restrictions, tax and other requirements. The Board considered information received from the Trust’s Chief Compliance Officer (“CCO”) regarding the Portfolios’ compliance policies and procedures established pursuant to Rule 38a-1 under the 1940 Act, including the policies and procedures in place relating to proxy voting. The Board also took into account its familiarity with management through Board meetings, discussions and reports during the preceding year.

The Board considered that an Investment Committee, consisting of investment professionals from across MetLife, meets at least quarterly to review the asset allocations and discuss the performance of the Asset Allocation Portfolios, the American Funds of Funds and the Met/Franklin Templeton Founding Strategy Portfolio.

¹ The Met/Templeton International Bond Portfolio recently commenced operations and, therefore, the Agreements with respect to this Portfolio were not up for renewal.

19

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

American Funds Balanced Allocation Portfolio

Board of Trustees’ Consideration of Advisory Agreement—(Continued)

The Board also recognized the Adviser^’s reputation and long-standing experience in serving as an investment adviser to the Trust, and considered the benefit to shareholders of investing in funds that are part of a family of variable annuity portfolios offering a variety of investments. In addition, the Board reviewed the financial condition of the Adviser and whether it had the financial wherewithal to provide a high level and quality of services to the Portfolios. In its review, the Board also received and took into account information regarding any services and/or payments provided to the Adviser by the Sub-Advisers in connection with marketing activities.

With respect to the services provided by each of the Sub-Advisers, the Board considered information provided to the Board by each Sub-Adviser, including each Sub-Adviser’s Form ADV, as well as information presented throughout the past year. The Board considered the Sub-Adviser’s current level of staffing and its overall resources, as well as its compensation program. The Board reviewed each Sub-Adviser’s history and investment experience, as well as information regarding the qualifications, background and responsibilities of the Sub-Adviser’s investment and compliance personnel who provide services to the Portfolios. The Board also considered, among other things, the Sub-Adviser’s compliance program and any disciplinary history. The Board noted each Sub-Adviser’s regulatory history, including whether it was currently involved in any regulatory actions or investigations as well as material litigation, and any settlements and ameliatory actions undertaken, as appropriate. The Board also noted that the CCO and his staff conduct regular, periodic compliance reviews with each of the Sub-Advisers and present reports to the Independent Trustees regarding the same, which includes evaluating the regulatory compliance systems of the Sub-Advisers and procedures reasonably designed by them to assure compliance with the federal securities laws, including issues related to late trading and market timing, best execution, fair value pricing, and proxy voting procedures, among others. The Board also took into account the financial condition of each Sub-Adviser.

The Board considered each Sub-Adviser’s investment process and philosophy. The Board took into account that each Sub-Adviser’s responsibilities include the development and maintenance of an investment program for the applicable Portfolio which is consistent with the Portfolio’s investment objectives, the selection of investment securities and the placement of orders for the purchase and sale of such securities, as well as the implementation of compliance controls related to performance of these services. The Board also reviewed each Sub-Adviser’s brokerage policies and practices, including with respect to best execution and soft dollars.

Based on its consideration and review of the foregoing information, the Board concluded that the nature, extent and quality of services provided by the Adviser and by each Sub-Adviser were satisfactory and that there was a reasonable basis on which to conclude that each would provide a high quality of investment services to the Portfolios.

Performance. The Board considered the performance of the Portfolios as described in the quarterly reports prepared by management, and as also analyzed in reports prepared by the Independent Trustees’ independent consultant. The Board noted that the Adviser reviews with the Board on a quarterly basis detailed information about the Portfolios’ performance results, portfolio composition and investment strategies. The Board also reviewed and considered a separate report prepared by Lipper Inc. (“Lipper”), an independent third party, which provided a statistical analysis comparing the Portfolios’ investment performance, expenses, and fees to comparable funds underlying variable insurance products (the “Performance Universe”). In addition, the Independent Trustees met separately with a representative of Bobroff Consulting, Inc., an independent consultant (“Bobroff”), at a special board meeting in September 2009, to review the separate reports prepared by such consultant (“Bobroff Report”), which analyzed the report prepared by Lipper, as well as certain of the other factors to be considered by the Board including supplemental alpha and information coefficient analysis. The Board also considered each Portfolio’s more recent performance subsequent to the performance period covered by the Lipper reports, and management’s discussion of the same, including the effect of current market conditions on each Portfolio’s more recent performance.

The Board closely reviewed the Portfolios’ performance records and the Adviser’s and Sub-Advisers’ management styles and long-term performance records with the Portfolios and comparable funds. The Board focused particular attention on Portfolios with less favorable performance records. The Board was mindful of the Adviser’s focus on each Sub-Adviser’s performance and noted that the Adviser has been active in monitoring and responding to any performance issues with respect to the Portfolios. The Board also took into account its discussions with management regarding factors that contributed to the performance of each Portfolio.

Among other data relating specifically to the American Funds Balanced Allocation Portfolio’s performance, the Board considered that the Portfolio outperformed the median of its Performance Universe and underperformed its Lipper Index for the one-year and since inception periods ended July 31, 2009. The Board also considered that the Portfolio underperformed its benchmark, the Dow Jones Moderate Index, for the one-year period ended August 31, 2009. The Board also took into account management’s discussion of the Portfolio’s performance. Based on its review and taking into account the limited performance history of the Portfolio, the Board concluded that the Portfolio’s performance was satisfactory.

Fees and Expenses. The Board gave substantial consideration to the advisory fees payable under the Advisory Agreement and the sub-advisory fees payable under each of the Sub-Advisory Agreements. In this regard, the Board reviewed the advisory fees payable in the aggregate as well as on a Portfolio-by-Portfolio basis based on information provided by the Adviser. The Independent Trustees, with the assistance of Bobroff, also examined the fees paid by each Portfolio in light of fees paid to other investment managers by comparable funds and the method of computing each Portfolio’s fee, as well as considered the fees charged by the Adviser to manage other comparable funds. The Lipper report included comparisons of the Adviser’s fee schedule with that of its peers based on an asset-based analysis of relative fee structures according to the size of each Portfolio. In addition, the Board considered the Portfolios’ advisory and sub-advisory fees and total expenses as compared to similarly

20

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

American Funds Balanced Allocation Portfolio

Board of Trustees’ Consideration of Advisory Agreement—(Continued)

situated investment companies underlying variable insurance products deemed to be comparable to the Portfolios as determined by Lipper. The Board considered each Portfolio’s ranking within a smaller group of peer funds chosen by Lipper (the “Expense Group”), as well as the Portfolio’s ranking within broader groups of funds (the “Expense Universe” and the “Sub-advised Expense Universe”). The Board also considered each Portfolio’s contractual sub-advisory fees, as applicable, as compared to the Sub-advised Expense Universe as well as a smaller group of funds (the “Sub-advised Expense Group”). In comparing each Portfolio’s actual and contractual management fee to that of comparable funds, the Board noted that such fee includes both advisory and administrative fees.

The Board noted that the sub-advisory fees for the Portfolios are paid by the Adviser, not the Portfolios, out of the advisory fee. It was further noted that the Adviser negotiates such fees at arm’s length. The Board also considered that the Adviser had entered into expense limitation agreements with certain of the Portfolios as noted below, pursuant to which the Adviser has agreed to waive a portion of its advisory fee and/or reimburse certain expenses as a means of limiting a Portfolio’s total annual operating expenses. In addition, the Board noted that the Adviser effected fee reductions in 2009 with respect to several Portfolios. The Board also noted that the Adviser had re-negotiated the securities lending arrangement with State Street Corporation to further maximize the income to the Portfolios from such program.

With respect to each sub-advised Portfolio, the Board also compared the sub-advisory fees paid by the Adviser to fees charged by the Portfolio’s Sub-Adviser to manage other sub-advised portfolios and portfolios not subject to regulation under the 1940 Act, such as separate accounts, as applicable. The Board considered the fee comparisons in light of the differences required to manage different types of accounts.

With respect to the American Funds Balanced Allocation Portfolio, the Board considered that the Portfolio’s actual management fees and total expenses (exclusive of 12b-1 fees) were below the Expense Group median and the Expense Universe median. The Board also noted that the Portfolio’s contractual management fee was below the normalized median of the Expense Group at the Portfolio’s current size. The Board noted that the Adviser is currently reimbursing expenses so that the Portfolio’s total annual operating expenses are capped. The Board also noted that the Adviser was proposing a reduction to its advisory fee through the implementation of additional breakpoints, which would become effective on November 12, 2009. After consideration of all relevant factors, the Board concluded that the advisory fee is consistent with industry norms and is fair and reasonable in light of the services to be provided.

Profitability. The Board examined the profitability of the Adviser on an aggregate basis with respect to all Portfolios, as well as on a Portfolio-by-Portfolio basis. With respect to the Asset Allocation Portfolios and Met/Franklin Templeton Founding Strategy Portfolio, the Board noted that the advisory fee is in addition to the fees received by the Adviser and its affiliates with regard to the other Portfolios of the Trust or of Metropolitan Series Fund, Inc., in which the Asset Allocation Portfolios and Met/Franklin Templeton Founding Strategy Portfolio may invest. With respect to the other Portfolios, the Board noted that a major component of profitability of the Adviser was the margin between the sub-advisory fees that the Adviser receives from the Trust and the portion of those fees paid to the Sub-Advisers. In this regard, the Board took into account certain comparative information in the Lipper report. The Board also reviewed the Adviser’s unaudited income statements and balance sheet information supplied by the Adviser regarding costs borne by the Adviser’s affiliates which support the operations of the Adviser but are not reflected on the unaudited income statements of the Adviser, as well as considered the profitability of the insurance products, the function of which is supported in part by the Adviser’s revenues under the Advisory Agreement, and other information and analysis prepared by the Adviser. With respect to the American Funds Bond Portfolio, American Funds Growth Portfolio, American Funds Growth-Income Portfolio, American Funds Global Small Capitalization Portfolio and American Funds International Portfolio, the Board noted that the Adviser currently does not receive an advisory fee. The Board also considered that the Distributor, MetLife Investors Distribution Company, receives 12b-1 payments to support the distribution of the products. The Board concluded after extensive discussions with management that the profitability of the Adviser and its affiliates from their relationship with each Portfolio was reasonable in light of all relevant factors.

In considering the profitability to the Sub-Advisers and their affiliates of their relationships with the Portfolios, the Board noted that the fees under the Sub-Advisory Agreements were paid by the Adviser out of the advisory fees that it receives under the Advisory Agreement. The Board also relied on the ability of the Adviser to negotiate the Sub-Advisory Agreements and the fees thereunder at arm’s length. The Board reviewed portfolio specific data with regard to the profitability of the Portfolios to each Sub-Adviser, as available, and analyzed the reasonableness of such profitability finding no indication of excessive profitability. However, the Board placed more reliance on the fact that the Sub-Advisory Agreement was negotiated at arm’s length and that the advisory fee was paid by the Adviser than on Sub-Adviser profitability.

Economies of scale. The Board also considered the effect of the Portfolios’ growth in size on their performances and fees. The Board noted that the fee schedules for all but eleven of the Portfolios contain breakpoints that reduce the fee rate above specified asset levels. The Board noted those Portfolios that did not contain breakpoints in the advisory fee and took into account management’s discussion of the same. The Board noted that those Portfolios with advisory fee schedules containing breakpoints generally reflect the inclusion of breakpoints in the sub-advisory fee schedule for such Portfolios. The Board considered the effective fees under the Advisory Agreement for each Portfolio as a percentage of assets at different asset levels and possible economies of scale that may be realized if the assets of the Portfolio grow. Among other data, the Board examined the effect of each Portfolio’s growth in size on various fee schedules and reviewed the Lipper and Bobroff Reports, which compared fee schedules among peers. The Board also took into account that the Sub-Adviser fees are paid by the Adviser out of the advisory fee. The Board also noted that if the Portfolios’ assets increase over time, the Portfolios may realize other economies of scale if assets increase proportionally more than certain other fixed expenses.

21

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

American Funds Balanced Allocation Portfolio

Board of Trustees’ Consideration of Advisory Agreement—(Continued)

With respect to the American Funds Balanced Allocation Portfolio, the Board noted that management was proposing that breakpoints be added to the Portfolio’s advisory fee. The Board also noted that the Portfolio’s management fee is below the asset-weighted average of comparable funds at all asset levels. The Board considered the effect of the Portfolio’s current size and potential growth on its performance and fees. The Board noted that if the Portfolio’s assets increased over time, the Portfolio might realize other economies of scale if assets increased proportionally more than certain other fixed expenses. The Board concluded that the advisory fee structure for the Portfolio, including the proposed breakpoints, was reasonable and appropriately reflects potential economies of scale.

Other factors. As part of its evaluation of the Adviser’s compensation, the Board considered other benefits that may be realized by the Adviser and its affiliates from their relationship with the Trust. Among them, the Board recognized that an affiliate of the Adviser, MetLife Investors Distribution Company, serves as the Distributor for the Trust, and, as such, receives payments pursuant to Rule 12b-1 from the Portfolios to compensate it for providing shareholder services and selling activities, which could lead to growth in the Trust’s assets and corresponding benefits from such growth, including economies of scale. The Board also considered that affiliates of the Adviser may benefit from certain indirect tax benefits relating to dividend received deductions and foreign tax credits. The Board concluded that ancillary benefits accruing to the Adviser and its affiliates by virtue of the Adviser’s relationship with the Portfolios are fair and reasonable in light of the costs of providing investment management and other services to the Portfolios and the ongoing commitment of the Adviser to the Portfolios.

The Board considered other benefits that may be realized by each Subadviser and its affiliates from their relationship with the Trust, including the opportunity to provide advisory services to additional portfolios of the Trust and reputational benefits. The Board concluded that the benefits accruing to the Subadvisers and their affiliates by virtue of the Subadvisers’ relationships to the Portfolios are fair and reasonable in light of the costs of providing investment advisory services to the Portfolios and the ongoing commitment of the Subadvisers to the Portfolios.

The Board considered any possible conflicts of interest in the form of material benefits or detriments to the Trust resulting from the nature of the Trust’s and the Adviser’s or the Subadvisers’ affiliations. Here, the Board considered possible conflicts of interest that may arise between the Trust and the Adviser or a Subadviser in connection with the services provided to the Trust and the various relationships that they and their affiliates may have with the Trust. The Board considered the procedures for monitoring and managing such potential conflicts.

In addition, the Board reviewed the advisory fee to be paid to the Adviser for the American Funds of Funds and concluded that the advisory fee to be paid to the Adviser with respect to the Portfolios is based on services to be provided that are in addition to, rather than duplicative of, the services provided pursuant to the advisory agreements for the underlying funds in which the Portfolios invest and that the additional services are necessary because of the differences between the investment policies, strategies and techniques of the Portfolios and those of the underlying funds.

Conclusion. In considering the renewal of each of the Agreements, the Board, including the Independent Trustees, did not identify any single factor as controlling, and each Trustee may have attributed different weights to various factors. The Board evaluated all information available to them on a Portfolio-by-Portfolio basis, and their determinations were made separately with respect to each Portfolio. Based on all of the above-mentioned considerations, and the recommendations of management, the Board, including a majority of the Independent Trustees, determined that approval of the Advisory Agreement and the Sub-Advisory Agreements was in the best interests of each Portfolio. After full consideration of these and other factors, the Board, including a majority of the Independent Trustees, with the assistance of independent counsel, approved the Advisory Agreement and the Sub-Advisory Agreement with respect to each Portfolio.

22

Simplify your life…

with MetLife eDelivery^® while helping MetLife preserve the planet’s natural resources.

(see details on inside cover)

Met Investors Series Trust American Funds Bond Portfolio Annual Report December 31, 2009

• get rid of all that paper?

• access important documents whenever you want?

• conveniently receive valuable information online?

Get it all with MetLife eDelivery!

MetLife’s eDelivery service is your resource for electronic delivery of your variable annuity or variable life prospectuses, semiannual and annual reports, and other information. Available to variable product clients of Metropolitan Life Insurance Company, First MetLife Investors Insurance Company, General American Life Insurance Company, MetLife Investors Insurance Company, MetLife Investors USA Insurance Company, MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut and New England Life Insurance Company.*

Why sign up for MetLife eDelivery?

It’s Free** – No cost to enroll or use the service.

It’s Paperless – We’ll email you when your documents are available.

It’s Easy – Enrollment takes just a few minutes.

How do you sign up?

Just type in www.metlife.esourcelink.net to get to MetLife’s online registration form. You will need your policy/account numbers, which can be found on your statements. The form takes only a few minutes to complete. Please note, for jointly owned contracts, both owners will need to register in order to eliminate paper delivery.

  * Not all MetLife products offer eDelivery at this time. ** Your internet provider may impose fees for this service. L0210086208[0911]

Letter from the President

Letter to Policy Holders

February 1, 2010

2009 can best be described as a year of recovery. The year began with the stock market in a broad decline and the economy mired in a deep recession. However, investors’ sentiment improved dramatically during the year as fiscal and monetary authorities took measures to jump start the economy which helped spark a strong market rally in equities and corporate bonds.

The Barclays Capital U.S. Aggregate Bond Index returned 5.9% during 2009. While this was similar to the 5.2% return experienced in 2008, the two years could not have been more different. In 2008, fear drove investors toward the safety of U.S. Treasury securities and away from the risk of corporate bonds, especially those rated below investment grade. In contrast, investors were more willing to embrace risk in 2009. This produced an enormous recovery in below investment grade bonds; the Barclays Capital U.S. Corporate High Yield Index returned over 58% in 2009 after falling 26% in 2008. The Barclays Capital U.S. Treasury Index returned 13.7% in 2008, but declined 3.6% in 2009.

Stock investors also became less pessimistic in 2009. While the stock market indices are still far from the record levels reached in 2007, investors were rewarded in 2009 as stocks returned 26.5% as measured by the Standard & Poor’s 500 Index, its best return since 2003. Foreign stocks, as measured by the MSCI EAFE Index, returned 31.8% during 2009.

On the following pages, you will find a complete review of your Portfolio and its investment performance.

MetLife is committed to building your financial freedom. We appreciate your trust and will continue to focus our efforts on meeting your investment needs.

Sincerely,

Elizabeth M. Forget

President

Met Investors Series Trust

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

American Funds Bond Portfolio

During the year ended December 31, 2009, the Portfolio had a return of 12.12% for Class C versus 5.93% for its benchmark, the Barclays Capital U.S. Aggregate Bond Index¹.

American Funds Bond Portfolio managed by

MetLife Advisers, LLC vs. Barclays Capital U.S. Aggregate Bond Index¹

	Average Annual Return2 (for the year ended 12/31/09)
	1 Year	3 Year	5 Year	10 Year
American Funds Bond Portfolio—Class C	12.12%	1.32%	2.30%	4.44%
Barclays Capital U.S. Aggregate Bond Index1	5.93%	6.04%	4.97%	6.33%

¹The Barclays Capital U.S. Aggregate Bond Index includes most obligations of the U.S. Treasury, agencies and quasi-federal corporations, most publicly issued investment grade corporate bonds and most bonds backed by mortgage pools of GNMA, FNMA and FHLMC.

²“Average Annual Return” is calculated including reinvestment of all income dividends and capital gain distributions.

The Portfolio and its corresponding Master Fund have essentially the same investment objectives, policies, and strategies. Since the Portfolio commenced operations on April 28, 2008, it does not have a significant operating history. However, hypothetical performance information regarding the Portfolio is presented because the Portfolio’s performance is based on the performance of the Master Fund for the period ended December 31, 2009, adjusted to reflect the Portfolio’s expenses for the period ended December 31, 2009 (including contractual expense waivers).

Past performance does not guarantee future results. The investment return and principal value of an investment in the Portfolio will fluctuate, so that shares, on any given day or when redeemed, may be worth more or less than their original cost. Performance numbers are net of all Portfolio expenses but do not include any insurance, sales, or administration charges of variable annuity or life insurance contracts. If these charges were included, the returns would be lower. The Index does not include fees or expenses and is not available for direct investment.

1

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

American Funds Bond Portfolio

Understanding Your Portfolio’s Expenses

Shareholder Expense Example

As a shareholder of the Portfolio, you incur ongoing costs, including management fees; distribution and service (12b-1) fees; and other Portfolio expenses. This example is intended to help you understand your ongoing costs (in dollars) (referred to as “expenses”) of investing in the Portfolio and compare these costs with the ongoing costs of investing in other mutual funds. The example is based on an investment of $1,000 invested at the beginning of the period and held for the entire period, July 1, 2009 through December 31, 2009.

Actual Expenses

The first line in the table below provides information about actual account values and actual expenses. You may use the information in this line, together with the amount you invested in the Portfolio, to estimate the expenses that you paid over the period. Simply divide your account value by $1,000 (for example, an $8,600 account value divided by $1,000 = 8.6), then multiply the result by the number in the first line under the heading entitled “Expenses Paid During Period” to estimate the expenses you paid on your account during this period.

Hypothetical Example for Comparison Purposes

The second line in the table below provides information about hypothetical account values and hypothetical expenses based on the Portfolio’s actual expense ratio and an assumed rate of return of 5% per year before expenses, which is not the Portfolio’s actual return. The hypothetical account values and expenses may not be used to estimate the actual ending account balance or expenses you paid for the period. You may use this information to compare the ongoing costs of investing in the Portfolio and other funds. To do so, compare this 5% hypothetical example with the 5% hypothetical examples that appear in the shareholder reports of the other funds.

Please note that the expenses shown in the table are meant to highlight your ongoing costs only and do not reflect any fees or charges of your variable insurance product or any additional expenses that participants in certain eligible qualified plans may bear relating to the operations of their plan. Therefore, the second line in the table is useful in comparing ongoing costs only, and will not help you determine the relative total costs of owning different funds. In addition, if these other costs were included, your costs would have been higher.

	Annualized Expense Ratio	Beginning Account Value 7/1/09		Ending Account Value 12/31/09		Expenses Paid During Period* 7/1/09-12/31/09
Class C
Actual	0.65%	$	1,000.00	$	1,060.64	$	3.38
Hypothetical	0.65%		1,000.00		1,021.93		3.31

* Expenses paid are equal to the Portfolio’s annualized expense ratio for the most recent six month period, as shown above, multiplied by the average account value over the period, multiplied by the number of days (184 days) in the most recent fiscal half-year, divided by 365 (to reflect the one-half year period).

2

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

American Funds Bond Portfolio

PORTFOLIO OF INVESTMENTS

December 31, 2009

(Percentage of Net Assets)

Security Description	Shares	Value
Investment Company Security - 100.1%
American Funds Bond Fund (Class 1)(a) (Cost - $188,143,422)	18,539,931	$	191,517,492
Total Investments - 100.1% (Cost $188,143,422)			191,517,492
Other Assets And Liabilities (net) - (0.1)%			(102,769	)
Net Assets - 100.0%		$	191,414,723

(a) A Portfolio of the American Funds Insurance Series.

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

3

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

American Funds Bond Portfolio

Various inputs are used in determining the value of the Portfolio’s investments, which are as follows:

Level 1—unadjusted quoted prices in active markets for identical investments

Level 2—other significant observable inputs (including, but not limited to: quoted prices for similar investments in markets that are both active or inactive; inputs other than quoted prices that are observable such as interest rates, yield curves, credit risks, default rates, etc.)

Level 3—significant unobservable inputs based on the best information available in the circumstances, to the extent observable inputs are unavailable (including the Portfolio’s own assumptions in determining the fair value of investments)

The inputs or methodology used for valuing investments are not necessarily an indication of the risk associated with investing in them. For information about the Portfolio’s policy regarding valuation of investments and other significant accounting policies, please refer to Note 2 of the Notes to Financial Statements.

The following table summarizes the inputs used in determining the value the Portfolio’s investments as of December 31, 2009:

ASSETS VALUATION INPUTS

Description	Level 1		Level 2		Level 3		Total
Investment Company Security	$	191,517,492	$	—	$	—	$	191,517,492
TOTAL INVESTMENTS	$	191,517,492	$	—	$	—	$	191,517,492

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

4

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

American Funds Bond Portfolio

Statement of Assets and Liabilities

December 31, 2009

Assets
Investments at value (a)	$	191,517,492
Receivable for shares sold		374,490
Receivable from Manager		1,571
Total assets		191,893,553
Liabilities
Payables for:
Investments purchased		315,695
Shares redeemed		58,795
Accrued Expenses:
Distribution and service fees - Class C		86,665
Administration fees		2,000
Custodian and accounting fees		2,067
Deferred trustees’ fees		7,518
Other expenses		6,090
Total liabilities		478,830
Net Assets	$	191,414,723
Net Assets Represented by
Paid in surplus	$	183,542,903
Accumulated net realized loss		(121,468	)
Unrealized appreciation on investments		3,374,070
Undistributed net investment income		4,619,218
Net Assets	$	191,414,723
Net Assets
Class C	$	191,414,723
Capital Shares Outstanding
Class C		19,890,700
Net Asset Value, Offering Price and Redemption Price Per Share
Class C	$	9.62

(a) Identified cost of investments was $188,143,422.

Statement of Operations

For the Year Ended December 31, 2009

Investment Income
Dividends from Underlying Portfolios	$	5,299,091
Total investment income		5,299,091
Expenses
Administration fees		23,985
Custodian and accounting fees		25,301
Distribution and service fees - Class C		575,273
Audit and tax services		17,179
Legal		43,447
Trustees’ fees and expenses		21,947
Shareholder reporting		9,238
Insurance		1,837
Miscellaneous		6,104
Total expenses		724,311
Less expenses reimbursed by the Manager		(44,442	)
Net expenses		679,869
Net investment income		4,619,222
Net Realized and Unrealized Gain (Loss) on Investments
Net realized loss on investments		(42,829	)
Net change in unrealized appreciation on investments		7,208,671
Net realized and unrealized gain on investments		7,165,842
Net Increase in Net Assets from Operations	$	11,785,064

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

5

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

American Funds Bond Portfolio

Statements of Changes in Net Assets

	Year Ended December 31, 2009			Period Ended December 31, 2008*
Increase (Decrease) in Net Assets:
Operations
Net investment income	$	4,619,222		$	1,797,336
Net realized loss on investments and capital gain distribution from Master Fund		(42,829	)		(56,697	)
Net change in unrealized appreciation (depreciation) on investments		7,208,671			(3,834,601	)
Net increase (decrease) in net assets resulting from operations		11,785,064			(2,093,962	)
Distributions to Shareholders
From net investment income
Class C		(8	)		(1,828,551	)
From net realized gains
Class C		—			—
Net decrease in net assets resulting from distributions		(8	)		(1,828,551	)
Capital Share Transactions
Proceeds from shares sold
Class C		158,669,719			44,951,952
Net asset value of shares issued through dividend reinvestment
Class C		8			1,828,551
Cost of shares repurchased
Class C		(15,149,373	)		(6,748,677	)
Net increase in net assets from capital share transactions		143,520,354			40,031,826
Net Increase in Net Assets		155,305,410			36,109,313
Net assets at beginning of period		36,109,313			—
Net assets at end of period	$	191,414,723		$	36,109,313
Undistributed net investment income at end of period	$	4,619,218		$	4

* For the period 4/28/08 (Commencement of Operations) through 12/31/2008.

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

6

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

American Funds Bond Portfolio

Financial Highlights

Selected Per Share Data for the Years or Period Ended:
	Class C
	For the Years Ended December 31,
	2009			2008(b)
Net Asset Value, Beginning of Period	$	8.58		$	10.00
Income (Loss) from Investment Operations:
Net investment income(a)		0.41			0.87
Net realized/unrealized gain (loss) on investments		0.63			(1.83	)
Total from investment operations		1.04			(0.96	)
Less Distributions
Dividends from net investment income		(0.00	)+		(0.46	)
Distributions from net realized capital gains		—			—
Total distributions		(0.00	)+		(0.46	)
Net Asset Value, End of Period	$	9.62		$	8.58
Total Return		12.12	%		(9.61	)%
Ratio of expenses to average net assets after reimbursement		0.65	%		0.65	%*
Ratio of expenses to average net assets before reimbursement and rebates		0.69	%		1.05	%*
Ratio of net investment income to average net assets		4.42	%		13.82	%*
Portfolio turnover rate		0.5	%		6.3	%
Net assets, end of period (in millions)	$	191.4		$	36.1

* Annualized

+ Rounds to less than $0.005 per share.

(a) Per share amounts based on average shares outstanding during the period.

(b) Commencement of operations—4/28/08.

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

7

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

American Funds Bond Portfolio

Notes to Financial Statements—December 31, 2009

1. Organization

Met Investors Series Trust (the “Trust”) is registered as an open-end management investment company under the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended (the “1940 Act”). The Trust currently offers forty-eight Portfolios (the “Portfolios”), each of which operates as a distinct investment vehicle of the Trust. The portfolio included in this report is American Funds Bond Portfolio (the “Portfolio”), which is diversified. Shares in the Trust are not offered directly to the general public and are currently available only to separate accounts established by certain affiliated life insurance companies.

The Trust is managed by MetLife Advisers, LLC (the “Manager”), an affiliate of MetLife, Inc. (“MetLife”).

The Trust has registered four classes of shares: Class A, B, C and E Shares. Class C Shares are currently offered by the Portfolio. Shares of each Class of the Portfolio represent an equal pro rata interest in the Portfolio and generally give the shareholder the same voting, dividend, liquidation, and other rights. Investment income, realized and unrealized capital gains and losses, the common expenses of the Portfolio and certain Portfolio-level expense reductions, if any, are allocated on a pro rata basis to each Class based on the relative net assets of each Class to the net assets of the Portfolio. Each Class of shares differs in its respective distribution expenses.

The Portfolio, a feeder fund, seeks to achieve its investment objective by investing all of its investable assets in a master fund, the Bond Fund (the “Master Fund”), a fund of the American Funds Insurance Series (“AFIS”). AFIS is an open-end diversified investment management company advised by Capital Research and Management Company (“CRMC"), an indirect, wholly owned subsidiary of The Capital Group Companies, Inc. The financial statements of the Master Fund are provided separately and should be read in conjunction with the Portfolio’s financial statements. As of December 31, 2009, the Portfolio owned approximately 2.28% of the Master Fund.

2. Significant Accounting Policies

The financial statements have been prepared in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (“GAAP”) which require management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of income and expenses during the reporting period. Actual results could differ from these estimates.

The following is a summary of significant accounting policies consistently followed by the Trust in the preparation of its financial statements.

Valuation - Investments in the Master Fund are valued at its closing daily net asset value. The net asset value of the Portfolio is calculated based on the net asset value of the Master Fund in which the Portfolio invests. For information about the use of fair value pricing by the Master Fund, please refer to the Notes to Financial Statements for the Master Fund.

Security Transactions - Security transactions are recorded on a trade date basis. Realized gains and losses on investments and unrealized appreciation and depreciation are determined on the identified cost basis, which is the same basis used for federal income tax purposes.

Investment Income and Expenses - Interest income is recorded on an accrual basis. Discounts and premiums on securities purchased are amortized over the lives of the respective securities. Income and capital gain distributions from the Master Fund are recorded on the ex-dividend date.

Income Taxes - It is the Portfolio’s policy to comply with the requirements of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”), and regulations thereunder, applicable to regulated investment companies and to distribute, with respect to each taxable year, all of its taxable income to shareholders. Therefore, no federal income tax provision is required. The Portfolio files U.S. Federal and various state tax returns. No income tax returns are currently under examination. The Portfolio’s federal tax returns for the prior three fiscal years remain subject to examination by the Internal Revenue Service.

Dividends and Distributions to Shareholders - The Portfolio records dividends and distributions on the ex-dividend date. Net realized gains from security transactions (if any) are generally distributed annually to shareholders. The timing and characterization of certain income and capital gains distributions are determined in accordance with federal tax regulations that may differ from GAAP. Permanent book and tax basis differences relating to shareholder distributions will result in reclassification between under/over distributed net investment income, accumulated net realized gains/losses and paid in surplus. Book-tax differences are primarily due to futures transactions, foreign currency transactions, certain foreign withholding taxes, passive foreign investment companies (PFIC), partnerships, deferred trustees compensation, capital loss carryforwards and losses deferred due to wash sales, as applicable. These adjustments have no impact on net assets or the results of operations.

3. Investment Management Agreement and Other Transactions with Affiliates

Investment Management Agreement - The Trust has entered into a management agreement with the Manager (the “Management Agreement”) for investment management services in connection with the investment management of the Portfolio. The Manager is subject to the supervision and direction of the Board of Trustees (the “Board”) and has overall responsibility for the general management and administration of the Trust. The Manager selects the Master Fund in which the Portfolio will invest and monitors the Master Fund investment program. The Manager is an affiliate of MetLife. The Manager currently receives no compensation for its services to the Portfolio. In the event that the Portfolio were to

8

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

American Funds Bond Portfolio

Notes to Financial Statements—December 31, 2009—(Continued)

3. Investment Management Agreement and Other Transactions with Affiliates - continued

withdraw from the Master Fund and invest its assets directly in investment securities, the Manager would retain the services of an investment adviser and would receive a management fee at an annual rate of percentage of the assets of the Portfolio as follows:

% per annum	Average Daily Net Assets
0.55%	ALL

Transfer Agency Agreement - Metropolitan Life Insurance Company (“MLIC”) serves as the transfer agent for the Trust. MLIC is an affiliate of the Manager. MLIC receives no fees for its services to the Trust under the transfer agency agreement.

Expense Limitation Agreement - The Manager has entered into an expense limitation agreement with the Trust (“Expense Limitation Agreement”) in the interest of limiting expenses of the Portfolio. The Expense Limitation Agreement shall continue in effect with respect to the Portfolio until April 30, 2010. Pursuant to that Expense Limitation Agreement, the Manager has agreed to waive or limit its fees and to assume other expenses so that the total annual operating expenses of the Portfolio other than interest, taxes, brokerage commissions, other expenditures which are capitalized in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America, other extraordinary expenses not incurred in the ordinary course of the Portfolio’s business, and Master Fund fees and expenses, but including amounts payable pursuant to a plan adopted in accordance with Rule 12b-1 under the 1940 Act, are limited to the following expense ratio as a percentage of the Portfolio’s average daily net assets:

Maximum Expense Ratio under current Expense Limitation Agreement		Expenses Deferred in
		2008		2009
		Subject to repayment until December 31,
Class C		2013		2014
0.65	%	$	51,953	$	44,442

The expenses reimbursed for the year ended December 31, 2009 are shown as expenses reimbursed in the Statement of Operations of the Portfolio.

If in any year in which the Management Agreement is still in effect, the estimated aggregate portfolio operating expenses of the Portfolio for the fiscal year are less than the Maximum Expense Ratio for that year, subject to approval by the Trust’s Board, the Manager shall be entitled to reimbursement by the Portfolio to the extent that the charge does not cause the expenses in such subsequent year to exceed the Maximum Expense Ratio as stated above. The Portfolio is not obligated to repay any expense paid by the Manager more than five years after the end of the fiscal year in which such expense was incurred.

Distribution Agreements and Plans - The Trust has a distribution agreement with MetLife Investors Distribution Company (“MIDC” or the “Distributor”) in which MIDC serves as the Distributor for the Trust’s Class C Shares. MIDC is a wholly-owned subsidiary of MetLife Investors Group, Inc., an affiliate of the Manager. The Class C distribution plan provides that the Trust, on behalf of the Portfolio, may pay annually up to 1.00% of the average net assets of the Portfolio attributable to its Class C Shares in respect to activities primarily intended to result in the sale of Class C Shares. However, under the Class C distribution agreement, payments to the Distributor for activities pursuant to the Class C distribution plan are currently limited to payments at an annual rate equal to 0.55% of average daily net assets of the Portfolio, attributable to its Class C Shares.

Under the terms of the Class C distribution plan and distribution agreement, the Portfolio is authorized to make payments monthly to the Distributor that may be used to pay or reimburse entities providing distribution and shareholder servicing with respect to the Class C Shares for such entities’ fees or expenses incurred.

Deferred Trustee Compensation - Each Trustee of the Trust who is not currently an employee of the Manager or any of its affiliates receives compensation from the Trust for his or her service to the Portfolio. A deferred compensation plan (the “Plan”) is available to the Trustees on a voluntary basis. Deferred amounts remain in the Trust until distributed in accordance with the provisions of the Plan. The value of a participating Trustee’s deferral account is based on theoretical investments of deferred amounts, on the normal payment dates, in certain portfolios of the Trust or Metropolitan Series Fund, Inc. as designated by the participating Trustee. Changes in the value of participants’ deferral accounts are reflected as Trustees’ fees and expenses in the Statement of Operations. The portion of the accrued obligations allocated to the Portfolio, if any, under the Plan are reflected as Deferred Trustees’ fees in the Statement of Assets and Liabilities.

9

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

American Funds Bond Portfolio

Notes to Financial Statements—December 31, 2009—(Continued)

4. Shares of Beneficial Interest

Transactions in shares of beneficial interest for the periods ended noted below were as follows:

	Beginning Shares	Sales	Reinvestments	Redemptions		Net Increase in Shares Outstanding	Ending Shares
Class C
12/31/2009	4,206,415	17,320,224	1	(1,635,940	)	15,684,285	19,890,700
4/28/08-12/31/2008	—	4,718,491	213,118	(725,194	)	4,206,415	4,206,415

The Portfolio is authorized to issue an unlimited number of shares.

5. Investment Transactions

Aggregate cost of purchases and proceeds of sales of investment securities, excluding short-term securities, for the period ended December 31, 2009 were as follows:

Purchases			Sales
U.S. Government	Non-Government		U.S. Government		Non-Government
$—	$	148,784,868	$	—	$	581,055

At December 31, 2009, the cost of securities for federal income tax purposes and the unrealized appreciation (depreciation) of investments for federal income tax purposes for the Portfolio were as follows:

Federal Income Tax Cost	Gross Unrealized Appreciation		Gross Unrealized Depreciation			Net Unrealized Appreciation
$188,264,890	$	3,374,070	$	(121,468	)	$	3,252,602

6. Contractual Obligations

The Trust has a variety of indemnification obligations under contracts with its service providers. The Trust’s maximum exposure under these arrangements is unknown. However, the Trust has not had prior claims or losses pursuant to these contracts and expects the risk of loss to be remote.

7. Market, Credit and Counterparty Risk

In the normal course of business, the Master Fund in which the Portfolio invests its assets invests in securities and enters into transactions where risks exist due to fluctuations in the market (market risk) or failure of the other party to a transaction to perform (credit risk). The value of securities held by the Master Fund may decline in response to certain events, including those directly involving the companies whose securities are owned by the Master Fund; conditions affecting the general economy; overall market changes; local, regional or global political, social or economic instability; and currency and interest rate and price fluctuations. The Master Fund may be exposed to counterparty risk, or the risk that an entity with which the Master Fund has unsettled or open transactions may default. The potential loss could exceed the value of the financial assets recorded in the financial statements. Financial assets, which potentially expose the Master Fund to credit risk, consist principally of cash due from counterparties and investments. The Master Fund restricts its exposure to credit losses by entering into master agreements with counterparties (approved brokers) with whom it undertakes a significant volume of transactions to include certain safeguards for derivatives and non-standard settlement trades. The credit risk associated with favorable contracts is reduced by a master netting arrangement to the extent that if an event of default occurs, all amounts with the counterparty are terminated and settled on a net basis. The Master Fund’s overall exposure to credit risk on derivative instruments subject to master netting arrangements can change substantially within a short period, as it is affected by each transaction subject to the arrangement.

8. Income Tax Information

The tax character of distributions paid for the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2008 were as follows:

Ordinary Income		Long-Term Capital Gains				Total
2009	2008	2009		2008		2009		2008
$8	$1,821,237	$	—	$	7,314	$	8	$	1,828,551

10

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

American Funds Bond Portfolio

Notes to Financial Statements—December 31, 2009—(Continued)

8. Income Tax Information - continued

As of December 31, 2009, the components of distributable earnings (accumulated losses) on a federal income tax basis were as follows:

Undistributed Ordinary Income	Undistributed Long-Term Gain		Net Unrealized Appreciation		Loss Carryforwards		Total
$4,626,736	$	—	$	3,252,602	$	—	$	7,879,338

9. Recent Accounting Pronouncement

On January 21, 2010, the Financial Accounting Standards Board issued Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) 2010-06, “Improving Disclosures About Fair Value Measurements.” The ASU amends Accounting Standards Codification 820 to add new requirements for disclosures about transfers into and out of Levels 1 and 2. It also clarifies existing fair value disclosures about the level of disaggregation and about inputs and valuation techniques used to measure fair value. Additionally, the ASU amends disclosures about providing purchases, sales, issuances, and settlements on a gross basis relating to Level 3 measurements. The ASU guidance is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2009, and for interim periods within those fiscal years, except for the requirement to provide the Level 3 activity of purchases, sales, issuances, and settlements on a gross basis, which will be effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2010, and for interim periods within those fiscal years. Management is currently evaluating the impact the adoption of ASU 2010-06 will have on the Portfolio’s financial statements.

10. Subsequent Events

Management’s evaluation of the impact of all subsequent events on the Portfolio’s financial statements was completed through February 25, 2010, the date the financial statements were issued, and management has determined that as of that date there were no subsequent events requiring adjustments or disclosure in the Portfolio’s financial statements.

11

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

American Funds Bond Portfolio

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

To the Shareholders and Board of Trustees of Met Investors Series Trust:

We have audited the accompanying statement of assets and liabilities, including the portfolio of investments, of the American Funds Bond Portfolio, one of the portfolios constituting Met Investors Series Trust (the “Trust”), as of December 31, 2009, and the related statement of operations for the year then ended, and the statements of changes in net assets and the financial highlights for the year ended December 31, 2009 and for the period from April 28, 2008 (commencement of operations) to December 31, 2008. These financial statements and financial highlights are the responsibility of the Trust’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements and financial highlights based on our audits.

We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements and financial highlights are free of material misstatement. The Trust is not required to have, nor were we engaged to perform, an audit of its internal control over financial reporting. Our audits included consideration of internal control over financial reporting as a basis for designing audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the Trust’s internal control over financial reporting. Accordingly, we express no such opinion. An audit also includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements, assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. Our procedures included confirmation of securities owned as of December 31, 2009, by correspondence with the transfer agent. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.

In our opinion, the financial statements and financial highlights referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of the American Funds Bond Portfolio of the Met Investors Series Trust as of December 31, 2009, the results of its operations for the year then ended, and the changes in its net assets and the financial highlights for the year ended December 31, 2009 and for the period from April 28, 2008 (commencement of operations) to December 31, 2008, in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.

Deloitte & Touche LLP

Boston, Massachusetts

February 25, 2010

12

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Trustees and Officers (Unaudited) December 31, 2009

The Trustees and executive officers of the Trust, their ages and their principal occupations during the past five years are set forth below. Unless otherwise indicated, the business address of each is 5 Park Plaza, Suite 1900 Irvine, California 92614. Each Trustee who is deemed an “interested person,” as such term is defined in the 1940 Act, is indicated by an asterisk. Those Trustees who are not “interested persons” as defined in the 1940 Act are referred to as “Independent Trustees.” Additional information about the Trustees is available in the Statement of Additional Information which is available without charge, upon request, by calling (800) 848-3854.

The Trustees
Name and Age	Position(s) Held with Registrant	Term of Office and Length of Time Served	Principal Occupation(s) During Past 5 Years	Number of Portfolios in Fund Complex+ overseen by Trustee	Other Directorships Held by Trustee
Interested Trustees
Elizabeth M. Forget* (43)	President and Trustee	Indefinite; From December 2000 to present	Since May 2007, Senior Vice President, MetLife, Inc.; since December 2000, President of MetLife Advisers, LLC and its predecessor; December 2003 to April 2007, Vice President, MetLife, Inc.	84	Director, Metropolitan Series Fund, Inc. since August 2006.
Independent Trustees
Stephen M. Alderman (50)	Trustee	Indefinite; From December 2000 to present	Since November 1991, Shareholder in the law firm of Garfield and Merel, Ltd.	48	None
Jack R. Borsting (80)	Trustee	Indefinite; From December 2000 to present	Since 2006, Professor and Dean Emeritus, Marshall School of Business, University of Southern California (USC); from 2001 to 2005, Professor of Business Administration and Dean Emeritus.	48	Director, Los Angeles Orthopedic Hospital, Trustee, The Rose Hills Foundation. Member, Army Science Board.
Robert Boulware (53)	Trustee	Indefinite; From March 2008 to present	From 2004 to 2009, Director of Norwood Promotional Products, Inc.; from 2007 to 2008, Director of Wealthpoint Advisors (a business development company); from 2007 to 2009, Director of Holladay Bank; from 1992-2006, President and Chief Executive Officer of ING Fund Distributor, LLC.	48	Since 2005, Director of Gainsco, Inc. (auto insurance).
Daniel A. Doyle (51)	Trustee	Indefinite; From February 2007 to present	From October 2000 to June 2009, Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of ATC Management, Inc. (public utility); since June 2009, independent business consultant.	48	Director, Wisconsin Sports Development Corporation
Susan C. Gause (57)	Trustee	Indefinite; From March 2008 to present	From 2000 to December 2002, Chief Executive Officer of Allianz Dresdner Asset Management; since 2003, private investor.	48	None

13

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Trustees and Officers (Unaudited)—(Continued) December 31, 2009

Name and Age	Position(s) Held with Registrant	Term of Office and Length of Time Served	Principal Occupation(s) During Past 5 Years	Number of Portfolios in Fund Complex+ overseen by Trustee	Other Directorships Held by Trustee
Independent Trustees - continued
Dawn M. Vroegop (43)	Trustee	Indefinite; From December 2000 to present	From September 1999 to September 2003, Managing Director, Dresdner RCM Global Investors.	84	Director, Metropolitan Series Fund, Inc. since May 2009; from 2003 to present, Director and Finance Committee Chair, City College of San Francisco Foundation

The Executive Officers
Name and Age	Position(s) Held with Registrant	Term of Office and Length of Time Served	Principal Occupation(s) During Past 5 Years
Jeffrey L. Bernier (38)	Vice President	From February 2009 to present	Since December 2007, Vice President, Metropolitan Life Insurance Company; since 2008 Senior Vice President of MetLife Advisers, LLC and its predecessor; from July 2004 to December 2007, Director and Senior Investment Analyst of Investment Management Services for John Hancock Financial Services.
Jeffrey A. Tupper (39)	Chief Financial Officer, Treasurer	From August 2002 to present	Since February 2009, Vice President, MetLife Advisers, LLC. Since October 2006, Assistant Vice President, MetLife Group, Inc. Since February 2001, Assistant Vice President of MetLife Investors Insurance Company.
Richard C. Pearson (66)	Vice President and Secretary	From December 2000 to present	Since June 2001, President or Executive Vice President of MetLife Investors Distribution Company; since January 2001, Executive Vice President, General Counsel and Secretary of MetLife Investors Group, Inc. and Vice President, Secretary and Associate General Counsel of its affiliated life insurance companies; since November 2000, Senior Vice President and General Counsel of MetLife Advisers, LLC and its predecessor.
Jeffrey P. Halperin (42)	Chief Compliance Officer	From November 2006 to present	Since March 2006, Vice President, Corporate Ethics and Compliance Department, MetLife, Inc.; from October 2002 to March 2006, Assistant Vice President; from November 2005 to August 2006, Interim Chief Compliance Officer, Met Investors Series Trust; since April 2007, Chief Compliance Officer, Metropolitan Series Funds; from August 2006 to April 2007, Interim Chief Compliance Officer, Metropolitan Series Funds; since August 2006, Chief Compliance Officer, MetLife Advisers, LLC and its predecessor; since November 2006, Chief Compliance Officer, MetLife Investment Advisors Company, LLC.

+ The Fund Complex includes the Trust (48 portfolios) and Metropolitan Series Fund, Inc. (36 portfolios).

* Ms. Forget is an “interested person” of the Trust as a result of her affiliation with the Manager and the Distributor.

Quarterly Portfolio Schedule

The Trust files Form N-Q for the first and third quarters of each fiscal year. The Trust’s Forms N-Q will be available on the Securities and Exchange Commission’s website at http://www.sec.gov. The Trust’s Forms N-Q may be reviewed and copied at the Securities and Exchange Commission’s

14

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Trustees and Officers (Unaudited)—(Continued) December 31, 2009

Public Reference Room in Washington, D.C. and information on the operation of the Public Reference Room may be obtained by calling 1-800-SEC-0330. Once filed, the most recent Form N-Q will be available without charge, upon request, by calling (800) 848-3854.

Proxy Voting Policies and Procedures

A description of the policies and procedures that the Trust uses to determine how to vote proxies relating to portfolio securities is available without charge, upon request, by calling (800) 848-3854 and on the Securities and Exchange Commission’s website at http://www.sec.gov.

Proxy Voting Record

The Trust, on behalf of each of its Portfolios, has filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission its proxy voting record for the 12-month period ending June 30 on Form N-PX. Form N-PX must be filed by the Trust each year by August 31. Once filed, the most recent Form N-PX will be available without charge, upon request, by calling (800) 848-3854 or on the Securities and Exchange Commission’s website at http://www.sec.gov.

15

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

American Funds Bond Portfolio

Board of Trustees’ Consideration of Advisory Agreement

At an in-person meeting of the Board of Trustees (the “Board”) of the Met Investors Series Trust (the “Trust”) held on November 10-11, 2009, the Board, including a majority of the Trustees who are not considered to be “interested persons” of the Trust (the “Independent Trustees”) under the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended (the “1940 Act”), approved for an annual period the continuation of the Trust’s advisory agreement (the “Advisory Agreement”) with MetLife Advisers, LLC (the “Adviser”) and the applicable sub-advisory agreements (each a “Sub-Advisory Agreement”, and collectively with the Advisory Agreement, the “Agreements”) between the Adviser and the investment sub-advisers (each a “Sub-Adviser”, and collectively, the “Sub-Advisers”) for each of the series of the Trust, including the American Funds Bond Portfolio (each a “Portfolio,” and collectively, the “Portfolios”).¹ With respect to the American Funds Bond Portfolio, a “feeder fund” that invests all of its assets in an American Funds Insurance Series “master fund,” a stand-by Advisory Agreement was approved at the November 11-12, 2009 meeting for the American Funds Bond Portfolio in the event it no longer invests all of its assets in its American Funds Insurance Series master fund.

In considering the Agreements, the Board reviewed a variety of materials provided by the Adviser and the Sub-Advisers relating to each Portfolio, the Adviser and each Sub-Adviser, including comparative performance, fee and expense information for an appropriate peer group of similar mutual funds, performance information for relevant benchmark indices and other information regarding the nature, extent and quality of services provided by the Adviser and the Sub-Advisers under their respective Agreements. The Board also took into account information provided to the Board in its meetings throughout the year with respect to the services provided by the Adviser and the Sub-Advisers, including quarterly performance reports prepared by management containing reviews of investment results, and periodic presentations from the Sub-Advisers with respect to the Portfolios they manage. The Independent Trustees also assessed reports provided by independent consultants, who reviewed and provided analyses regarding investment performance, fees and expenses, profitability and other information provided by, or at the direction of, the Adviser and the Sub-Advisers, as more fully discussed below.

The Independent Trustees were separately advised by independent legal counsel throughout the process. Prior to voting, the Independent Trustees also received a memorandum from their independent counsel discussing the legal standards for their consideration of the proposed continuation of the Agreements. The Board met in person with personnel of the Adviser prior to the November meeting for the specific purpose of considering the proposed continuation of the Agreements. The Independent Trustees also discussed the proposed continuation of the Agreements in private sessions with their independent legal counsel at which no representatives of management were present.

In considering whether to approve the renewal of the Advisory Agreement with the Adviser and any applicable Sub-Advisory Agreements with respect to each Portfolio, the Board reviewed and analyzed the factors it deemed relevant, including: (1) the nature, extent and quality of the services to be provided to the Portfolios by the Adviser and the Sub-Advisers; (2) the performance of the Portfolios as compared to a peer group and an appropriate index; (3) the Adviser’s and each of the Sub-Adviser’s personnel and operations; (4) the financial condition of the Adviser and of the Sub-Advisers; (5) the level and method of computing each Portfolio’s advisory and sub-advisory fees; (6) the profitability of the Adviser under the Advisory Agreement and of the Sub-Advisers under the Sub-Advisory Agreements; (7) any “fall-out” benefits to the Adviser, the Sub-Advisers and their affiliates (i.e., ancillary benefits realized by the Adviser, the Sub-Advisers or their affiliates from the Adviser’s or Sub-Advisers’ relationship with the Trust); (8) the anticipated effect of growth in size on each Portfolio’s performance and expenses; (9) fees paid to the Sub-Advisers by comparable institutional and retail accounts; and (10) possible conflicts of interest. The Board also considered the nature, quality, and extent of the services to be provided to the Portfolios by the Adviser’s affiliates, including distribution services.

Nature, extent and quality of services. In considering the nature, extent and quality of the services to be provided by the Adviser to the Portfolios, the Board took into account the extensive responsibilities that the Adviser has as investment manager to the Portfolios, including the provision of investment advice to: (i) MetLife Aggressive Strategy Portfolio, MetLife Balanced Strategy Portfolio, MetLife Defensive Strategy Portfolio, MetLife Growth Strategy Portfolio, and MetLife Moderate Strategy Portfolio (together, the “Asset Allocation Portfolios”), (ii) American Funds Balanced Allocation Portfolio, American Funds Growth Allocation Portfolio, and American Funds Moderate Allocation Portfolio (together, the “American Funds of Funds”), and (iii) the Met/Franklin Templeton Founding Strategy Portfolio, the selection of the Sub-Advisers for the other Portfolios and oversight of the Sub-Advisers’ compliance with fund policies and objectives, review of brokerage matters including with respect to trade allocation and best execution, oversight of general fund compliance with federal and state laws, and the implementation of Board directives as they relate to the Portfolios. The Adviser’s role in coordinating the activities of the Portfolios’ other service providers was also considered. The Board also evaluated the expertise and performance of the investment personnel with respect to the Asset Allocation Portfolios, the American Funds of Funds and the Met/Franklin Templeton Founding Strategy Portfolio and of the personnel overseeing the Sub-Advisers of the other Portfolios, and compliance with each Portfolio’s investment restrictions, tax and other requirements. The Board considered information received from the Trust’s Chief Compliance Officer (“CCO”) regarding the Portfolios’ compliance policies and procedures established pursuant to Rule 38a-1 under the 1940 Act, including the policies and procedures in place relating to proxy voting. The Board also took into account its familiarity with management through Board meetings, discussions and reports during the preceding year.

The Board also recognized the Adviser^’s reputation and long-standing experience in serving as an investment adviser to the Trust, and considered the benefit to shareholders of investing in funds that are part of a family of variable annuity portfolios offering a variety of investments. In addition,

¹ The Met/Templeton International Bond Portfolio recently commenced operations and, therefore, the Agreements with respect to this Portfolio were not up for renewal.

16

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

American Funds Bond Portfolio

Board of Trustees’ Consideration of Advisory Agreement—(Continued)

the Board reviewed the financial condition of the Adviser and whether it had the financial wherewithal to provide a high level and quality of services to the Portfolios. In its review, the Board also received and took into account information regarding any services and/or payments provided to the Adviser by the Sub-Advisers in connection with marketing activities.

With respect to the services provided by each of the Sub-Advisers, the Board considered information provided to the Board by each Sub-Adviser, including each Sub-Adviser’s Form ADV, as well as information presented throughout the past year. The Board considered the Sub-Adviser’s current level of staffing and its overall resources, as well as its compensation program. The Board reviewed each Sub-Adviser’s history and investment experience, as well as information regarding the qualifications, background and responsibilities of the Sub-Adviser’s investment and compliance personnel who provide services to the Portfolios. The Board also considered, among other things, the Sub-Adviser’s compliance program and any disciplinary history. The Board noted each Sub-Adviser’s regulatory history, including whether it was currently involved in any regulatory actions or investigations as well as material litigation, and any settlements and ameliatory actions undertaken, as appropriate. The Board also noted that the CCO and his staff conduct regular, periodic compliance reviews with each of the Sub-Advisers and present reports to the Independent Trustees regarding the same, which includes evaluating the regulatory compliance systems of the Sub-Advisers and procedures reasonably designed by them to assure compliance with the federal securities laws, including issues related to late trading and market timing, best execution, fair value pricing, and proxy voting procedures, among others. The Board also took into account the financial condition of each Sub-Adviser.

The Board considered each Sub-Adviser’s investment process and philosophy. The Board took into account that each Sub-Adviser’s responsibilities include the development and maintenance of an investment program for the applicable Portfolio which is consistent with the Portfolio’s investment objectives, the selection of investment securities and the placement of orders for the purchase and sale of such securities, as well as the implementation of compliance controls related to performance of these services. The Board also reviewed each Sub-Adviser’s brokerage policies and practices, including with respect to best execution and soft dollars.

Based on its consideration and review of the foregoing information, the Board concluded that the nature, extent and quality of services provided by the Adviser and by each Sub-Adviser were satisfactory and that there was a reasonable basis on which to conclude that each would provide a high quality of investment services to the Portfolios.

Performance. The Board considered the performance of the Portfolios as described in the quarterly reports prepared by management, and as also analyzed in reports prepared by the Independent Trustees’ independent consultant. The Board noted that the Adviser reviews with the Board on a quarterly basis detailed information about the Portfolios’ performance results, portfolio composition and investment strategies. The Board also reviewed and considered a separate report prepared by Lipper Inc. (“Lipper”), an independent third party, which provided a statistical analysis comparing the Portfolios’ investment performance, expenses, and fees to comparable funds underlying variable insurance products (the “Performance Universe”). In addition, the Independent Trustees met separately with a representative of Bobroff Consulting, Inc., an independent consultant (“Bobroff”), at a special board meeting in September 2009, to review the separate reports prepared by such consultant (“Bobroff Report”), which analyzed the report prepared by Lipper, as well as certain of the other factors to be considered by the Board including supplemental alpha and information coefficient analysis. The Board also considered each Portfolio’s more recent performance subsequent to the performance period covered by the Lipper reports, and management’s discussion of the same, including the effect of current market conditions on each Portfolio’s more recent performance.

The Board closely reviewed the Portfolios’ performance records and the Adviser’s and Sub-Advisers’ management styles and long-term performance records with the Portfolios and comparable funds. The Board focused particular attention on Portfolios with less favorable performance records. The Board was mindful of the Adviser’s focus on each Sub-Adviser’s performance and noted that the Adviser has been active in monitoring and responding to any performance issues with respect to the Portfolios. The Board also took into account its discussions with management regarding factors that contributed to the performance of each Portfolio.

Among other data relating specifically to the American Funds Bond Portfolio’s performance, the Board took into account that the Portfolio is a “feeder fund” and all of its assets are invested in a “master fund,” a series of the American Funds Insurance Series, which in turn purchases investment securities. The Board noted that the Portfolio commenced operations on April 28, 2008. Among other information relating to the Portfolio’s performance, the Board considered that the Portfolio underperformed the median of its Performance Universe and Lipper Index for the one-year and since inception periods ended July 31, 2009. The Board also considered that the Portfolio underperformed its benchmark, the Barclays Capital U.S. Aggregate Bond Index, for the one-year period ended August 31, 2009. The Board also took into account management’s discussion of the Portfolio’s performance, including its more recent performance. Based on its review and taking into account the fact that the Portfolio had a limited performance history and the current size of the Portfolio, the Board concluded that the Portfolio’s performance was satisfactory.

Fees and Expenses. The Board gave substantial consideration to the advisory fees payable under the Advisory Agreement and the sub-advisory fees payable under each of the Sub-Advisory Agreements. In this regard, the Board reviewed the advisory fees payable in the aggregate as well as on a Portfolio-by-Portfolio basis based on information provided by the Adviser. The Independent Trustees, with the assistance of Bobroff, also examined the fees paid by each Portfolio in light of fees paid to other investment managers by comparable funds and the method of computing

17

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

American Funds Bond Portfolio

Board of Trustees’ Consideration of Advisory Agreement—(Continued)

each Portfolio’s fee, as well as considered the fees charged by the Adviser to manage other comparable funds. The Lipper report included comparisons of the Adviser’s fee schedule with that of its peers based on an asset-based analysis of relative fee structures according to the size of each Portfolio. In addition, the Board considered the Portfolios’ advisory and sub-advisory fees and total expenses as compared to similarly situated investment companies underlying variable insurance products deemed to be comparable to the Portfolios as determined by Lipper. The Board considered each Portfolio’s ranking within a smaller group of peer funds chosen by Lipper (the “Expense Group”), as well as the Portfolio’s ranking within broader groups of funds (the “Expense Universe” and the “Sub-advised Expense Universe”). The Board also considered each Portfolio’s contractual sub-advisory fees, as applicable, as compared to the Sub-advised Expense Universe as well as a smaller group of funds (the “Sub-advised Expense Group”). In comparing each Portfolio’s actual and contractual management fee to that of comparable funds, the Board noted that such fee includes both advisory and administrative fees.

The Board noted that the sub-advisory fees for the Portfolios are paid by the Adviser, not the Portfolios, out of the advisory fee. It was further noted that the Adviser negotiates such fees at arm’s length. The Board also considered that the Adviser had entered into expense limitation agreements with certain of the Portfolios as noted below, pursuant to which the Adviser has agreed to waive a portion of its advisory fee and/or reimburse certain expenses as a means of limiting a Portfolio’s total annual operating expenses. In addition, the Board noted that the Adviser effected fee reductions in 2009 with respect to several Portfolios. The Board also noted that the Adviser had re-negotiated the securities lending arrangement with State Street Corporation to further maximize the income to the Portfolios from such program.

With respect to each sub-advised Portfolio, the Board also compared the sub-advisory fees paid by the Adviser to fees charged by the Portfolio’s Sub-Adviser to manage other sub-advised portfolios and portfolios not subject to regulation under the 1940 Act, such as separate accounts, as applicable. The Board considered the fee comparisons in light of the differences required to manage different types of accounts.

With respect to the American Funds Bond Portfolio, the Board considered that the Portfolio’s total expenses (exclusive of 12b-1 fees), which reflected the expenses of the underlying master fund, were equal to the Expense Group median and the Expense Universe median. The Board noted that the Portfolio does not currently pay an advisory fee under the stand-by Advisory Agreement and will not do so in the future unless the Portfolio no longer invests its assets in a master fund. The Board noted, however, that the Portfolio’s contractual management fee under the stand-by Advisory Agreement would be at the normalized median of the Expense Group at the Portfolio’s current size. The Board noted that the Adviser is currently reimbursing expenses so that the Portfolio’s total annual operating expenses are capped. After consideration of all relevant factors, the Board concluded that the advisory fee under the stand-by Advisory Agreement is consistent with industry norms and is fair and reasonable in light of the services to be provided.

Profitability. The Board examined the profitability of the Adviser on an aggregate basis with respect to all Portfolios, as well as on a Portfolio-by-Portfolio basis. With respect to the Asset Allocation Portfolios and Met/Franklin Templeton Founding Strategy Portfolio, the Board noted that the advisory fee is in addition to the fees received by the Adviser and its affiliates with regard to the other Portfolios of the Trust or of Metropolitan Series Fund, Inc. in which the Asset Allocation Portfolios and Met/Franklin Templeton Founding Strategy Portfolio may invest. With respect to the other Portfolios, the Board noted that a major component of profitability of the Adviser was the margin between the sub-advisory fees that the Adviser receives from the Trust and the portion of those fees paid to the Sub-Advisers. In this regard, the Board took into account certain comparative information in the Lipper report. The Board also reviewed the Adviser’s unaudited income statements and balance sheet information supplied by the Adviser regarding costs borne by the Adviser’s affiliates which support the operations of the Adviser but are not reflected on the unaudited income statements of the Adviser, as well as considered the profitability of the insurance products, the function of which is supported in part by the Adviser’s revenues under the Advisory Agreement, and other information and analysis prepared by the Adviser. With respect to the American Funds Bond Portfolio, American Funds Growth Portfolio, American Funds Growth-Income Portfolio, American Funds Global Small Capitalization Portfolio and American Funds International Portfolio, the Board noted that the Adviser currently does not receive an advisory fee. The Board also considered that the Distributor, MetLife Investors Distribution Company, receives 12b-1 payments to support the distribution of the products. The Board concluded after extensive discussions with management that the profitability of the Adviser and its affiliates from their relationship with each Portfolio was reasonable in light of all relevant factors.

In considering the profitability to the Sub-Advisers and their affiliates of their relationships with the Portfolios, the Board noted that the fees under the Sub-Advisory Agreements were paid by the Adviser out of the advisory fees that it receives under the Advisory Agreement. The Board also relied on the ability of the Adviser to negotiate the Sub-Advisory Agreements and the fees thereunder at arm’s length. The Board reviewed portfolio specific data with regard to the profitability of the Portfolios to each Sub-Adviser, as available, and analyzed the reasonableness of such profitability finding no indication of excessive profitability. However, the Board placed more reliance on the fact that the Sub-Advisory Agreement was negotiated at arm’s length and that the advisory fee was paid by the Adviser than on Sub-Adviser profitability.

Economies of scale. The Board also considered the effect of the Portfolios’ growth in size on their performances and fees. The Board noted that the fee schedules for all but eleven of the Portfolios contain breakpoints that reduce the fee rate above specified asset levels. The Board noted those Portfolios that did not contain breakpoints in the advisory fee and took into account management’s discussion of the same. The Board noted that those Portfolios with advisory fee schedules containing breakpoints generally reflect the inclusion of breakpoints in the sub-advisory fee schedule for such Portfolios. The Board considered the effective fees under the Advisory Agreement for each Portfolio as a percentage of assets at

18

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

American Funds Bond Portfolio

Board of Trustees’ Consideration of Advisory Agreement—(Continued)

different asset levels and possible economies of scale that may be realized if the assets of the Portfolio grow. Among other data, the Board examined the effect of each Portfolio’s growth in size on various fee schedules and reviewed the Lipper and Bobroff Reports, which compared fee schedules among peers. The Board also took into account that the Sub-Adviser fees are paid by the Adviser out of the advisory fee. The Board also noted that if the Portfolios’ assets increase over time, the Portfolios may realize other economies of scale if assets increase proportionally more than certain other fixed expenses.

With respect to the American Funds Bond Portfolio, the Board noted that the Portfolio’s advisory fee under the stand-by Advisory Agreement does not contain breakpoints. The Board noted, however, that the Portfolio’s management fee is below the asset-weighted average of comparable funds at all asset levels. The Board considered the effect of the Portfolio’s current size and potential growth on its performance and fees. The Board noted that if the Portfolio’s assets increased over time, the Portfolio might realize other economies of scale if assets increased proportionally more than certain other fixed expenses. The Board concluded that adding breakpoints to the advisory fee at specified asset levels was not appropriate given the Portfolio’s current size and the fact that the Portfolio is not currently paying the advisory fee. The Board concluded that the advisory fee structure for the Portfolio was reasonable and appropriate.

Other factors. As part of its evaluation of the Adviser’s compensation, the Board considered other benefits that may be realized by the Adviser and its affiliates from their relationship with the Trust. Among them, the Board recognized that an affiliate of the Adviser, MetLife Investors Distribution Company, serves as the Distributor for the Trust, and, as such, receives payments pursuant to Rule 12b-1 from the Portfolios to compensate it for providing shareholder services and selling activities, which could lead to growth in the Trust’s assets and corresponding benefits from such growth, including economies of scale. The Board also considered that affiliates of the Adviser may benefit from certain indirect tax benefits relating to dividend received deductions and foreign tax credits. The Board concluded that ancillary benefits accruing to the Adviser and its affiliates by virtue of the Adviser’s relationship with the Portfolios are fair and reasonable in light of the costs of providing investment management and other services to the Portfolios and the ongoing commitment of the Adviser to the Portfolios.

The Board considered other benefits that may be realized by each Subadviser and its affiliates from their relationship with the Trust, including the opportunity to provide advisory services to additional portfolios of the Trust and reputational benefits. The Board concluded that the benefits accruing to the Subadvisers and their affiliates by virtue of the Subadvisers’ relationships to the Portfolios are fair and reasonable in light of the costs of providing investment advisory services to the Portfolios and the ongoing commitment of the Subadvisers to the Portfolios.

The Board considered any possible conflicts of interest in the form of material benefits or detriments to the Trust resulting from the nature of the Trust’s and the Adviser’s or the Subadvisers’ affiliations. Here, the Board considered possible conflicts of interest that may arise between the Trust and the Adviser or a Subadviser in connection with the services provided to the Trust and the various relationships that they and their affiliates may have with the Trust. The Board considered the procedures for monitoring and managing such potential conflicts.

Conclusion. In considering the renewal of each of the Agreements, the Board, including the Independent Trustees, did not identify any single factor as controlling, and each Trustee may have attributed different weights to various factors. The Board evaluated all information available to them on a Portfolio-by-Portfolio basis, and their determinations were made separately with respect to each Portfolio. Based on all of the above-mentioned considerations, and the recommendations of management, the Board, including a majority of the Independent Trustees, determined that approval of the Advisory Agreement and the Sub-Advisory Agreements was in the best interests of each Portfolio. After full consideration of these and other factors, the Board, including a majority of the Independent Trustees, with the assistance of independent counsel, approved the Advisory Agreement and the Sub-Advisory Agreement with respect to each Portfolio.

19

Simplify your life…

with MetLife eDelivery^® while helping MetLife preserve the planet’s natural resources.

(see details on inside cover)

Met Investors Series Trust American Funds Growth Allocation Portfolio Annual Report December 31, 2009

• get rid of all that paper?

• access important documents whenever you want?

• conveniently receive valuable information online?

Get it all with MetLife eDelivery!

MetLife’s eDelivery service is your resource for electronic delivery of your variable annuity or variable life prospectuses, semiannual and annual reports, and other information. Available to variable product clients of Metropolitan Life Insurance Company, First MetLife Investors Insurance Company, General American Life Insurance Company, MetLife Investors Insurance Company, MetLife Investors USA Insurance Company, MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut and New England Life Insurance Company.*

Why sign up for MetLife eDelivery?

It’s Free** – No cost to enroll or use the service.

It’s Paperless – We’ll email you when your documents are available.

It’s Easy – Enrollment takes just a few minutes.

How do you sign up?

Just type in www.metlife.esourcelink.net to get to MetLife’s online registration form. You will need your policy/account numbers, which can be found on your statements. The form takes only a few minutes to complete. Please note, for jointly owned contracts, both owners will need to register in order to eliminate paper delivery.

  * Not all MetLife products offer eDelivery at this time. ** Your internet provider may impose fees for this service. L0210086208[0911]

Letter from the President

Letter to Policy Holders

February 1, 2010

2009 can best be described as a year of recovery. The year began with the stock market in a broad decline and the economy mired in a deep recession. However, investors’ sentiment improved dramatically during the year as fiscal and monetary authorities took measures to jump start the economy which helped spark a strong market rally in equities and corporate bonds.

The Barclays Capital U.S. Aggregate Bond Index returned 5.9% during 2009. While this was similar to the 5.2% return experienced in 2008, the two years could not have been more different. In 2008, fear drove investors toward the safety of U.S. Treasury securities and away from the risk of corporate bonds, especially those rated below investment grade. In contrast, investors were more willing to embrace risk in 2009. This produced an enormous recovery in below investment grade bonds; the Barclays Capital U.S. Corporate High Yield Index returned over 58% in 2009 after falling 26% in 2008. The Barclays Capital U.S. Treasury Index returned 13.7% in 2008, but declined 3.6% in 2009.

Stock investors also became less pessimistic in 2009. While the stock market indices are still far from the record levels reached in 2007, investors were rewarded in 2009 as stocks returned 26.5% as measured by the Standard & Poor’s 500 Index, its best return since 2003. Foreign stocks, as measured by the MSCI EAFE Index, returned 31.8% during 2009.

On the following pages, you will find a complete review of your Portfolio and its investment performance.

MetLife is committed to building your financial freedom. We appreciate your trust and will continue to focus our efforts on meeting your investment needs.

Sincerely,

Elizabeth M. Forget

President

Met Investors Series Trust

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

American Funds Growth Allocation Portfolio

Managed by MetLife Advisers, LLC

Portfolio Manager Commentary*

Performance

For the year ended December 31, 2009, the American Funds Growth Allocation Portfolio had a return of 34.36% and 34.04% for Class B and C Shares, respectively, versus 31.31% for its benchmark the Dow Jones Moderately Aggressive Index¹.

Market Environment/Conditions

After contracting sharply in the last half of 2008 and the first half of 2009, the Gross Domestic Product expanded at an annualized rate of 3.9% over the last six months of 2009 as companies began to replenish their inventories. Even with this strong second half, the U.S. economy still shrank 2.4% during 2009, its worst performance since 1946. Some economic indicators (the Consumer Confidence Index and the Purchasing Managers Index for example) showed improvement over the course of the year, but two important economic statistics have remained sluggish: the Unemployment Rate topped 10% in October and the percentage of mortgages that are more than 90 days delinquent exceeded 24% at the end of December, compared to 16% a year ago, and 8% two years ago. To combat this economic crisis the, US government applied a two-pronged approach: the Federal Reserve kept the fed funds target rate in the 0.00% to 0.25% range (monetary policy) and the government continued their stimulus spending (fiscal policy).

The Barclays Capital U.S. Aggregate Bond Index returned 5.9% during 2009. Overall, the yield curve shifted slightly higher and steepened during 2009 as the yield on the 5-Year Treasury Bond rose 1.1% from 1.6% to 2.7% and the yield on the 30-Yr Treasury Bond rose 2.0% from 2.6% to 4.6%. More importantly though was the significant tightening of the yield spread between “safe” treasury securities and “risky” corporate and other credit based securities. In this environment, corporate and other spread sector bonds significantly outperformed treasury securities. This produced an enormous recovery in below investment grade bonds: the Barclays Capital US Corporate High Yield Index returned over 58% in 2009 after falling 26% in 2008.

Stocks returned 26.5% in 2009 as measured by the Standard & Poor’s 500 Index, its best calendar year return since 2003. Growth style stocks generally did better than value style stocks across all capitalization ranges. Information Technology, Materials, and Consumer Discretionary were the best performing sectors for the full year, while Energy, Telecom, and Utilities lagged. However, performance within the Financial Services sector was especially notable for its dramatic rebound: after falling more than 50% early in the year, it was up over 140% from the post crisis low in early March to the end of the year for a full year return of 17.2%. Foreign stocks, as measured by the MSCI EAFE Index returned 31.8% during 2009.

Portfolio Review/Current Positioning

The American Funds Growth Allocation Portfolio is structured to be broadly diversified across and within a wide variety of fixed income and equity asset classes to add value and control risk over the long term. The Portfolio strives to achieve its objectives through investment in the various funds of the American Funds Insurance Series (AFIS). Although the Portfolio’s broad asset allocation goal of 15% to fixed income and 85% to equities did not change, there were several very modest changes to the narrower asset class goals during the course of the year. This included the elimination of a formal goal for cash—although we still expect the Portfolio will hold some residual cash from the underlying portfolios—and a slight increase in the goal for foreign equities. To achieve these new asset class goals and to improve the overall diversification of the Portfolio, several adjustments to the underlying portfolio targets were made as part of the May 1, 2009 restructuring.

In contrast to 2008 when risk was shunned, investors were rewarded for taking on risk during 2009: stocks generally outperformed bonds, while bond issues with lower credit quality ratings outperformed bonds with higher credit quality ratings, growth stocks outperformed value stocks, foreign stocks outperformed domestic stocks, and emerging market country stocks outperformed developed country stocks. Although only 15% of the Portfolio was allocated to fixed income, it also contributed to the relative performance. Within its fixed income segment, the Portfolio held a higher overall percentage in “spread” products (including investment grade corporate bonds, mortgage backed securities, and high yield securities) than was held in a broad bond market index, such as the Barclays Capital Aggregate Index.

Even with a significant holding of cash (ranging from 5% to 10%) in the underlying equity portfolios for most of the year, the underlying equity portfolios had strong performance and contributed to both relative and absolute performance. A modest overall tilt to growth style stocks and a slight overweight to foreign securities relative to its target also helped the Portfolio’s relative performance. Within foreign equities, the Portfolio’s exposure to small cap foreign stocks and emerging market stocks through the AFIS Global Small Capitalization Fund and the AFIS New World Fund was a key contributor as these segments both significantly outperformed the return of large foreign stocks from developed counties as represented by the MSCI EAFE Index. The AFIS Growth Fund’s good performance for the year was driven by both good sector weightings and solid stock selection. Within the Energy sector, it underweighted the sluggish energy giant Exxon Mobil and held Canadian oil producer Pacific Rubiales Corp., which rose over 500% during the year. The AFIS Growth—Income Fund also had strong performance due primarily to advantageous sector weightings: overweighting the strong Consumer Discretionary and Information Technology sectors and the relatively weak Consumer Staples and Financial Services sectors.

While high yield bond exposure was slightly below its stated target allocation of 2%, the Portfolio’s overall exposure to credit based bonds (also including investment grade corporate bonds) helped relative performance. Among the fixed income underlying portfolios, the 2009 returns were directly related to the level of credit exposure: the higher the credit exposure and less held in the safety of U.S. Treasury Securities, the better the performance. AFIS High-Income Bond Fund

1

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

American Funds Growth Allocation Portfolio

Managed by MetLife Advisers, LLC

Portfolio Manager Commentary* (continued)

was the best absolute performer among the underlying bond portfolios, while the AFIS U.S. Government/AAA Rated Securities Fund posted a nearly flat return in response to the rise in treasury yields.

Investment Committee

MetLife Advisers, LLC

*This commentary may include statements that constitute “forward-looking statements” under the U.S. securities laws. Forward-looking statements include, among other things, projections, estimates, and information about possible or future results related to the Portfolio, market or regulatory developments. The views expressed above are not guarantees of future performance or economic results and involve certain risks, uncertainties and assumptions that could cause actual outcomes and results to differ materially from the views expressed herein. The views expressed above are subject to change at any time based upon economic, market, or other conditions and the advisory firm undertakes no obligation to update the views expressed herein. Any discussions of specific securities should not be considered a recommendation to buy or sell those securities. The views expressed above (including any forward-looking statement) may not be relied upon as investment advice or as an indication of the Portfolio’s trading intent. Information about the Portfolio’s holdings, asset allocation or country diversification is historical and is not an indication of future Portfolio composition, which may vary. Direct investment in any index is not possible. The performance of any index mentioned in this commentary has not been adjusted for ongoing management, distribution and operating expenses, and sales charges applicable to mutual fund investments. In addition, the returns do not reflect additional fees charged by separate accounts or variable insurance contracts that an investor in the Portfolio may pay. If these additional fees were reflected, performance would have been lower.

Portfolio Composition as of December 31, 2009

Top Holdings

	Percent of Net Assets
American Funds Growth-Income Fund (Class 1)	45.4%
American Funds Growth Fund (Class 1)	30.4%
American Funds International Fund (Class 1)	6.9%
American Funds U.S. Government/AAA - Rated Securities Fund (Class 1)	4.6%
American Funds New World Fund (Class 1)	4.0%
American Funds Global Small Capitalization Fund (Class 1)	4.0%
American Funds High-Income Bond Fund (Class 1)	2.0%
American Funds Bond Fund (Class 1)	1.9%
American Funds Global Bond Fund (Class 1)	0.9%

2

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

American Funds Growth Allocation Portfolio

American Funds Growth Allocation Portfolio managed by MetLife Advisers, LLC vs. Dow Jones Moderately Aggressive Index¹

	Average Annual Return (for the year ended 12/31/09)2
	1 Year	Since Inception3
American Funds Growth Allocation Portfolio—Class B	34.36%	-8.13%
Class C	34.04%	-8.54%
Dow Jones Moderately Aggressive Index1	31.31%	-5.95%

The performance of Class B shares will differ from that of the other class because of the difference in expenses paid by policyholders investing in the different share classes.

¹ The Dow Jones Moderately Aggressive Index is a benchmark designed for asset allocation strategists who are willing to take 80% of the risk of the global securities market. It is a total returns index that is a time-varying weighted average of stocks, bonds, and cash using a combination of various indices (both domestic and foreign) from Barclays and Dow Jones.

²“Average Annual Return” is calculated including reinvestment of all income dividends and capital gain distributions.

³Inception of the Class B and Class C shares is 4/28/08. Index returns are based on an inception date of 4/28/08.

Past performance does not guarantee future results. The investment return and principal value of an investment in the Portfolio will fluctuate, so that shares, on any given day or when redeemed, may be worth more or less than their original cost. Performance numbers are net of all Portfolio expenses but do not include any insurance, sales, or administration charges of variable annuity or life insurance contracts. If these charges were included, the returns would be lower. The Indexes do not include fees or expenses and are not available for direct investment.

3

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

American Funds Growth Allocation Portfolio

Understanding Your Portfolio’s Expenses

Shareholder Expense Example

As a shareholder of the Portfolio, you incur ongoing costs, including management fees; distribution and service (12b-1) fees; and other Portfolio expenses. This example is intended to help you understand your ongoing costs (in dollars) (referred to as “expenses”) of investing in the Portfolio and compare these costs with the ongoing costs of investing in other mutual funds. The example is based on an investment of $1,000 invested at the beginning of the period and held for the entire period, July 1, 2009 through December 31, 2009.

Actual Expenses

The first line for each share class of the Portfolio in the table below provides information about actual account values and actual expenses. You may use the information in this line, together with the amount you invested in the particular share class of the Portfolio, to estimate the expenses that you paid over the period. Simply divide your account value by $1,000 (for example, an $8,600 account value divided by $1,000 = 8.6), then multiply the result by the number in the first line under the heading entitled “Expenses Paid During Period” to estimate the expenses you paid on your account during this period.

Hypothetical Example for Comparison Purposes

The second line for each share class of the Portfolio in the table below provides information about hypothetical account values and hypothetical expenses based on the Portfolio’s actual expense ratio and an assumed rate of return of 5% per year before expenses, which is not the Portfolio’s actual return. The hypothetical account values and expenses may not be used to estimate the actual ending account balance or expenses you paid for the period. You may use this information to compare the ongoing costs of investing in the Portfolio and other funds. To do so, compare this 5% hypothetical example with the 5% hypothetical examples that appear in the shareholder reports of the other funds.

Please note that the expenses shown in the table are meant to highlight your ongoing costs only and do not reflect any fees or charges of your variable insurance product or any additional expenses that participants in certain eligible qualified plans may bear relating to the operations of their plan. Therefore, the second line for each share class in the table is useful in comparing ongoing costs only, and will not help you determine the relative total costs of owning different funds. In addition, if these other costs were included, your costs would have been higher.

	Annualized Expense Ratio	Beginning Account Value 7/1/09		Ending Account Value 12/31/09		Expenses Paid During Period* 7/1/09-12/31/09
Class B(a)(b)
Actual	0.73%	$	1,000.00	$	1,212.00	$	4.07
Hypothetical	0.73%		1,000.00		1,021.53		3.72
Class C(a)(b)
Actual	1.03%	$	1,000.00	$	1,210.30	$	5.74
Hypothetical	1.03%		1,000.00		1,020.01		5.24

* Expenses paid are equal to the Portfolio’s annualized expense ratio for the most recent six month period, as shown above, multiplied by the average account value over the period, multiplied by the number of days (184 days) in the most recent fiscal half-year, divided by 365 (to reflect the one-half year period).

(a) The annualized expense ratio shown reflects an expense limitation agreement between MetLife Advisers, LLC and the Portfolio as described in Note 3 of the Notes to Financial Statements.

(b) The annualized expense ratio reflects the expenses of both the Portfolio and the Underlying Portfolios in which it invests.

4

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

American Funds Growth Allocation Portfolio

PORTFOLIO OF INVESTMENTS

December 31, 2009

(Percentage of Net Assets)

Security Description	Shares	Value
Investment Company Securities - 100.1%
American Funds Bond Fund (Class 1)(a)	3,515,260	$	36,312,630
American Funds Global Bond Fund (Class 1)(a)	1,551,362		17,949,263
American Funds Global Small Capitalization Fund (Class 1)(a)	4,323,022		77,814,401
American Funds Growth Fund (Class 1)(a)	12,710,394		590,397,813
American Funds Growth-Income Fund (Class 1)(a)	28,074,879		880,708,962
American Funds High-Income Bond Fund (Class 1)(a)	3,581,746		37,572,514
American Funds International Fund (Class 1)(a)	7,796,647		133,868,430
American Funds New World Fund (Class 1)(a)	3,885,374		77,862,887
American Funds U.S. Government/AAA - Rated Securities Fund (Class 1)(a)	7,383,993		89,937,034
Total Investment Company Securities (Cost $1,702,497,826)			1,942,423,934
Total Investments - 100.1% (Cost $1,702,497,826)			1,942,423,934
Other Assets And Liabilities (net) - (0.1)%			(1,056,537	)
Net Assets - 100.0%		$	1,941,367,397

(a) A Portfolio of the American Funds Insurance Series.

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

5

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

American Funds Growth Allocation Portfolio

Various inputs are used in determining the value of the Portfolio’s investments, which are as follows:

Level 1—unadjusted quoted prices in active markets for identical investments

Level 2—other significant observable inputs (including, but not limited to: quoted prices for similar investments in markets that are both active or inactive; inputs other than quoted prices that are observable such as interest rates, yield curves, credit risks, default rates, etc.)

Level 3—significant unobservable inputs based on the best information available in the circumstances, to the extent observable inputs are unavailable (including the Portfolio’s own assumptions in determining the fair value of investments)

The inputs or methodology used for valuing investments are not necessarily an indication of the risk associated with investing in them. For information about the Portfolio’s policy regarding valuation of investments and other significant accounting policies, please refer to Note 2 of the Notes to Financial Statements.

The following table summarizes the inputs used in determining the value the Portfolio’s investments as of December 31, 2009:

ASSETS VALUATION INPUTS

Description	Level 1		Level 2		Level 3		Total
Investment Company Securities	$	1,942,423,934	$	—	$	—	$	1,942,423,934
TOTAL INVESTMENTS	$	1,942,423,934	$	—	$	—	$	1,942,423,934

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

6

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

American Funds Growth Allocation Portfolio

Statement of Assets and Liabilities

December 31, 2009

Assets
Investments at value (a)	$	1,942,423,934
Receivable for shares sold		624,029
Total assets		1,943,047,963
Liabilities
Payables for:
Due to Manager		27,317
Investments purchased		69,658
Shares redeemed		554,371
Accrued Expenses:
Management fees		113,118
Distribution and service fees - Class B		502
Distribution and service fees - Class C		892,853
Administration fees		2,000
Custodian and accounting fees		2,067
Deferred trustees’ fees		7,518
Other expenses		11,162
Total liabilities		1,680,566
Net Assets	$	1,941,367,397
Net Assets Represented by
Paid in surplus	$	1,740,878,673
Accumulated net realized loss		(57,895,019	)
Unrealized appreciation on investments		239,926,108
Undistributed net investment income		18,457,635
Net Assets	$	1,941,367,397
Net Assets
Class B	$	2,448,195
Class C		1,938,919,202
Capital Shares Outstanding
Class B		295,359
Class C		235,533,748
Net Asset Value, Offering Price and Redemption Price Per Share
Class B	$	8.29
Class C		8.23

(a) Identified cost of investments was $1,702,497,826.

Statement of Operations

For the Year Ended December 31, 2009

Investment Income
Dividends from Underlying Portfolios	$	27,212,623
Total investment income		27,212,623
Expenses
Management fees		1,341,052
Administration fees		23,985
Custodian and accounting fees		25,301
Distribution and service fees - Class B		3,734
Distribution and service fees - Class C		7,800,607
Audit and tax services		17,179
Legal		44,299
Trustees’ fees and expenses		21,139
Shareholder reporting		28,134
Insurance		14,917
Miscellaneous		4,495
Total expenses		9,324,842
Less expenses reimbursed by the Manager		(100,715	)
Net expenses		9,224,127
Net investment income		17,988,496
Net Realized and Unrealized Gain (Loss) on Investments
Net realized gain (loss) on:
Investments		(56,412,457	)
Capital gain distributions from Underlying Portfolios		1,155,903
Net realized loss on investments and capital gain distributions from Underlying Portfolios		(55,256,554	)
Net change in unrealized appreciation on investments		508,109,374
Net realized and unrealized gain on investments		452,852,820
Net Increase in Net Assets from Operations	$	470,841,316

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

7

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

American Funds Growth Allocation Portfolio

Statements of Changes in Net Assets

	Year Ended December 31, 2009			Period Ended December 31, 2008*
Increase (Decrease) in Net Assets:
Operations
Net investment income	$	17,988,496		$	14,384,955
Net realized gain (loss) on investments and capital gains distributions from Underlying Portfolios		(55,256,554	)		17,168,255
Net change in unrealized appreciation (depreciation) on investments		508,109,374			(268,183,266	)
Net increase (decrease) in net assets resulting from operations		470,841,316			(236,630,056	)
Distributions to Shareholders
From net investment income
Class B		(0	)+		(32,458	)
Class C		(186	)		(33,936,756	)
From net realized gains
Class B		—			(14	)
Class C		—			(14,346	)
Net decrease in net assets resulting from distributions		(186	)		(33,983,574	)
Capital Share Transactions
Proceeds from shares sold
Class B		1,315,145			1,813,006
Class C		852,306,777			1,049,580,597
Net asset value of shares issued through dividend reinvestment
Class B		0	+		32,472
Class C		186			33,951,102
Cost of shares repurchased
Class B		(100,706	)		(849,852	)
Class C		(169,242,965	)		(27,665,865	)
Net increase in net assets from capital share transactions		684,278,437			1,056,861,460
Net Increase in Net Assets		1,155,119,567			786,247,830
Net assets at beginning of period		786,247,830			—
Net assets at end of period	$	1,941,367,397		$	786,247,830
Undistributed net investment income at end of period	$	18,457,635		$	52

* For the period 4/28/08 (Commencement of operations) through 12/31/08.

+ Rounds to less than $0.50.

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

8

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

American Funds Growth Allocation Portfolio

Financial Highlights

Selected Per Share Data for the Years or Period Ended:
	Class B
	For the Years Ended December 31,
	2009			2008(b)
Net Asset Value, Beginning of Period	$	6.17		$	10.00
Income (Loss) from Investment Operations:
Net investment income(a)		0.13			0.14
Net realized/unrealized gain (loss) on investments		1.99			(3.69	)
Total from investment operations		2.12			(3.55	)
Less Distributions
Dividends from net investment income		(0.00	)+		(0.28	)
Distributions from net realized capital gains		—			(0.00	)+
Total distributions		(0.00	)+		(0.28	)
Net Asset Value, End of Period	$	8.29		$	6.17
Total Return		34.36	%		(35.45	)%
Ratio of expenses to average net assets after reimbursement(c)		0.35	%		0.35	%*
Ratio of expenses to average net assets before reimbursement and rebates(d)		0.36	%		0.65	%*
Ratio of net investment income to average net assets(e)		1.81	%		2.37	%*
Portfolio turnover rate		7.4	%		4.6	%
Net assets, end of period (in millions)	$	2.4		$	0.7
	Class C
	For the Years Ended December 31,
	2009			2008(b)
Net Asset Value, Beginning of Period	$	6.14		$	10.00
Income (Loss) from Investment Operations:
Net investment income(a)		0.09			0.23
Net realized/unrealized gain (loss) on investments		2.00			(3.81	)
Total from investment operations		2.09			(3.58	)
Less Distributions
Dividends from net investment income		(0.00	)+		(0.28	)
Distributions from net realized capital gains		—			(0.00	)+
Total distributions		(0.00	)+		(0.28	)
Net Asset Value, End of Period	$	8.23		$	6.14
Total Return		34.04	%		(35.78	)%
Ratio of expenses to average net assets after reimbursement(c)		0.65	%		0.65	%*
Ratio of expenses to average net assets before reimbursement and rebates(d)		0.66	%		0.70	%*
Ratio of net investment income to average net assets(e)		1.27	%		4.65	%*
Portfolio turnover rate		7.4	%		4.6	%
Net assets, end of period (in millions)	$	1,938.9		$	785.5

* Annualized

+ Rounds to less than $0.005 per share.

(a) Per share amounts based on average shares outstanding during the period.

(b) Commencement of operations—04/28/2008.

(c) The ratio of operating expenses to average net assets does not include expenses of the Underlying Portfolios in which the Portfolio invests.

(d) See Note 3 of the Notes to Financial Statements.

(e) Recognition of net investment income by the Portfolio is affected by the timing of the declaration of dividends by the Underlying Portfolios in which it invests.

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

9

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

American Funds Growth Allocation Portfolio

Notes to Financial Statements—December 31, 2009

1. Organization

Met Investors Series Trust (the “Trust”) is registered as an open-end management investment company under the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended (the “1940 Act”). The Trust currently offers forty-eight Portfolios (the “Portfolios”), each of which operates as a distinct investment vehicle of the Trust. The portfolio included in this report is American Funds Growth Allocation Portfolio (the “Portfolio”), which is non-diversified. Shares in the Trust are not offered directly to the general public and are currently available only to separate accounts established by certain affiliated life insurance companies.

The Trust is managed by MetLife Advisers, LLC (the “Manager”), an affiliate of MetLife, Inc.

The Trust has registered four classes of shares: Class A, B, C and E Shares. Class B and C Shares are currently offered by the Portfolio. Shares of each Class of the Portfolio represent an equal pro rata interest in the Portfolio and generally give the shareholder the same voting, dividend, liquidation, and other rights. Investment income, realized and unrealized capital gains and losses, the common expenses of the Portfolio and certain Portfolio-level expense reductions, if any, are allocated on a pro rata basis to each Class based on the relative net assets of each Class to the net assets of the Portfolio. Each Class of shares differs in its respective distribution expenses.

The Portfolio is designed on established principles of asset allocation and risk tolerance. The Portfolio will invest substantially all of its assets in certain funds of the American Funds Insurance Series (“AFIS”), which invest either in equity securities or fixed income securities, as applicable (“Underlying Portfolios”). AFIS is an open-end diversified investment management company advised by Capital Research and Management Company (“CRMC”), an indirect, wholly owned subsidiary of The Capital Group Companies, Inc.

2. Significant Accounting Policies

The financial statements have been prepared in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (“GAAP”) which require management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of income and expenses during the reporting period. Actual results could differ from these estimates.

The following is a summary of significant accounting policies consistently followed by the Trust in the preparation of its financial statements.

Valuation - Investments in the Underlying Portfolios are valued at their closing daily net asset value. The net asset value of the Portfolio is calculated based on the net asset values of the Underlying Portfolios in which the Portfolio invests. For information about the use of fair value pricing by the Underlying Portfolios that are funds of AFIS, please refer to the prospectus of the Underlying Portfolios.

Security Transactions - Security transactions are recorded on a trade date basis. Realized gains and losses on investments and unrealized appreciation and depreciation are determined on the identified cost basis, which is the same basis used for federal income tax purposes.

Investment Income and Expenses - Interest income is recorded on an accrual basis. Discounts and premiums on securities purchased are amortized over the lives of the respective securities. Income and capital gain distributions from the Underlying Portfolios are recorded on the ex-dividend date.

Income Taxes - It is the Portfolio’s policy to comply with the requirements of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”), and regulations thereunder, applicable to regulated investment companies and to distribute, with respect to each taxable year, all of its taxable income to shareholders. Therefore, no federal income tax provision is required. The Portfolio files U.S. Federal and various state tax returns. No income tax returns are currently under examination. The Portfolio’s federal tax returns for the prior three fiscal years remain subject to examination by the Internal Revenue Service.

Dividends and Distributions to Shareholders - The Portfolio records dividends and distributions on the ex-dividend date. Net realized gains from security transactions (if any) are generally distributed annually to shareholders. The timing and characterization of certain income and capital gains distributions are determined in accordance with federal tax regulations that may differ from GAAP. Permanent book and tax basis differences relating to shareholder distributions will result in reclassification between under/over distributed net investment income, accumulated net realized gains/losses and paid in surplus. Book-tax differences are primarily due to futures transactions, foreign currency transactions, certain foreign withholding taxes, passive foreign investment companies (PFIC), partnerships, deferred trustees compensation, capital loss carryforwards and losses deferred due to wash sales, as applicable. These adjustments have no impact on net assets or the results of operations.

3. Investment Management Agreement and Other Transactions with Affiliates

Investment Management Agreement - The Trust has entered into a management agreement (the “Management Agreement”) with the Manager for investment management services in connection with the investment management of the Portfolio. The Manager is subject to the supervision and direction of the Board of Trustees (the “Board”) and has overall responsibility for the general management and administration of the Trust.

10

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

American Funds Growth Allocation Portfolio

Notes to Financial Statements—December 31, 2009—(Continued)

3. Investment Management Agreement and Other Transactions with Affiliates - continued

Under the terms of the Portfolio’s Management Agreement, the Portfolio pays the Manager a monthly fee based upon annual rates applied to the Portfolio’s average daily net assets as follows:

Management Fees earned by the Manager for the period ended December 31, 2009	% per annum		Average Daily Net Assets
$1,341,052	0.100	%	First $500 Million
	0.075	%	$500 Million to $1 Billion
	0.050	%	Over $1 Billion

Prior to November 12, 2009, the management fee for the Portfolio was 10 basis points. The management fee earned for the period January 1, 2009 through November 11, 2009 was $1,159,578.

Transfer Agency Agreement - Metropolitan Life Insurance Company (“MLIC”) serves as the transfer agent for the Trust. MLIC is an affiliate of the Manager. MLIC receives no fees for its services to the Trust under the transfer agency agreement.

Expense Limitation Agreement - The Manager has entered into an expense limitation agreement with the Trust (“Expense Limitation Agreement”) in the interest of limiting expenses of the Portfolio. The Expense Limitation Agreement shall continue in effect with respect to the Portfolio until April 30, 2010. Pursuant to that Expense Limitation Agreement, the Manager has agreed to waive or limit its fees and to assume other expenses so that the total annual operating expenses of the Portfolio other than interest, taxes, brokerage commissions, other expenditures which are capitalized in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America, other extraordinary expenses not incurred in the ordinary course of the Portfolio’s business, and Underlying Portfolios’ fees and expenses, but including amounts payable pursuant to a plan adopted in accordance with Rule 12b-1 under the 1940 Act, are limited to the following expense ratios as a percentage of the Portfolio’s average daily net assets:

Maximum Expense Ratio under current       Expense Limitation Agreement			Expenses Deferred in
			2008		2009
			Subject to repayment until December 31,
Class B	Class C		2013		2014
0.35%	0.65	%	$	145,377	$	100,715

The expenses reimbursed for the year ended December 31, 2009 are shown as expenses reimbursed in the Statement of Operations of the Portfolio.

If in any year in which the Management Agreement is still in effect, the estimated aggregate portfolio operating expenses of the Portfolio for the fiscal year are less than the Maximum Expense Ratios for that year, subject to approval by the Trust’s Board, the Manager shall be entitled to reimbursement by the Portfolio to the extent that the charge does not cause the expenses in such subsequent year to exceed the Maximum Expense Ratios as stated above. The Portfolio is not obligated to repay any expense paid by the Manager more than five years after the end of the fiscal year in which such expense was incurred.

Distribution Agreements and Plans - The Trust has distribution agreements with MetLife Investors Distribution Company (“MIDC” or the “Distributor”) in which MIDC serves as the Distributor for the Trust’s Class B and Class C Shares. MIDC is a wholly-owned subsidiary of MetLife Investors Group, Inc., an affiliate of the Manager. The Class B and Class C distribution plans provide that the Trust, on behalf of the Portfolio, may pay annually up to 0.50% and 1.00% respectively, of the average net assets of the Portfolio attributable to its Class B and Class C Shares in respect to activities primarily intended to result in the sale of Class B and Class C Shares. However, under the Class B and Class C distribution agreements, payments to the Distributor for activities pursuant to the Class B and Class C distribution plans are currently limited to payments at an annual rate equal to 0.25% and 0.55% of average daily net assets of the Portfolio, attributable to its Class B and Class C Shares, respectively.

Under the terms of the Class B and Class C distribution plans and distribution agreements, the Portfolio is authorized to make payments monthly to the Distributor that may be used to pay or reimburse entities providing distribution and shareholder servicing with respect to the Class B and Class C Shares for such entities’ fees or expenses incurred.

Deferred Trustee Compensation - Each Trustee of the Trust who is not currently an employee of the Manager or any of its affiliates receives compensation from the Trust for his or her service to the Portfolio. A deferred compensation plan (the “Plan”) is available to the Trustees on a

11

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

American Funds Growth Allocation Portfolio

Notes to Financial Statements—December 31, 2009—(Continued)

3. Investment Management Agreement and Other Transactions with Affiliates - continued

voluntary basis. Deferred amounts remain in the Trust until distributed in accordance with the provisions of the Plan. The value of a participating Trustee’s deferral account is based on theoretical investments of deferred amounts, on the normal payment dates, in certain portfolios of the Trust or Metropolitan Series Fund, Inc. as designated by the participating Trustee. Changes in the value of participants’ deferral accounts are reflected as Trustees’ fees and expenses in the Statement of Operations. The portion of the accrued obligations allocated to the Portfolio, if any, under the Plan are reflected as Deferred Trustees’ fees in the Statement of Assets and Liabilities.

4. Shares of Beneficial Interest

Transactions in shares of beneficial interest for the periods ended noted below were as follows:

	Beginning Shares	Sales	Reinvestments		Redemptions		Net Increase in Shares Outstanding	Ending Shares
Class B
12/31/2009	120,688	188,614	0	+	(13,943	)	174,671	295,359
04/28/2008-12/31/2008	—	214,278	5,315		(98,905	)	120,688	120,688
Class C
12/31/2009	127,868,366	130,818,998	30		(23,153,646	)	107,665,382	235,533,748
04/28/2008-12/31/2008	—	125,821,911	5,574,894		(3,528,439	)	127,868,366	127,868,366

+ Rounds to less than 0.50 share.

The Portfolio is authorized to issue an unlimited number of shares.

5. Investment Transactions

Aggregate cost of purchases and proceeds of sales of investment securities, excluding short-term securities, for the period ended December 31, 2009 were as follows:

Purchases			Sales
U.S. Government	Non-Government		U.S. Government		Non-Government
$—	$	808,864,428	$	—	$	104,852,115

At December 31, 2009, the cost of securities for federal income tax purposes and the unrealized appreciation (depreciation) of investments for federal income tax purposes for the Portfolio were as follows:

Federal Income Tax Cost	Gross Unrealized Appreciation		Gross Unrealized Depreciation			Net Unrealized Appreciation
$1,758,293,490	$	239,926,107	$	(55,795,663	)	$	184,130,444

6. Contractual Obligations

The Trust has a variety of indemnification obligations under contracts with its service providers. The Trust’s maximum exposure under these arrangements is unknown. However, the Trust has not had prior claims or losses pursuant to these contracts and expects the risk of loss to be remote.

7. Market, Credit and Counterparty Risk

In the normal course of business, the Underlying Portfolios in which the Portfolio invests its assets invest in securities and enter into transactions where risks exist due to fluctuations in the market (market risk) or failure of the other party to a transaction to perform (credit risk). The value of securities held by the Underlying Portfolios may decline in response to certain events, including those directly involving the companies whose securities are owned by the Underlying Portfolios; conditions affecting the general economy; overall market changes; local, regional or global

12

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

American Funds Growth Allocation Portfolio

Notes to Financial Statements—December 31, 2009—(Continued)

7. Market, Credit and Counterparty Risk - continued

political, social or economic instability; and currency and interest rate and price fluctuations. The Underlying Portfolios may be exposed to counterparty risk, or the risk that an entity with which the Underlying Portfolios have unsettled or open transactions may default. The potential loss could exceed the value of the financial assets recorded in the financial statements. Financial assets, which potentially expose the Underlying Portfolios to credit risk, consist principally of cash due from counterparties and investments. The Underlying Portfolios restrict their exposure to credit losses by entering into master agreements with counterparties (approved brokers) with whom it undertakes a significant volume of transactions to include certain safeguards for derivatives and non-standard settlement trades. The credit risk associated with favorable contracts is reduced by a master netting arrangement to the extent that if an event of default occurs, all amounts with the counterparty are terminated and settled on a net basis. The Underlying Portfolios’ overall exposure to credit risk on derivative instruments subject to master netting arrangements can change substantially within a short period, as it is affected by each transaction subject to the arrangement.

8. Transactions in Securities of Affiliated Issuers

The Asset Allocation Portfolio does not invest in the Underlying Portfolios for the purpose of exercising management or control; however, investments by the Asset Allocation Portfolio within its principal investment strategies may represent a significant portion of the Underlying Portfolio’s net assets. Transactions in the Underlying Portfolios during the year ended December 31, 2009 were as follows:

Underlying Portfolio	Number of shares held at December 31, 2008	Shares purchased during the period	Shares sold during the period		Number of shares held at December 31, 2009
American Funds Bond Fund (Class 1)	1,644,962	2,001,583	(131,285	)	3,515,260
American Funds Global Bond Fund (Class 1)*	772,120	865,687	(86,445	)	1,551,362
American Funds Global Small Capitalization Fund (Class 1)*	2,762,215	2,348,124	(787,317	)	4,323,022
American Funds Growth Fund (Class 1)*	7,492,965	6,432,289	(1,214,860	)	12,710,394
American Funds Growth-Income Fund (Class 1)*	14,170,572	14,515,064	(610,757	)	28,074,879
American Funds High-Income Bond Fund (Class 1)	1,838,535	1,907,451	(164,240	)	3,581,746
American Funds International Fund (Class 1)	4,114,756	4,477,720	(795,829	)	7,796,647
American Funds New World Fund (Class 1)*	2,401,415	1,971,764	(487,805	)	3,885,374
American Funds U.S. Government/AAA - Rated Securities Fund (Class 1)	3,223,095	4,479,584	(318,686	)	7,383,993

* The Portfolio had ownership of at least 25% of the outstanding voting securities of the Underlying Portfolio as of December 31, 2009. Once filed, the most recent Annual Report of the Underlying Portfolio will be available without charge, upon request, by calling (800) 848-3854 or on the Securities and Exchange Commission’s website at http://www.sec.gov.

Underlying Portfolio	Net Realized Gain (Loss) on Investments during the period			Net Realized Gain on Capital Gain Distributions from Affiliates during the period		Income earned from affiliate during the period		Ending Value
American Funds Bond Fund (Class 1)	$	(144,398	)	$	—	$	1,103,162	$	36,312,630
American Funds Global Bond Fund (Class 1)		(24,864	)		—		266,646		17,949,263
American Funds Global Small Capitalization Fund (Class 1)		(6,221,594	)		—		294,273		77,814,401
American Funds Growth Fund (Class 1)		(33,072,427	)		—		4,287,972		590,397,813
American Funds Growth-Income Fund (Class 1)		(7,400,405	)		—		13,458,993		880,708,962
American Funds High-Income Bond Fund (Class 1)		(226,860	)		—		2,394,062		37,572,514
American Funds International Fund (Class 1)		(5,788,889	)		566,583		1,971,845		133,868,430
American Funds New World Fund (Class 1)		(3,715,514	)		—		1,105,604		77,862,887
American Funds U.S. Government/AAA - Rated Securities Fund (Class 1)		182,494			120,047		2,799,339		89,937,034

13

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

American Funds Growth Allocation Portfolio

Notes to Financial Statements—December 31, 2009—(Continued)

9. Income Tax Information

The tax character of distributions paid for the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2008 were as follows:

Ordinary Income		Long-Term Capital Gains				Total
2009	2008	2009		2008		2009		2008
$186	$16,880,302	$	—	$	17,103,272	$	186	$	33,983,574

As of December 31, 2009, the components of distributable earnings (accumulated losses) on a federal income tax basis were as follows:

Undistributed Ordinary Income	Undistributed Long-Term Gain		Net Unrealized Appreciation		Loss Carryforwards			Total
$18,465,153	$	—	$	184,130,444	$	(2,099,355	)	$	200,496,242

The Portfolio utilizes the provisions of the federal income tax laws that provide for the carryforward of capital losses for eight years, offsetting such losses against any future net realized capital gains. At December 31, 2009, the accumulated capital loss carryforwards and expiration dates by the Portfolio were as follows:

Expiring 12/31/2017	Total
$2,099,355	$	2,099,355

10. Recent Accounting Pronouncement

On January 21, 2010, the Financial Accounting Standards Board issued Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) 2010-06, “Improving Disclosures About Fair Value Measurements.” The ASU amends Accounting Standards Codification 820 to add new requirements for disclosures about transfers into and out of Levels 1 and 2. It also clarifies existing fair value disclosures about the level of disaggregation and about inputs and valuation techniques used to measure fair value. Additionally, the ASU amends disclosures about providing purchases, sales, issuances, and settlements on a gross basis relating to Level 3 measurements. The ASU guidance is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2009, and for interim periods within those fiscal years, except for the requirement to provide the Level 3 activity of purchases, sales, issuances, and settlements on a gross basis, which will be effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2010, and for interim periods within those fiscal years. Management is currently evaluating the impact the adoption of ASU 2010-06 will have on the Portfolio’s financial statements.

11. Subsequent Events

Management’s evaluation of the impact of all subsequent events on the Portfolio’s financial statements was completed through February 25, 2010, the date the financial statements were issued, and management has determined that as of that date there were no subsequent events requiring adjustments or disclosure in the Portfolio’s financial statements.

14

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

American Funds Growth Allocation Portfolio

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

To the Shareholders and Board of Trustees of Met Investors Series Trust:

We have audited the accompanying statement of assets and liabilities, including the portfolio of investments, of the American Funds Growth Allocation Portfolio, one of the portfolios constituting Met Investors Series Trust (the “Trust”), as of December 31, 2009, and the related statement of operations for the year then ended, and the statements of changes in net assets and the financial highlights for the year ended December 31, 2009 and for the period from April 28, 2008 (commencement of operations) to December 31, 2008. These financial statements and financial highlights are the responsibility of the Trust’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements and financial highlights based on our audits.

We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements and financial highlights are free of material misstatement. The Trust is not required to have, nor were we engaged to perform, an audit of its internal control over financial reporting. Our audits included consideration of internal control over financial reporting as a basis for designing audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the Trust’s internal control over financial reporting. Accordingly, we express no such opinion. An audit also includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements, assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. Our procedures included confirmation of securities owned as of December 31, 2009, by correspondence with the transfer agent. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.

In our opinion, the financial statements and financial highlights referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of the American Funds Growth Allocation Portfolio of the Met Investors Series Trust as of December 31, 2009, the results of its operations for the year then ended, and the changes in its net assets and the financial highlights for the year ended December 31, 2009 and for the period from April 28, 2008 (commencement of operations) to December 31, 2008, in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.

Deloitte & Touche LLP

Boston, Massachusetts

February 25, 2010

15

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Trustees and Officers (Unaudited) December 31, 2009

The Trustees and executive officers of the Trust, their ages and their principal occupations during the past five years are set forth below. Unless otherwise indicated, the business address of each is 5 Park Plaza, Suite 1900 Irvine, California 92614. Each Trustee who is deemed an “interested person,” as such term is defined in the 1940 Act, is indicated by an asterisk. Those Trustees who are not “interested persons” as defined in the 1940 Act are referred to as “Independent Trustees.” Additional information about the Trustees is available in the Statement of Additional Information which is available without charge, upon request, by calling (800) 848-3854.

The Trustees
Name and Age	Position(s) Held with Registrant	Term of Office and Length of Time Served	Principal Occupation(s) During Past 5 Years	Number of Portfolios in Fund Complex+ overseen by Trustee	Other Directorships Held by Trustee
Interested Trustees
Elizabeth M. Forget* (43)	President and Trustee	Indefinite; From December 2000 to present	Since May 2007, Senior Vice President, MetLife, Inc.; since December 2000, President of MetLife Advisers, LLC and its predecessor; December 2003 to April 2007, Vice President, MetLife, Inc.	84	Director, Metropolitan Series Fund, Inc. since August 2006.
Independent Trustees
Stephen M. Alderman (50)	Trustee	Indefinite; From December 2000 to present	Since November 1991, Shareholder in the law firm of Garfield and Merel, Ltd.	48	None
Jack R. Borsting (80)	Trustee	Indefinite; From December 2000 to present	Since 2006, Professor and Dean Emeritus, Marshall School of Business, University of Southern California (USC); from 2001 to 2005, Professor of Business Administration and Dean Emeritus.	48	Director, Los Angeles Orthopedic Hospital, Trustee, The Rose Hills Foundation. Member, Army Science Board.
Robert Boulware (53)	Trustee	Indefinite; From March 2008 to present	From 2004 to 2009, Director of Norwood Promotional Products, Inc.; from 2007 to 2008, Director of Wealthpoint Advisors (a business development company); from 2007 to 2009, Director of Holladay Bank; from 1992-2006, President and Chief Executive Officer of ING Fund Distributor, LLC.	48	Since 2005, Director of Gainsco, Inc. (auto insurance).
Daniel A. Doyle (51)	Trustee	Indefinite; From February 2007 to present	From October 2000 to June 2009, Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of ATC Management, Inc. (public utility); since June 2009, independent business consultant.	48	Director, Wisconsin Sports Development Corporation
Susan C. Gause (57)	Trustee	Indefinite; From March 2008 to present	From 2000 to December 2002, Chief Executive Officer of Allianz Dresdner Asset Management; since 2003, private investor.	48	None

16

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Trustees and Officers (Unaudited)—(Continued) December 31, 2009

Name and Age	Position(s) Held with Registrant	Term of Office and Length of Time Served	Principal Occupation(s) During Past 5 Years	Number of Portfolios in Fund Complex+ overseen by Trustee	Other Directorships Held by Trustee
Independent Trustees - continued
Dawn M. Vroegop (43)	Trustee	Indefinite; From December 2000 to present	From September 1999 to September 2003, Managing Director, Dresdner RCM Global Investors.	84	Director, Metropolitan Series Fund, Inc. since May 2009; from 2003 to present, Director and Finance Committee Chair, City College of San Francisco Foundation

The Executive Officers
Name and Age	Position(s) Held with Registrant	Term of Office and Length of Time Served	Principal Occupation(s) During Past 5 Years
Jeffrey L. Bernier (38)	Vice President	From February 2009 to present	Since December 2007, Vice President, Metropolitan Life Insurance Company; since 2008 Senior Vice President of MetLife Advisers, LLC and its predecessor; from July 2004 to December 2007, Director and Senior Investment Analyst of Investment Management Services for John Hancock Financial Services.
Jeffrey A. Tupper (39)	Chief Financial Officer, Treasurer	From August 2002 to present	Since February 2009, Vice President, MetLife Advisers, LLC. Since October 2006, Assistant Vice President, MetLife Group, Inc. Since February 2001, Assistant Vice President of MetLife Investors Insurance Company.
Richard C. Pearson (66)	Vice President and Secretary	From December 2000 to present	Since June 2001, President or Executive Vice President of MetLife Investors Distribution Company; since January 2001, Executive Vice President, General Counsel and Secretary of MetLife Investors Group, Inc. and Vice President, Secretary and Associate General Counsel of its affiliated life insurance companies; since November 2000, Senior Vice President and General Counsel of MetLife Advisers, LLC and its predecessor.
Jeffrey P. Halperin (42)	Chief Compliance Officer	From November 2006 to present	Since March 2006, Vice President, Corporate Ethics and Compliance Department, MetLife, Inc.; from October 2002 to March 2006, Assistant Vice President; from November 2005 to August 2006, Interim Chief Compliance Officer, Met Investors Series Trust; since April 2007, Chief Compliance Officer, Metropolitan Series Funds; from August 2006 to April 2007, Interim Chief Compliance Officer, Metropolitan Series Funds; since August 2006, Chief Compliance Officer, MetLife Advisers, LLC and its predecessor; since November 2006, Chief Compliance Officer, MetLife Investment Advisors Company, LLC.

+ The Fund Complex includes the Trust (48 portfolios) and Metropolitan Series Fund, Inc. (36 portfolios).

* Ms. Forget is an “interested person” of the Trust as a result of her affiliation with the Manager and the Distributor.

Quarterly Portfolio Schedule

The Trust files Form N-Q for the first and third quarters of each fiscal year. The Trust’s Forms N-Q will be available on the Securities and Exchange Commission’s website at http://www.sec.gov. The Trust’s Forms N-Q may be reviewed and copied at the Securities and Exchange Commission’s

17

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Trustees and Officers (Unaudited)—(Continued) December 31, 2009

Public Reference Room in Washington, D.C. and information on the operation of the Public Reference Room may be obtained by calling 1-800-SEC-0330. Once filed, the most recent Form N-Q will be available without charge, upon request, by calling (800) 848-3854.

Proxy Voting Policies and Procedures

A description of the policies and procedures that the Trust uses to determine how to vote proxies relating to portfolio securities is available without charge, upon request, by calling (800) 848-3854 and on the Securities and Exchange Commission’s website at http://www.sec.gov.

Proxy Voting Record

The Trust, on behalf of each of its Portfolios, has filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission its proxy voting record for the 12-month period ending June 30 on Form N-PX. Form N-PX must be filed by the Trust each year by August 31. Once filed, the most recent Form N-PX will be available without charge, upon request, by calling (800) 848-3854 or on the Securities and Exchange Commission’s website at http://www.sec.gov.

18

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

American Funds Growth Allocation Portfolio

Board of Trustees’ Consideration of Advisory Agreement

At an in-person meeting of the Board of Trustees (the “Board”) of the Met Investors Series Trust (the “Trust”) held on November 10-11, 2009, the Board, including a majority of the Trustees who are not considered to be “interested persons” of the Trust (the “Independent Trustees”) under the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended (the “1940 Act”), approved for an annual period the continuation of the Trust’s advisory agreement (the “Advisory Agreement”) with MetLife Advisers, LLC (the “Adviser”) and the applicable sub-advisory agreements (each a “Sub-Advisory Agreement”, and collectively with the Advisory Agreement, the “Agreements”) between the Adviser and the investment sub-advisers (each a “Sub-Adviser”, and collectively, the “Sub-Advisers”) for each of the series of the Trust, including the American Funds Growth Allocation Portfolio (each a “Portfolio,” and collectively, the “Portfolios”).¹ As the Adviser has the day to day responsibility for managing the American Funds Growth Allocation Portfolio’s investments, the Board only approved an Advisory Agreement with respect to the American Funds Growth Allocation Portfolio.

In considering the Agreements, the Board reviewed a variety of materials provided by the Adviser and the Sub-Advisers relating to each Portfolio, the Adviser and each Sub-Adviser, including comparative performance, fee and expense information for an appropriate peer group of similar mutual funds, performance information for relevant benchmark indices and other information regarding the nature, extent and quality of services provided by the Adviser and the Sub-Advisers under their respective Agreements. The Board also took into account information provided to the Board in its meetings throughout the year with respect to the services provided by the Adviser and the Sub-Advisers, including quarterly performance reports prepared by management containing reviews of investment results, and periodic presentations from the Sub-Advisers with respect to the Portfolios they manage. The Independent Trustees also assessed reports provided by independent consultants, who reviewed and provided analyses regarding investment performance, fees and expenses, profitability and other information provided by, or at the direction of, the Adviser and the Sub-Advisers, as more fully discussed below.

The Independent Trustees were separately advised by independent legal counsel throughout the process. Prior to voting, the Independent Trustees also received a memorandum from their independent counsel discussing the legal standards for their consideration of the proposed continuation of the Agreements. The Board met in person with personnel of the Adviser prior to the November meeting for the specific purpose of considering the proposed continuation of the Agreements. The Independent Trustees also discussed the proposed continuation of the Agreements in private sessions with their independent legal counsel at which no representatives of management were present.

In considering whether to approve the renewal of the Advisory Agreement with the Adviser and any applicable Sub-Advisory Agreements with respect to each Portfolio, the Board reviewed and analyzed the factors it deemed relevant, including: (1) the nature, extent and quality of the services to be provided to the Portfolios by the Adviser and the Sub-Advisers; (2) the performance of the Portfolios as compared to a peer group and an appropriate index; (3) the Adviser’s and each of the Sub-Adviser’s personnel and operations; (4) the financial condition of the Adviser and of the Sub-Advisers; (5) the level and method of computing each Portfolio’s advisory and sub-advisory fees; (6) the profitability of the Adviser under the Advisory Agreement and of the Sub-Advisers under the Sub-Advisory Agreements; (7) any “fall-out” benefits to the Adviser, the Sub-Advisers and their affiliates (i.e., ancillary benefits realized by the Adviser, the Sub-Advisers or their affiliates from the Adviser’s or Sub-Advisers’ relationship with the Trust); (8) the anticipated effect of growth in size on each Portfolio’s performance and expenses; (9) fees paid to the Sub-Advisers by comparable institutional and retail accounts; and (10) possible conflicts of interest. The Board also considered the nature, quality, and extent of the services to be provided to the Portfolios by the Adviser’s affiliates, including distribution services.

Nature, extent and quality of services. In considering the nature, extent and quality of the services to be provided by the Adviser to the Portfolios, the Board took into account the extensive responsibilities that the Adviser has as investment manager to the Portfolios, including the provision of investment advice to: (i) MetLife Aggressive Strategy Portfolio, MetLife Balanced Strategy Portfolio, MetLife Defensive Strategy Portfolio, MetLife Growth Strategy Portfolio, and MetLife Moderate Strategy Portfolio (together, the “Asset Allocation Portfolios”), (ii) American Funds Balanced Allocation Portfolio, American Funds Growth Allocation Portfolio, and American Funds Moderate Allocation Portfolio (together, the “American Funds of Funds”), and (iii) the Met/Franklin Templeton Founding Strategy Portfolio, the selection of the Sub-Advisers for the other Portfolios and oversight of the Sub-Advisers’ compliance with fund policies and objectives, review of brokerage matters including with respect to trade allocation and best execution, oversight of general fund compliance with federal and state laws, and the implementation of Board directives as they relate to the Portfolios. The Adviser’s role in coordinating the activities of the Portfolios’ other service providers was also considered. The Board also evaluated the expertise and performance of the investment personnel with respect to the Asset Allocation Portfolios, the American Funds of Funds and the Met/Franklin Templeton Founding Strategy Portfolio and of the personnel overseeing the Sub-Advisers of the other Portfolios, and compliance with each Portfolio’s investment restrictions, tax and other requirements. The Board considered information received from the Trust’s Chief Compliance Officer (“CCO”) regarding the Portfolios’ compliance policies and procedures established pursuant to Rule 38a-1 under the 1940 Act, including the policies and procedures in place relating to proxy voting. The Board also took into account its familiarity with management through Board meetings, discussions and reports during the preceding year.

The Board considered that an Investment Committee, consisting of investment professionals from across MetLife, meets at least quarterly to review the asset allocations and discuss the performance of the Asset Allocation Portfolios, the American Funds of Funds and the Met/Franklin Templeton Founding Strategy Portfolio.

¹ The Met/Templeton International Bond Portfolio recently commenced operations and, therefore, the Agreements with respect to this Portfolio were not up for renewal.

19

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

American Funds Growth Allocation Portfolio

Board of Trustees’ Consideration of Advisory Agreement—(Continued)

The Board also recognized the Adviser^’s reputation and long-standing experience in serving as an investment adviser to the Trust, and considered the benefit to shareholders of investing in funds that are part of a family of variable annuity portfolios offering a variety of investments. In addition, the Board reviewed the financial condition of the Adviser and whether it had the financial wherewithal to provide a high level and quality of services to the Portfolios. In its review, the Board also received and took into account information regarding any services and/or payments provided to the Adviser by the Sub-Advisers in connection with marketing activities.

With respect to the services provided by each of the Sub-Advisers, the Board considered information provided to the Board by each Sub-Adviser, including each Sub-Adviser’s Form ADV, as well as information presented throughout the past year. The Board considered the Sub-Adviser’s current level of staffing and its overall resources, as well as its compensation program. The Board reviewed each Sub-Adviser’s history and investment experience, as well as information regarding the qualifications, background and responsibilities of the Sub-Adviser’s investment and compliance personnel who provide services to the Portfolios. The Board also considered, among other things, the Sub-Adviser’s compliance program and any disciplinary history. The Board noted each Sub-Adviser’s regulatory history, including whether it was currently involved in any regulatory actions or investigations as well as material litigation, and any settlements and ameliatory actions undertaken, as appropriate. The Board also noted that the CCO and his staff conduct regular, periodic compliance reviews with each of the Sub-Advisers and present reports to the Independent Trustees regarding the same, which includes evaluating the regulatory compliance systems of the Sub-Advisers and procedures reasonably designed by them to assure compliance with the federal securities laws, including issues related to late trading and market timing, best execution, fair value pricing, and proxy voting procedures, among others. The Board also took into account the financial condition of each Sub-Adviser.

The Board considered each Sub-Adviser’s investment process and philosophy. The Board took into account that each Sub-Adviser’s responsibilities include the development and maintenance of an investment program for the applicable Portfolio which is consistent with the Portfolio’s investment objectives, the selection of investment securities and the placement of orders for the purchase and sale of such securities, as well as the implementation of compliance controls related to performance of these services. The Board also reviewed each Sub-Adviser’s brokerage policies and practices, including with respect to best execution and soft dollars.

Based on its consideration and review of the foregoing information, the Board concluded that the nature, extent and quality of services provided by the Adviser and by each Sub-Adviser were satisfactory and that there was a reasonable basis on which to conclude that each would provide a high quality of investment services to the Portfolios.

Performance. The Board considered the performance of the Portfolios as described in the quarterly reports prepared by management, and as also analyzed in reports prepared by the Independent Trustees’ independent consultant. The Board noted that the Adviser reviews with the Board on a quarterly basis detailed information about the Portfolios’ performance results, portfolio composition and investment strategies. The Board also reviewed and considered a separate report prepared by Lipper Inc. (“Lipper”), an independent third party, which provided a statistical analysis comparing the Portfolios’ investment performance, expenses, and fees to comparable funds underlying variable insurance products (the “Performance Universe”). In addition, the Independent Trustees met separately with a representative of Bobroff Consulting, Inc., an independent consultant (“Bobroff”), at a special board meeting in September 2009, to review the separate reports prepared by such consultant (“Bobroff Report”), which analyzed the report prepared by Lipper, as well as certain of the other factors to be considered by the Board including supplemental alpha and information coefficient analysis. The Board also considered each Portfolio’s more recent performance subsequent to the performance period covered by the Lipper reports, and management’s discussion of the same, including the effect of current market conditions on each Portfolio’s more recent performance.

The Board closely reviewed the Portfolios’ performance records and the Adviser’s and Sub-Advisers’ management styles and long-term performance records with the Portfolios and comparable funds. The Board focused particular attention on Portfolios with less favorable performance records. The Board was mindful of the Adviser’s focus on each Sub-Adviser’s performance and noted that the Adviser has been active in monitoring and responding to any performance issues with respect to the Portfolios. The Board also took into account its discussions with management regarding factors that contributed to the performance of each Portfolio.

Among other data relating specifically to the American Funds Growth Allocation Portfolio’s performance, the Board considered that the Portfolio outperformed both the median of its Performance Universe and its Lipper Index for the one-year and since-inception periods ended July 31, 2009. The Board further considered that the Portfolio underperformed its benchmark, the Dow Jones Moderately Aggressive Index, for the one-year period ended August 31, 2009. Based on its review and taking into account the limited performance history of the Portfolio, the Board concluded that the Portfolio’s performance was satisfactory.

Fees and Expenses. The Board gave substantial consideration to the advisory fees payable under the Advisory Agreement and the sub-advisory fees payable under each of the Sub-Advisory Agreements. In this regard, the Board reviewed the advisory fees payable in the aggregate as well as on a Portfolio-by-Portfolio basis based on information provided by the Adviser. The Independent Trustees, with the assistance of Bobroff, also examined the fees paid by each Portfolio in light of fees paid to other investment managers by comparable funds and the method of computing each Portfolio’s fee, as well as considered the fees charged by the Adviser to manage other comparable funds. The Lipper report included comparisons of the Adviser’s fee schedule with that of its peers based on an asset-based analysis of relative fee structures according to the size of each Portfolio. In addition, the Board considered the Portfolios’ advisory and sub-advisory fees and total expenses as compared to similarly

20

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

American Funds Growth Allocation Portfolio

Board of Trustees’ Consideration of Advisory Agreement—(Continued)

situated investment companies underlying variable insurance products deemed to be comparable to the Portfolios as determined by Lipper. The Board considered each Portfolio’s ranking within a smaller group of peer funds chosen by Lipper (the “Expense Group”), as well as the Portfolio’s ranking within broader groups of funds (the “Expense Universe” and the “Sub-advised Expense Universe”). The Board also considered each Portfolio’s contractual sub-advisory fees, as applicable, as compared to the Sub-advised Expense Universe as well as a smaller group of funds (the “Sub-advised Expense Group”). In comparing each Portfolio’s actual and contractual management fee to that of comparable funds, the Board noted that such fee includes both advisory and administrative fees.

The Board noted that the sub-advisory fees for the Portfolios are paid by the Adviser, not the Portfolios, out of the advisory fee. It was further noted that the Adviser negotiates such fees at arm’s length. The Board also considered that the Adviser had entered into expense limitation agreements with certain of the Portfolios as noted below, pursuant to which the Adviser has agreed to waive a portion of its advisory fee and/or reimburse certain expenses as a means of limiting a Portfolio’s total annual operating expenses. In addition, the Board noted that the Adviser effected fee reductions in 2009 with respect to several Portfolios. The Board also noted that the Adviser had re-negotiated the securities lending arrangement with State Street Corporation to further maximize the income to the Portfolios from such program.

With respect to each sub-advised Portfolio, the Board also compared the sub-advisory fees paid by the Adviser to fees charged by the Portfolio’s Sub-Adviser to manage other sub-advised portfolios and portfolios not subject to regulation under the 1940 Act, such as separate accounts, as applicable. The Board considered the fee comparisons in light of the differences required to manage different types of accounts.

With respect to the American Funds Growth Allocation Portfolio, the Board considered that the Portfolio’s actual management fees and total expenses (exclusive of 12b-1 fees) were below the Expense Group median and the Expense Universe median. The Board also noted that the Portfolio’s contractual management fees were below the normalized median of the Expense Group at the Portfolio’s current size. The Board noted that the Adviser is reimbursing expenses so that the Portfolio’s total annual operating expenses are capped. The Board also noted that the Adviser was proposing a reduction to its advisory fee through the implementation of additional breakpoints, effective November 12, 2009. After consideration of all relevant factors, the Board concluded that the advisory fee is consistent with industry norms and is fair and reasonable in light of the services to be provided.

Profitability. The Board examined the profitability of the Adviser on an aggregate basis with respect to all Portfolios, as well as on a Portfolio-by-Portfolio basis. With respect to the Asset Allocation Portfolios and Met/Franklin Templeton Founding Strategy Portfolio, the Board noted that the advisory fee is in addition to the fees received by the Adviser and its affiliates with regard to the other Portfolios of the Trust or of Metropolitan Series Fund, Inc., in which the Asset Allocation Portfolios and Met/Franklin Templeton Founding Strategy Portfolio may invest. With respect to the other Portfolios, the Board noted that a major component of profitability of the Adviser was the margin between the sub-advisory fees that the Adviser receives from the Trust and the portion of those fees paid to the Sub-Advisers. In this regard, the Board took into account certain comparative information in the Lipper report. The Board also reviewed the Adviser’s unaudited income statements and balance sheet information supplied by the Adviser regarding costs borne by the Adviser’s affiliates which support the operations of the Adviser but are not reflected on the unaudited income statements of the Adviser, as well as considered the profitability of the insurance products, the function of which is supported in part by the Adviser’s revenues under the Advisory Agreement, and other information and analysis prepared by the Adviser. With respect to the American Funds Bond Portfolio, American Funds Growth Portfolio, American Funds Growth-Income Portfolio, American Funds Global Small Capitalization Portfolio and American Funds International Portfolio, the Board noted that the Adviser currently does not receive an advisory fee. The Board also considered that the Distributor, MetLife Investors Distribution Company, receives 12b-1 payments to support the distribution of the products. The Board concluded after extensive discussions with management that the profitability of the Adviser and its affiliates from their relationship with each Portfolio was reasonable in light of all relevant factors.

In considering the profitability to the Sub-Advisers and their affiliates of their relationships with the Portfolios, the Board noted that the fees under the Sub-Advisory Agreements were paid by the Adviser out of the advisory fees that it receives under the Advisory Agreement. The Board also relied on the ability of the Adviser to negotiate the Sub-Advisory Agreements and the fees thereunder at arm’s length. The Board reviewed portfolio specific data with regard to the profitability of the Portfolios to each Sub-Adviser, as available, and analyzed the reasonableness of such profitability finding no indication of excessive profitability. However, the Board placed more reliance on the fact that the Sub-Advisory Agreement was negotiated at arm’s length and that the advisory fee was paid by the Adviser than on Sub-Adviser profitability.

Economies of scale. The Board also considered the effect of the Portfolios’ growth in size on their performances and fees. The Board noted that the fee schedules for all but eleven of the Portfolios contain breakpoints that reduce the fee rate above specified asset levels. The Board noted those Portfolios that did not contain breakpoints in the advisory fee and took into account management’s discussion of the same. The Board noted that those Portfolios with advisory fee schedules containing breakpoints generally reflect the inclusion of breakpoints in the sub-advisory fee schedule for such Portfolios. The Board considered the effective fees under the Advisory Agreement for each Portfolio as a percentage of assets at different asset levels and possible economies of scale that may be realized if the assets of the Portfolio grow. Among other data, the Board examined the effect of each Portfolio’s growth in size on various fee schedules and reviewed the Lipper and Bobroff Reports, which compared fee schedules among peers. The Board also took into account that the Sub-Adviser fees are paid by the Adviser out of the advisory fee. The Board also noted that if the Portfolios’ assets increase over time, the Portfolios may realize other economies of scale if assets increase proportionally more than certain other fixed expenses.

21

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

American Funds Growth Allocation Portfolio

Board of Trustees’ Consideration of Advisory Agreement—(Continued)

With respect to the American Funds Growth Allocation Portfolio, the Board noted that management was proposing that breakpoints be added to the Portfolio’s advisory fee. The Board noted that the Portfolio’s management fee is below the asset-weighted average of comparable funds at all asset levels. The Board considered the effect of the Portfolio’s current size and potential growth on its performance and fees. The Board noted that if the Portfolio’s assets increased over time, the Portfolio might realize other economies of scale if assets increased proportionally more than certain other fixed expenses. The Board concluded that the advisory fee structure for the Portfolio, including the proposed breakpoints, was reasonable and appropriately reflects potential economies of scale.

Other factors. As part of its evaluation of the Adviser’s compensation, the Board considered other benefits that may be realized by the Adviser and its affiliates from their relationship with the Trust. Among them, the Board recognized that an affiliate of the Adviser, MetLife Investors Distribution Company, serves as the Distributor for the Trust, and, as such, receives payments pursuant to Rule 12b-1 from the Portfolios to compensate it for providing shareholder services and selling activities, which could lead to growth in the Trust’s assets and corresponding benefits from such growth, including economies of scale. The Board also considered that affiliates of the Adviser may benefit from certain indirect tax benefits relating to dividend received deductions and foreign tax credits. The Board concluded that ancillary benefits accruing to the Adviser and its affiliates by virtue of the Adviser’s relationship with the Portfolios are fair and reasonable in light of the costs of providing investment management and other services to the Portfolios and the ongoing commitment of the Adviser to the Portfolios.

The Board considered other benefits that may be realized by each Subadviser and its affiliates from their relationship with the Trust, including the opportunity to provide advisory services to additional portfolios of the Trust and reputational benefits. The Board concluded that the benefits accruing to the Subadvisers and their affiliates by virtue of the Subadvisers’ relationships to the Portfolios are fair and reasonable in light of the costs of providing investment advisory services to the Portfolios and the ongoing commitment of the Subadvisers to the Portfolios.

The Board considered any possible conflicts of interest in the form of material benefits or detriments to the Trust resulting from the nature of the Trust’s and the Adviser’s or the Subadvisers’ affiliations. Here, the Board considered possible conflicts of interest that may arise between the Trust and the Adviser or a Subadviser in connection with the services provided to the Trust and the various relationships that they and their affiliates may have with the Trust. The Board considered the procedures for monitoring and managing such potential conflicts.

In addition, the Board reviewed the advisory fee to be paid to the Adviser for the American Funds of Funds and concluded that the advisory fee to be paid to the Adviser with respect to the Portfolios is based on services to be provided that are in addition to, rather than duplicative of, the services provided pursuant to the advisory agreements for the underlying funds in which the Portfolios invest and that the additional services are necessary because of the differences between the investment policies, strategies and techniques of the Portfolios and those of the underlying funds.

Conclusion. In considering the renewal of each of the Agreements, the Board, including the Independent Trustees, did not identify any single factor as controlling, and each Trustee may have attributed different weights to various factors. The Board evaluated all information available to them on a Portfolio-by-Portfolio basis, and their determinations were made separately with respect to each Portfolio. Based on all of the above-mentioned considerations, and the recommendations of management, the Board, including a majority of the Independent Trustees, determined that approval of the Advisory Agreement and the Sub-Advisory Agreements was in the best interests of each Portfolio. After full consideration of these and other factors, the Board, including a majority of the Independent Trustees, with the assistance of independent counsel, approved the Advisory Agreement and the Sub-Advisory Agreement with respect to each Portfolio.

22

Simplify your life…

with MetLife eDelivery^® while helping MetLife preserve the planet’s natural resources.

(see details on inside cover)

Met Investors Series Trust American Funds Growth Portfolio Annual Report December 31, 2009

• get rid of all that paper?

• access important documents whenever you want?

• conveniently receive valuable information online?

Get it all with MetLife eDelivery!

MetLife’s eDelivery service is your resource for electronic delivery of your variable annuity or variable life prospectuses, semiannual and annual reports, and other information. Available to variable product clients of Metropolitan Life Insurance Company, First MetLife Investors Insurance Company, General American Life Insurance Company, MetLife Investors Insurance Company, MetLife Investors USA Insurance Company, MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut and New England Life Insurance Company.*

Why sign up for MetLife eDelivery?

It’s Free** – No cost to enroll or use the service.

It’s Paperless – We’ll email you when your documents are available.

It’s Easy – Enrollment takes just a few minutes.

How do you sign up?

Just type in www.metlife.esourcelink.net to get to MetLife’s online registration form. You will need your policy/account numbers, which can be found on your statements. The form takes only a few minutes to complete. Please note, for jointly owned contracts, both owners will need to register in order to eliminate paper delivery.

  * Not all MetLife products offer eDelivery at this time. ** Your internet provider may impose fees for this service. L0210086208[0911]

Letter from the President

Letter to Policy Holders

February 1, 2010

2009 can best be described as a year of recovery. The year began with the stock market in a broad decline and the economy mired in a deep recession. However, investors’ sentiment improved dramatically during the year as fiscal and monetary authorities took measures to jump start the economy which helped spark a strong market rally in equities and corporate bonds.

The Barclays Capital U.S. Aggregate Bond Index returned 5.9% during 2009. While this was similar to the 5.2% return experienced in 2008, the two years could not have been more different. In 2008, fear drove investors toward the safety of U.S. Treasury securities and away from the risk of corporate bonds, especially those rated below investment grade. In contrast, investors were more willing to embrace risk in 2009. This produced an enormous recovery in below investment grade bonds; the Barclays Capital U.S. Corporate High Yield Index returned over 58% in 2009 after falling 26% in 2008. The Barclays Capital U.S. Treasury Index returned 13.7% in 2008, but declined 3.6% in 2009.

Stock investors also became less pessimistic in 2009. While the stock market indices are still far from the record levels reached in 2007, investors were rewarded in 2009 as stocks returned 26.5% as measured by the Standard & Poor’s 500 Index, its best return since 2003. Foreign stocks, as measured by the MSCI EAFE Index, returned 31.8% during 2009.

On the following pages, you will find a complete review of your Portfolio and its investment performance.

MetLife is committed to building your financial freedom. We appreciate your trust and will continue to focus our efforts on meeting your investment needs.

Sincerely,

Elizabeth M. Forget

President

Met Investors Series Trust

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

American Funds Growth Portfolio

During the year ended December 31, 2009, the Portfolio had a return of 38.89% for Class C versus 26.46% for its benchmark, the S&P 500 Index¹.

American Funds Growth Portfolio managed by

MetLife Advisers, LLC vs. S&P 500 Index¹

	Average Annual Return2 (for the year ended 12/31/09)
	1 Year	3 Year	5 Year	10 Year
American Funds Growth Portfolio—Class C	38.89%	-4.76%	1.83%	0.60%
S&P 500 Index1	26.46%	-5.63%	0.42%	-0.95%

¹ The S&P 500 Index is an unmanaged index consisting of 500 stocks chosen for market size, liquidity, and industry group representation. It is a market-weighted index (stock price times number of shares outstanding) with each stock’s weight in the Index proportionate to its market value.

²“Average Annual Return” is calculated including reinvestment of all income dividends and capital gain distributions.

The Portfolio and its corresponding Master Fund have essentially the same investment objectives, policies, and strategies. Since the Portfolio commenced operations on April 28, 2008, it does not have a significant operating history. However, hypothetical performance information regarding the Portfolio is presented because the Portfolio’s performance is based on the performance of the Master Fund for the period ended December 31, 2009 adjusted to reflect the Portfolio’s expenses for the period ended December 31, 2009 (including contractual expense waivers).

Past performance does not guarantee future results. The investment return and principal value of an investment in the Portfolio will fluctuate, so that shares, on any given day or when redeemed, may be worth more or less than their original cost. Performance numbers are net of all Portfolio expenses but do not include any insurance, sales, or administration charges of variable annuity or life insurance contracts. If these charges were included, the returns would be lower. The Index does not include fees or expenses and is not available for direct investment.

1

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

American Funds Growth Portfolio

Understanding Your Portfolio’s Expenses

Shareholder Expense Example

As a shareholder of the Portfolio, you incur ongoing costs, including management fees; distribution and service (12b-1) fees; and other Portfolio expenses. This example is intended to help you understand your ongoing costs (in dollars) (referred to as “expenses”) of investing in the Portfolio and compare these costs with the ongoing costs of investing in other mutual funds. The example is based on an investment of $1,000 invested at the beginning of the period and held for the entire period, July 1, 2009 through December 31, 2009.

Actual Expenses

The first line in the table below provides information about actual account values and actual expenses. You may use the information in this line, together with the amount you invested in the Portfolio, to estimate the expenses that you paid over the period. Simply divide your account value by $1,000 (for example, an $8,600 account value divided by $1,000 = 8.6), then multiply the result by the number in the first line under the heading entitled “Expenses Paid During Period” to estimate the expenses you paid on your account during this period.

Hypothetical Example for Comparison Purposes

The second line in the table below provides information about hypothetical account values and hypothetical expenses based on the Portfolio’s actual expense ratio and an assumed rate of return of 5% per year before expenses, which is not the Portfolio’s actual return. The hypothetical account values and expenses may not be used to estimate the actual ending account balance or expenses you paid for the period. You may use this information to compare the ongoing costs of investing in the Portfolio and other funds. To do so, compare this 5% hypothetical example with the 5% hypothetical examples that appear in the shareholder reports of the other funds.

Please note that the expenses shown in the table are meant to highlight your ongoing costs only and do not reflect any fees or charges of your variable insurance product or any additional expenses that participants in certain eligible qualified plans may bear relating to the operations of their plan. Therefore, the second line in the table is useful in comparing ongoing costs only, and will not help you determine the relative total costs of owning different funds. In addition, if these other costs were included, your costs would have been higher.

	Annualized Expense Ratio	Beginning Account Value 7/1/09		Ending Account Value 12/31/09		Expenses Paid During Period* 7/1/09-12/31/09
Class C
Actual	0.66%	$	1,000.00	$	1,232.11	$	3.71
Hypothetical	0.66%		1,000.00		1,021.88		3.36

* Expenses paid are equal to the Portfolio’s annualized expense ratio for the most recent six month period, as shown above, multiplied by the average account value over the period, multiplied by the number of days (184 days) in the most recent fiscal half-year, divided by 365 (to reflect the one-half year period).

2

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

American Funds Growth Portfolio

PORTFOLIO OF INVESTMENTS

December 31, 2009

(Percentage of Net Assets)

Security Description	Shares	Value
Investment Company Security - 100.1%
American Funds Growth Fund(a) (Cost - $305,252,675)	7,502,332	$	348,483,337
Total Investments - 100.1% (Cost $305,252,675)			348,483,337
Other Assets And Liabilities (net) - (0.1)%			(226,856	)
Net Assets - 100.0%		$	348,256,481

(a) A Portfolio of the American Funds Insurance Series.

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

3

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

American Funds Growth Portfolio

Various inputs are used in determining the value of the Portfolio’s investments, which are as follows:

Level 1—unadjusted quoted prices in active markets for identical investments

Level 2—other significant observable inputs (including, but not limited to: quoted prices for similar investments in markets that are both active or inactive; inputs other than quoted prices that are observable such as interest rates, yield curves, credit risks, default rates, etc.)

Level 3—significant unobservable inputs based on the best information available in the circumstances, to the extent observable inputs are unavailable (including the Portfolio’s own assumptions in determining the fair value of investments)

The inputs or methodology used for valuing investments are not necessarily an indication of the risk associated with investing in them. For information about the Portfolio’s policy regarding valuation of investments and other significant accounting policies, please refer to Note 2 of the Notes to Financial Statements.

The following table summarizes the inputs used in determining the value the Portfolio’s investments as of December 31, 2009:

ASSETS VALUATION INPUTS

Description	Level 1		Level 2		Level 3		Total
Investment Company Security	$	348,483,337	$	—	$	—	$	348,483,337
TOTAL INVESTMENTS	$	348,483,337	$	—	$	—	$	348,483,337

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

4

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

American Funds Growth Portfolio

Statement of Assets and Liabilities

December 31, 2009

Assets
Investments at value (a)	$	348,483,337
Receivable for shares sold		692,952
Total assets		349,176,289
Liabilities
Payables for:
Investments purchased		580,321
Shares redeemed		112,631
Accrued Expenses:
Management fees		51,889
Distribution and service fees - Class C		155,352
Administration fees		2,000
Custodian and accounting fees		2,067
Deferred trustees’ fees		7,518
Other expenses		8,030
Total liabilities		919,808
Net Assets	$	348,256,481
Net Assets Represented by
Paid in surplus	$	306,484,656
Accumulated net realized loss		(2,483,412	)
Unrealized appreciation on investments		43,230,662
Undistributed net investment income		1,024,575
Net Assets	$	348,256,481
Net Assets
Class C	$	348,256,481
Capital Shares Outstanding
Class C		44,955,437
Net Asset Value, Offering Price and Redemption Price Per Share
Class C	$	7.75

(a) Identified cost of investments was $305,252,675.

Statement of Operations

For the Year Ended December 31, 2009

Investment Income
Dividends from Underlying Portfolios	$	2,250,611
Total investment income		2,250,611
Expenses
Administration fees		23,986
Deferred Expense Reimbursement		66,600
Custodian and accounting fees		22,301
Distribution and service fees - Class C		1,031,125
Audit and tax services		17,179
Legal		31,447
Trustees’ fees and expenses		21,139
Shareholder reporting		6,838
Insurance		799
Miscellaneous		4,622
Total expenses		1,226,036
Net investment income		1,024,575
Net Realized and Unrealized Gain (Loss) on Investments
Net realized loss on investments		(2,426,782	)
Net change in unrealized appreciation on investments		68,316,665
Net realized and unrealized gain on investments		65,889,883
Net Increase in Net Assets from Operations	$	66,914,458

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

5

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

American Funds Growth Portfolio

Statements of Changes in Net Assets

	Year Ended December 31, 2009			Period Ended December 31, 2008*
Increase (Decrease) in Net Assets:
Operations
Net investment income	$	1,024,575		$	753,517
Net realized gain (loss) on investments and capital gain distribution from Master Fund		(2,426,782	)		1,890,642
Net change in unrealized appreciation (depreciation) on investments		68,316,665			(25,086,003	)
Net increase (decrease) in net assets resulting from operations		66,914,458			(22,441,844	)
Distributions to Shareholders
From net investment income
Class C		—			(2,720,585	)
From net realized gains
Class C		—			—
Net decrease in net assets resulting from distributions		—			(2,720,585	)
Capital Share Transactions
Proceeds from shares sold
Class C		245,787,492			95,320,579
Net asset value of shares issued through dividend reinvestment
Class C		—			2,720,585
Cost of shares repurchased
Class C		(32,935,863	)		(4,388,341	)
Net increase in net assets from capital share transactions		212,851,629			93,652,823
Net Increase in Net Assets		279,766,087			68,490,394
Net assets at beginning of period		68,490,394			—
Net assets at end of period	$	348,256,481		$	68,490,394
Undistributed net investment income at end of period	$	1,024,575		$	—

* For the period 4/28/2008 (Commencement of operations) through 12/31/2008.

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

6

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

American Funds Growth Portfolio

Financial Highlights

Selected Per Share Data for the Years or Period Ended:
	Class C
	For the Years Ended December 31,
	2009			2008(b)
Net Asset Value, Beginning of Period	$	5.58		$	10.00
Income (Loss) from Investment Operations:
Net investment income(a)		0.04			0.15
Net realized/unrealized gain (loss) on investments		2.13			(4.34	)
Total from investment operations		2.17			(4.19	)
Less Distributions
Dividends from net investment income		—			(0.23	)
Distributions from net realized capital gains		—			—
Total distributions		—			(0.23	)
Net Asset Value, End of Period	$	7.75		$	5.58
Total Return		38.89	%		(41.84	)%
Ratio of expenses to average net assets after reimbursement		0.65	%		0.65	%*
Ratio of expenses to average net assets before reimbursement and rebates		0.65	%		0.92	%*
Ratio of net investment income to average net assets		0.55	%		3.09	%*
Portfolio turnover rate		1.4	%		0.2	%
Net assets, end of period (in millions)	$	348.3		$	68.5

* Annualized

(a) Per share amounts based on average shares outstanding during the period.

(b) Commencement of operations—4/28/2008.

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

7

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

American Funds Growth Portfolio

Notes to Financial Statements—December 31, 2009

1. Organization

Met Investors Series Trust (the “Trust”) is registered as an open-end management investment company under the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended (the “1940 Act”). The Trust currently offers forty-eight Portfolios (the “Portfolios”), each of which operates as a distinct investment vehicle of the Trust. The portfolio included in this report is American Funds Growth Portfolio (the “Portfolio”), which is diversified. Shares in the Trust are not offered directly to the general public and are currently available only to separate accounts established by certain affiliated life insurance companies.

The Trust is managed by MetLife Advisers, LLC (the “Manager”), an affiliate of MetLife, Inc. (“MetLife”).

The Trust has registered four classes of shares: Class A, B, C and E Shares. Class C Shares are currently offered by the Portfolio. Shares of each Class of the Portfolio represent an equal pro rata interest in the Portfolio and generally give the shareholder the same voting, dividend, liquidation, and other rights. Investment income, realized and unrealized capital gains and losses, the common expenses of the Portfolio and certain Portfolio-level expense reductions, if any, are allocated on a pro rata basis to each Class based on the relative net assets of each Class to the net assets of the Portfolio. Each Class of shares differs in its respective distribution expenses.

The Portfolio, a feeder fund, seeks to achieve its investment objective by investing all of its investable assets in a master fund, the Growth Fund (the “Master Fund”), a fund of the American Funds Insurance Series (“AFIS”). AFIS is an open-end diversified investment management company advised by Capital Research and Management Company (“CRMC”), an indirect, wholly owned subsidiary of The Capital Group Companies, Inc. The financial statements of the Master Fund are provided separately and should be read in conjunction with the Portfolio’s financial statements. As of December 31, 2009, the Portfolio owned approximately 1.39% of the Master Fund.

2. Significant Accounting Policies

The financial statements have been prepared in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (“GAAP”) which require management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of income and expenses during the reporting period. Actual results could differ from these estimates.

The following is a summary of significant accounting policies consistently followed by the Trust in the preparation of its financial statements.

Valuation - Investments in the Master Fund are valued at its closing daily net asset value. The net asset value of the Portfolio is calculated based on the net asset value of the Master Fund in which the Portfolio invests. For information about the use of fair value pricing by the Master Fund, please refer to the Notes to Financial Statements for the Master Fund.

Security Transactions - Security transactions are recorded on a trade date basis. Realized gains and losses on investments and unrealized appreciation and depreciation are determined on the identified cost basis, which is the same basis used for federal income tax purposes.

Investment Income and Expenses - Interest income is recorded on an accrual basis. Discounts and premiums on securities purchased are amortized over the lives of the respective securities. Income and capital gain distributions from the Master Fund are recorded on the ex-dividend date.

Income Taxes - It is the Portfolio’s policy to comply with the requirements of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”), and regulations thereunder, applicable to regulated investment companies and to distribute, with respect to each taxable year, all of its taxable income to shareholders. Therefore, no federal income tax provision is required. The Portfolio files U.S. Federal and various state tax returns. No income tax returns are currently under examination. The Portfolio’s federal tax returns for the prior three fiscal years remain subject to examination by the Internal Revenue Service.

Dividends and Distributions to Shareholders - The Portfolio records dividends and distributions on the ex-dividend date. Net realized gains from security transactions (if any) are generally distributed annually to shareholders. The timing and characterization of certain income and capital gains distributions are determined in accordance with federal tax regulations that may differ from GAAP. Permanent book and tax basis differences relating to shareholder distributions will result in reclassification between under/over distributed net investment income, accumulated net realized gains/losses and paid in surplus. Book-tax differences are primarily due to futures transactions, foreign currency transactions, certain foreign withholding taxes, passive foreign investment companies (PFIC), partnerships, deferred trustees compensation, capital loss carryforwards and losses deferred due to wash sales, as applicable. These adjustments have no impact on net assets or the results of operations.

3. Investment Management Agreement and Other Transactions with Affiliates

Investment Management Agreement - The Trust has entered into a management agreement with the Manager (the “Management Agreement”) for investment management services in connection with the investment management of the Portfolio. The Manager is subject to the supervision and direction of the Board of Trustees (the “Board”) and has overall responsibility for the general management and administration of the Trust. The Manager selects the Master Fund in which the Portfolio will invest and monitors the Master Fund investment program. The Manager is an

8

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

American Funds Growth Portfolio

Notes to Financial Statements—December 31, 2009—(Continued)

3. Investment Management Agreement and Other Transactions with Affiliates - continued

affiliate of MetLife. The Manager currently receives no compensation for its services to the Portfolio. In the event that the Portfolio were to withdraw from the Master Fund and invest its assets directly in investment securities, the Manager would retain the services of an investment adviser and would receive a management fee at an annual rate of percentage of the assets of the Portfolio as follows:

% per annum	Average Daily Net Assets
0.75%	ALL

Transfer Agency Agreement - Metropolitan Life Insurance Company (“MLIC”) serves as the transfer agent for the Trust. MLIC is an affiliate of the Manager. MLIC receives no fees for its services to the Trust under the transfer agency agreement.

Expense Limitation Agreement - The Manager has entered into an expense limitation agreement with the Trust (“Expense Limitation Agreement”) in the interest of limiting expenses of the Portfolio. The Expense Limitation Agreement shall continue in effect with respect to the Portfolio until April 30, 2010. Pursuant to that Expense Limitation Agreement, the Manager has agreed to waive or limit its fees and to assume other expenses so that the total annual operating expenses of the Portfolio other than interest, taxes, brokerage commissions, other expenditures which are capitalized in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America, other extraordinary expenses not incurred in the ordinary course of the Portfolio’s business, and Master Fund fees and expenses, but including amounts payable pursuant to a plan adopted in accordance with Rule 12b-1 under the 1940 Act, are limited to the following expense ratio as a percentage of the Portfolio’s average daily net assets:

Maximum Expense Ratio under current Expense Limitation Agreement		Expenses Deferred in
		2008		2009
		Subject to repayment until December 31,
Class C		2013		2014
0.65	%	$	66,600	$	—

If in any year in which the Management Agreement is still in effect, the estimated aggregate portfolio operating expenses of the Portfolio for the fiscal year are less than the Maximum Expense Ratio for that year, subject to approval by the Trust’s Board, the Manager shall be entitled to reimbursement by the Portfolio to the extent that the charge does not cause the expenses in such subsequent year to exceed the Maximum Expense Ratio as stated above. The Portfolio is not obligated to repay any expense paid by the Manager more than five years after the end of the fiscal year in which such expense was incurred.

The following amount was repaid to the Manager in accordance with the Expense Limitation Agreement during the period ended December 31, 2009:                 $66,600

Distribution Agreements and Plans - The Trust has a distribution agreement with MetLife Investors Distribution Company (“MIDC” or the “Distributor”) in which MIDC serves as the Distributor for the Trust’s Class C Shares. MIDC is a wholly-owned subsidiary of MetLife Investors Group, Inc., an affiliate of the Manager. The Class C distribution plan provides that the Trust, on behalf of the Portfolio, may pay annually up to 1.00% of the average net assets of the Portfolio attributable to its Class C Shares in respect to activities primarily intended to result in the sale of Class C Shares. However, under the Class C distribution agreement, payments to the Distributor for activities pursuant to the Class C distribution plan are currently limited to payments at an annual rate equal to 0.55% of average daily net assets of the Portfolio, attributable to its Class C Shares.

Under the terms of the Class C distribution plan and distribution agreement, the Portfolio is authorized to make payments monthly to the Distributor that may be used to pay or reimburse entities providing distribution and shareholder servicing with respect to the Class C Shares for such entities’ fees or expenses incurred.

Deferred Trustee Compensation - Each Trustee of the Trust who is not currently an employee of the Manager or any of its affiliates receives compensation from the Trust for his or her service to the Portfolio. A deferred compensation plan (the “Plan”) is available to the Trustees on a voluntary basis. Deferred amounts remain in the Trust until distributed in accordance with the provisions of the Plan. The value of a participating Trustee’s deferral account is based on theoretical investments of deferred amounts, on the normal payment dates, in certain portfolios of the Trust or Metropolitan Series Fund, Inc. as designated by the participating Trustee. Changes in the value of participants’ deferral accounts are reflected as Trustees’ fees and expenses in the Statement of Operations. The portion of the accrued obligations allocated to the Portfolio, if any, under the Plan are reflected as Deferred Trustees’ fees in the Statement of Assets and Liabilities.

9

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

American Funds Growth Portfolio

Notes to Financial Statements—December 31, 2009—(Continued)

4. Shares of Beneficial Interest

Transactions in shares of beneficial interest for the periods ended noted below were as follows:

	Beginning Shares	Sales	Reinvestments	Redemptions		Net Increase in Shares Outstanding	Ending Shares
Class C
12/31/2009	12,277,510	37,562,711	—	(4,884,784	)	32,677,927	44,955,437
4/28/08-12/31/2008	—	12,395,042	494,652	(612,184	)	12,277,510	12,277,510

The Portfolio is authorized to issue an unlimited number of shares.

5. Investment Transactions

Aggregate cost of purchases and proceeds of sales of investment securities, excluding short-term securities, for the period ended December 31, 2009 were as follows:

Purchases			Sales
U.S. Government	Non-Government		U.S. Government		Non-Government
$—	$	216,600,231	$	—	$	2,572,721

At December 31, 2009, the cost of securities for federal income tax purposes and the unrealized appreciation (depreciation) of investments for federal income tax purposes for the Portfolio were as follows:

Federal Income Tax Cost	Gross Unrealized Appreciation		Gross Unrealized Depreciation			Net Unrealized Appreciation
$307,736,087	$	43,230,662	$	(2,483,412	)	$	40,747,250

6. Contractual Obligations

The Trust has a variety of indemnification obligations under contracts with its service providers. The Trust’s maximum exposure under these arrangements is unknown. However, the Trust has not had prior claims or losses pursuant to these contracts and expects the risk of loss to be remote.

7. Market, Credit and Counterparty Risk

In the normal course of business, the Master Fund in which the Portfolio invests its assets invests in securities and enters into transactions where risks exist due to fluctuations in the market (market risk) or failure of the other party to a transaction to perform (credit risk). The value of securities held by the Master Fund may decline in response to certain events, including those directly involving the companies whose securities are owned by the Master Fund; conditions affecting the general economy; overall market changes; local, regional or global political, social or economic instability; and currency and interest rate and price fluctuations. The Master Fund may be exposed to counterparty risk, or the risk that an entity with which the Master Fund has unsettled or open transactions may default. The potential loss could exceed the value of the financial assets recorded in the financial statements. Financial assets, which potentially expose the Master Fund to credit risk, consist principally of cash due from counterparties and investments. The Master Fund restricts its exposure to credit losses by entering into master agreements with counterparties (approved brokers) with whom it undertakes a significant volume of transactions to include certain safeguards for derivatives and non-standard settlement trades. The credit risk associated with favorable contracts is reduced by a master netting arrangement to the extent that if an event of default occurs, all amounts with the counterparty are terminated and settled on a net basis. The Master Fund’s overall exposure to credit risk on derivative instruments subject to master netting arrangements can change substantially within a short period, as it is affected by each transaction subject to the arrangement.

8. Income Tax Information

The tax character of distributions paid for the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2008 were as follows:

Ordinary Income			Long-Term Capital Gains				Total
2009	2008		2009		2008		2009		2008
$—	$	991,370	$	—	$	1,729,215	$	—	$	2,720,585

10

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

American Funds Growth Portfolio

Notes to Financial Statements—December 31, 2009—(Continued)

8. Income Tax Information - continued

As of December 31, 2009, the components of distributable earnings (accumulated losses) on a federal income tax basis were as follows:

Undistributed Ordinary Income	Undistributed Long-Term Gain	Net Unrealized Appreciation	Loss Carryforwards	Total
$1,032,093	$—	$40,747,250	$—	$41,779,343

9. Recent Accounting Pronouncement

On January 21, 2010, the Financial Accounting Standards Board issued Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) 2010-06, “Improving Disclosures About Fair Value Measurements.” The ASU amends Accounting Standards Codification 820 to add new requirements for disclosures about transfers into and out of Levels 1 and 2. It also clarifies existing fair value disclosures about the level of disaggregation and about inputs and valuation techniques used to measure fair value. Additionally, the ASU amends disclosures about providing purchases, sales, issuances, and settlements on a gross basis relating to Level 3 measurements. The ASU guidance is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2009, and for interim periods within those fiscal years, except for the requirement to provide the Level 3 activity of purchases, sales, issuances, and settlements on a gross basis, which will be effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2010, and for interim periods within those fiscal years. Management is currently evaluating the impact the adoption of ASU 2010-06 will have on the Portfolio’s financial statements.

10. Subsequent Events

Management’s evaluation of the impact of all subsequent events on the Portfolio’s financial statements was completed through February 25, 2010, the date the financial statements were issued, and management has determined that as of that date there were no subsequent events requiring adjustments or disclosure in the Portfolio’s financial statements.

11

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

American Funds Growth Portfolio

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

To the Shareholders and Board of Trustees of Met Investors Series Trust:

We have audited the accompanying statement of assets and liabilities, including the portfolio of investments, of the American Funds Growth Portfolio, one of the portfolios constituting Met Investors Series Trust (the “Trust”), as of December 31, 2009, and the related statement of operations for the year then ended, and the statements of changes in net assets and the financial highlights for the year ended December 31, 2009 and for the period from April 28, 2008 (commencement of operations) to December 31, 2008. These financial statements and financial highlights are the responsibility of the Trust’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements and financial highlights based on our audits.

We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements and financial highlights are free of material misstatement. The Trust is not required to have, nor were we engaged to perform, an audit of its internal control over financial reporting. Our audits included consideration of internal control over financial reporting as a basis for designing audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the Trust’s internal control over financial reporting. Accordingly, we express no such opinion. An audit also includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements, assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. Our procedures included confirmation of securities owned as of December 31, 2009, by correspondence with the transfer agent. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.

In our opinion, the financial statements and financial highlights referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of the American Funds Growth Portfolio of the Met Investors Series Trust as of December 31, 2009, the results of its operations for the year then ended, and the changes in its net assets and the financial highlights for the year ended December 31, 2009 and for the period from April 28, 2008 (commencement of operations) to December 31, 2008, in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.

Deloitte & Touche LLP

Boston, Massachusetts

February 25, 2010

12

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Trustees and Officers (Unaudited) December 31, 2009

The Trustees and executive officers of the Trust, their ages and their principal occupations during the past five years are set forth below. Unless otherwise indicated, the business address of each is 5 Park Plaza, Suite 1900 Irvine, California 92614. Each Trustee who is deemed an “interested person,” as such term is defined in the 1940 Act, is indicated by an asterisk. Those Trustees who are not “interested persons” as defined in the 1940 Act are referred to as “Independent Trustees.” Additional information about the Trustees is available in the Statement of Additional Information which is available without charge, upon request, by calling (800) 848-3854.

The Trustees
Name and Age	Position(s) Held with Registrant	Term of Office and Length of Time Served	Principal Occupation(s) During Past 5 Years	Number of Portfolios in Fund Complex+ overseen by Trustee	Other Directorships Held by Trustee
Interested Trustees
Elizabeth M. Forget* (43)	President and Trustee	Indefinite; From December 2000 to present	Since May 2007, Senior Vice President, MetLife, Inc.; since December 2000, President of MetLife Advisers, LLC and its predecessor; December 2003 to April 2007, Vice President, MetLife, Inc.	84	Director, Metropolitan Series Fund, Inc. since August 2006.
Independent Trustees
Stephen M. Alderman (50)	Trustee	Indefinite; From December 2000 to present	Since November 1991, Shareholder in the law firm of Garfield and Merel, Ltd.	48	None
Jack R. Borsting (80)	Trustee	Indefinite; From December 2000 to present	Since 2006, Professor and Dean Emeritus, Marshall School of Business, University of Southern California (USC); from 2001 to 2005, Professor of Business Administration and Dean Emeritus.	48	Director, Los Angeles Orthopedic Hospital, Trustee, The Rose Hills Foundation. Member, Army Science Board.
Robert Boulware (53)	Trustee	Indefinite; From March 2008 to present	From 2004 to 2009, Director of Norwood Promotional Products, Inc.; from 2007 to 2008, Director of Wealthpoint Advisors (a business development company); from 2007 to 2009, Director of Holladay Bank; from 1992-2006, President and Chief Executive Officer of ING Fund Distributor, LLC.	48	Since 2005, Director of Gainsco, Inc. (auto insurance).
Daniel A. Doyle (51)	Trustee	Indefinite; From February 2007 to present	From October 2000 to June 2009, Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of ATC Management, Inc. (public utility); since June 2009, independent business consultant.	48	Director, Wisconsin Sports Development Corporation
Susan C. Gause (57)	Trustee	Indefinite; From March 2008 to present	From 2000 to December 2002, Chief Executive Officer of Allianz Dresdner Asset Management; since 2003, private investor.	48	None

13

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Trustees and Officers (Unaudited)—(Continued) December 31, 2009

Name and Age	Position(s) Held with Registrant	Term of Office and Length of Time Served	Principal Occupation(s) During Past 5 Years	Number of Portfolios in Fund Complex+ overseen by Trustee	Other Directorships Held by Trustee
Independent Trustees - continued
Dawn M. Vroegop (43)	Trustee	Indefinite; From December 2000 to present	From September 1999 to September 2003, Managing Director, Dresdner RCM Global Investors.	84	Director, Metropolitan Series Fund, Inc. since May 2009; from 2003 to present, Director and Finance Committee Chair, City College of San Francisco Foundation

The Executive Officers
Name and Age	Position(s) Held with Registrant	Term of Office and Length of Time Served	Principal Occupation(s) During Past 5 Years
Jeffrey L. Bernier (38)	Vice President	From February 2009 to present	Since December 2007, Vice President, Metropolitan Life Insurance Company; since 2008 Senior Vice President of MetLife Advisers, LLC and its predecessor; from July 2004 to December 2007, Director and Senior Investment Analyst of Investment Management Services for John Hancock Financial Services.
Jeffrey A. Tupper (39)	Chief Financial Officer, Treasurer	From August 2002 to present	Since February 2009, Vice President, MetLife Advisers, LLC. Since October 2006, Assistant Vice President, MetLife Group, Inc. Since February 2001, Assistant Vice President of MetLife Investors Insurance Company.
Richard C. Pearson (66)	Vice President and Secretary	From December 2000 to present	Since June 2001, President or Executive Vice President of MetLife Investors Distribution Company; since January 2001, Executive Vice President, General Counsel and Secretary of MetLife Investors Group, Inc. and Vice President, Secretary and Associate General Counsel of its affiliated life insurance companies; since November 2000, Senior Vice President and General Counsel of MetLife Advisers, LLC and its predecessor.
Jeffrey P. Halperin (42)	Chief Compliance Officer	From November 2006 to present	Since March 2006, Vice President, Corporate Ethics and Compliance Department, MetLife, Inc.; from October 2002 to March 2006, Assistant Vice President; from November 2005 to August 2006, Interim Chief Compliance Officer, Met Investors Series Trust; since April 2007, Chief Compliance Officer, Metropolitan Series Funds; from August 2006 to April 2007, Interim Chief Compliance Officer, Metropolitan Series Funds; since August 2006, Chief Compliance Officer, MetLife Advisers, LLC and its predecessor; since November 2006, Chief Compliance Officer, MetLife Investment Advisors Company, LLC.

+ The Fund Complex includes the Trust (48 portfolios) and Metropolitan Series Fund, Inc. (36 portfolios).

* Ms. Forget is an “interested person” of the Trust as a result of her affiliation with the Manager and the Distributor.

Quarterly Portfolio Schedule

The Trust files Form N-Q for the first and third quarters of each fiscal year. The Trust’s Forms N-Q will be available on the Securities and Exchange Commission’s website at http://www.sec.gov. The Trust’s Forms N-Q may be reviewed and copied at the Securities and Exchange Commission’s

14

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Trustees and Officers (Unaudited)—(Continued) December 31, 2009

Public Reference Room in Washington, D.C. and information on the operation of the Public Reference Room may be obtained by calling 1-800-SEC-0330. Once filed, the most recent Form N-Q will be available without charge, upon request, by calling (800) 848-3854.

Proxy Voting Policies and Procedures

A description of the policies and procedures that the Trust uses to determine how to vote proxies relating to portfolio securities is available without charge, upon request, by calling (800) 848-3854 and on the Securities and Exchange Commission’s website at http://www.sec.gov.

Proxy Voting Record

The Trust, on behalf of each of its Portfolios, has filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission its proxy voting record for the 12-month period ending June 30 on Form N-PX. Form N-PX must be filed by the Trust each year by August 31. Once filed, the most recent Form N-PX will be available without charge, upon request, by calling (800) 848-3854 or on the Securities and Exchange Commission’s website at http://www.sec.gov.

15

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

American Funds Growth Portfolio

Board of Trustees’ Consideration of Advisory Agreement

At an in-person meeting of the Board of Trustees (the “Board”) of the Met Investors Series Trust (the “Trust”) held on November 10-11, 2009, the Board, including a majority of the Trustees who are not considered to be “interested persons” of the Trust (the “Independent Trustees”) under the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended (the “1940 Act”), approved for an annual period the continuation of the Trust’s advisory agreement (the “Advisory Agreement”) with MetLife Advisers, LLC (the “Adviser”) and the applicable sub-advisory agreements (each a “Sub-Advisory Agreement”, and collectively with the Advisory Agreement, the “Agreements”) between the Adviser and the investment sub-advisers (each a “Sub-Adviser”, and collectively, the “Sub-Advisers”) for each of the series of the Trust, including the American Funds Growth Portfolio (each a “Portfolio,” and collectively, the “Portfolios”).¹ With respect to the American Funds Growth Portfolio, a “feeder fund” that invests all of its assets in an American Funds Insurance Series “master fund,” a stand-by Advisory Agreement was approved at the November 11-12, 2009 meeting for the American Funds Growth Portfolio in the event it no longer invests all of its assets in its American Funds Insurance Series master fund.

In considering the Agreements, the Board reviewed a variety of materials provided by the Adviser and the Sub-Advisers relating to each Portfolio, the Adviser and each Sub-Adviser, including comparative performance, fee and expense information for an appropriate peer group of similar mutual funds, performance information for relevant benchmark indices and other information regarding the nature, extent and quality of services provided by the Adviser and the Sub-Advisers under their respective Agreements. The Board also took into account information provided to the Board in its meetings throughout the year with respect to the services provided by the Adviser and the Sub-Advisers, including quarterly performance reports prepared by management containing reviews of investment results, and periodic presentations from the Sub-Advisers with respect to the Portfolios they manage. The Independent Trustees also assessed reports provided by independent consultants, who reviewed and provided analyses regarding investment performance, fees and expenses, profitability and other information provided by, or at the direction of, the Adviser and the Sub-Advisers, as more fully discussed below.

The Independent Trustees were separately advised by independent legal counsel throughout the process. Prior to voting, the Independent Trustees also received a memorandum from their independent counsel discussing the legal standards for their consideration of the proposed continuation of the Agreements. The Board met in person with personnel of the Adviser prior to the November meeting for the specific purpose of considering the proposed continuation of the Agreements. The Independent Trustees also discussed the proposed continuation of the Agreements in private sessions with their independent legal counsel at which no representatives of management were present.

In considering whether to approve the renewal of the Advisory Agreement with the Adviser and any applicable Sub-Advisory Agreements with respect to each Portfolio, the Board reviewed and analyzed the factors it deemed relevant, including: (1) the nature, extent and quality of the services to be provided to the Portfolios by the Adviser and the Sub-Advisers; (2) the performance of the Portfolios as compared to a peer group and an appropriate index; (3) the Adviser’s and each of the Sub-Adviser’s personnel and operations; (4) the financial condition of the Adviser and of the Sub-Advisers; (5) the level and method of computing each Portfolio’s advisory and sub-advisory fees; (6) the profitability of the Adviser under the Advisory Agreement and of the Sub-Advisers under the Sub-Advisory Agreements; (7) any “fall-out” benefits to the Adviser, the Sub-Advisers and their affiliates (i.e., ancillary benefits realized by the Adviser, the Sub-Advisers or their affiliates from the Adviser’s or Sub-Advisers’ relationship with the Trust); (8) the anticipated effect of growth in size on each Portfolio’s performance and expenses; (9) fees paid to the Sub-Advisers by comparable institutional and retail accounts; and (10) possible conflicts of interest. The Board also considered the nature, quality, and extent of the services to be provided to the Portfolios by the Adviser’s affiliates, including distribution services.

Nature, extent and quality of services. In considering the nature, extent and quality of the services to be provided by the Adviser to the Portfolios, the Board took into account the extensive responsibilities that the Adviser has as investment manager to the Portfolios, including the provision of investment advice to: (i) MetLife Aggressive Strategy Portfolio, MetLife Balanced Strategy Portfolio, MetLife Defensive Strategy Portfolio, MetLife Growth Strategy Portfolio, and MetLife Moderate Strategy Portfolio (together, the “Asset Allocation Portfolios”), (ii) American Funds Balanced Allocation Portfolio, American Funds Growth Allocation Portfolio, and American Funds Moderate Allocation Portfolio (together, the “American Funds of Funds”), and (iii) the Met/Franklin Templeton Founding Strategy Portfolio, the selection of the Sub-Advisers for the other Portfolios and oversight of the Sub-Advisers’ compliance with fund policies and objectives, review of brokerage matters including with respect to trade allocation and best execution, oversight of general fund compliance with federal and state laws, and the implementation of Board directives as they relate to the Portfolios. The Adviser’s role in coordinating the activities of the Portfolios’ other service providers was also considered. The Board also evaluated the expertise and performance of the investment personnel with respect to the Asset Allocation Portfolios, the American Funds of Funds and the Met/Franklin Templeton Founding Strategy Portfolio and of the personnel overseeing the Sub-Advisers of the other Portfolios, and compliance with each Portfolio’s investment restrictions, tax and other requirements. The Board considered information received from the Trust’s Chief Compliance Officer (“CCO”) regarding the Portfolios’ compliance policies and procedures established pursuant to Rule 38a-1 under the 1940 Act, including the policies and procedures in place relating to proxy voting. The Board also took into account its familiarity with management through Board meetings, discussions and reports during the preceding year.

The Board also recognized the Adviser^’s reputation and long-standing experience in serving as an investment adviser to the Trust, and considered the benefit to shareholders of investing in funds that are part of a family of variable annuity portfolios offering a variety of investments. In addition,

¹ The Met/Templeton International Bond Portfolio recently commenced operations and, therefore, the Agreements with respect to this Portfolio were not up for renewal.

16

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

American Funds Growth Portfolio

Board of Trustees’ Consideration of Advisory Agreement—(Continued)

the Board reviewed the financial condition of the Adviser and whether it had the financial wherewithal to provide a high level and quality of services to the Portfolios. In its review, the Board also received and took into account information regarding any services and/or payments provided to the Adviser by the Sub-Advisers in connection with marketing activities.

With respect to the services provided by each of the Sub-Advisers, the Board considered information provided to the Board by each Sub-Adviser, including each Sub-Adviser’s Form ADV, as well as information presented throughout the past year. The Board considered the Sub-Adviser’s current level of staffing and its overall resources, as well as its compensation program. The Board reviewed each Sub-Adviser’s history and investment experience, as well as information regarding the qualifications, background and responsibilities of the Sub-Adviser’s investment and compliance personnel who provide services to the Portfolios. The Board also considered, among other things, the Sub-Adviser’s compliance program and any disciplinary history. The Board noted each Sub-Adviser’s regulatory history, including whether it was currently involved in any regulatory actions or investigations as well as material litigation, and any settlements and ameliatory actions undertaken, as appropriate. The Board also noted that the CCO and his staff conduct regular, periodic compliance reviews with each of the Sub-Advisers and present reports to the Independent Trustees regarding the same, which includes evaluating the regulatory compliance systems of the Sub-Advisers and procedures reasonably designed by them to assure compliance with the federal securities laws, including issues related to late trading and market timing, best execution, fair value pricing, and proxy voting procedures, among others. The Board also took into account the financial condition of each Sub-Adviser.

The Board considered each Sub-Adviser’s investment process and philosophy. The Board took into account that each Sub-Adviser’s responsibilities include the development and maintenance of an investment program for the applicable Portfolio which is consistent with the Portfolio’s investment objectives, the selection of investment securities and the placement of orders for the purchase and sale of such securities, as well as the implementation of compliance controls related to performance of these services. The Board also reviewed each Sub-Adviser’s brokerage policies and practices, including with respect to best execution and soft dollars.

Based on its consideration and review of the foregoing information, the Board concluded that the nature, extent and quality of services provided by the Adviser and by each Sub-Adviser were satisfactory and that there was a reasonable basis on which to conclude that each would provide a high quality of investment services to the Portfolios.

Performance. The Board considered the performance of the Portfolios as described in the quarterly reports prepared by management, and as also analyzed in reports prepared by the Independent Trustees’ independent consultant. The Board noted that the Adviser reviews with the Board on a quarterly basis detailed information about the Portfolios’ performance results, portfolio composition and investment strategies. The Board also reviewed and considered a separate report prepared by Lipper Inc. (“Lipper”), an independent third party, which provided a statistical analysis comparing the Portfolios’ investment performance, expenses, and fees to comparable funds underlying variable insurance products (the “Performance Universe”). In addition, the Independent Trustees met separately with a representative of Bobroff Consulting, Inc., an independent consultant (“Bobroff”), at a special board meeting in September 2009, to review the separate reports prepared by such consultant (“Bobroff Report”), which analyzed the report prepared by Lipper, as well as certain of the other factors to be considered by the Board including supplemental alpha and information coefficient analysis. The Board also considered each Portfolio’s more recent performance subsequent to the performance period covered by the Lipper reports, and management’s discussion of the same, including the effect of current market conditions on each Portfolio’s more recent performance.

The Board closely reviewed the Portfolios’ performance records and the Adviser’s and Sub-Advisers’ management styles and long-term performance records with the Portfolios and comparable funds. The Board focused particular attention on Portfolios with less favorable performance records. The Board was mindful of the Adviser’s focus on each Sub-Adviser’s performance and noted that the Adviser has been active in monitoring and responding to any performance issues with respect to the Portfolios. The Board also took into account its discussions with management regarding factors that contributed to the performance of each Portfolio.

Among other data relating specifically to the American Funds Growth Portfolio’s performance, the Board took into account that the Portfolio is a “feeder fund” and all of its assets are invested in a “master fund,” a series of the American Funds Insurance Series, which in turn purchases investment securities. The Board noted that the Portfolio commenced operations on April 28, 2008. Among other information relating to the Portfolio’s performance, the Board considered that the Portfolio slightly underperformed the median of its Performance Universe for the one-year and since inception periods ended July 31, 2009. The Board further considered that the Portfolio outperformed its Lipper Index for the one-year and since inception periods ended July 31, 2009. The Board further considered that the Portfolio underperformed its benchmark, the S&P 500 Index, for the one-year period ended August 31, 2009. The Board also took into account management’s discussion of the Portfolio’s performance, including its improved more recent performance. Based on its review and taking into account the fact that the Portfolio had a limited performance history and the current size of the Portfolio, the Board concluded that the Portfolio’s performance was satisfactory.

Fees and Expenses. The Board gave substantial consideration to the advisory fees payable under the Advisory Agreement and the sub-advisory fees payable under each of the Sub-Advisory Agreements. In this regard, the Board reviewed the advisory fees payable in the aggregate as well as on a Portfolio-by-Portfolio basis based on information provided by the Adviser. The Independent Trustees, with the assistance of Bobroff, also examined the fees paid by each Portfolio in light of fees paid to other investment managers by comparable funds and the method of computing each Portfolio’s fee, as well as considered the fees charged by the Adviser to manage other comparable funds. The Lipper report included

17

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

American Funds Growth Portfolio

Board of Trustees’ Consideration of Advisory Agreement—(Continued)

comparisons of the Adviser’s fee schedule with that of its peers based on an asset-based analysis of relative fee structures according to the size of each Portfolio. In addition, the Board considered the Portfolios’ advisory and sub-advisory fees and total expenses as compared to similarly situated investment companies underlying variable insurance products deemed to be comparable to the Portfolios as determined by Lipper. The Board considered each Portfolio’s ranking within a smaller group of peer funds chosen by Lipper (the “Expense Group”), as well as the Portfolio’s ranking within broader groups of funds (the “Expense Universe” and the “Sub-advised Expense Universe”). The Board also considered each Portfolio’s contractual sub-advisory fees, as applicable, as compared to the Sub-advised Expense Universe as well as a smaller group of funds (the “Sub-advised Expense Group”). In comparing each Portfolio’s actual and contractual management fee to that of comparable funds, the Board noted that such fee includes both advisory and administrative fees.

The Board noted that the sub-advisory fees for the Portfolios are paid by the Adviser, not the Portfolios, out of the advisory fee. It was further noted that the Adviser negotiates such fees at arm’s length. The Board also considered that the Adviser had entered into expense limitation agreements with certain of the Portfolios as noted below, pursuant to which the Adviser has agreed to waive a portion of its advisory fee and/or reimburse certain expenses as a means of limiting a Portfolio’s total annual operating expenses. In addition, the Board noted that the Adviser effected fee reductions in 2009 with respect to several Portfolios. The Board also noted that the Adviser had re-negotiated the securities lending arrangement with State Street Corporation to further maximize the income to the Portfolios from such program.

With respect to each sub-advised Portfolio, the Board also compared the sub-advisory fees paid by the Adviser to fees charged by the Portfolio’s Sub-Adviser to manage other sub-advised portfolios and portfolios not subject to regulation under the 1940 Act, such as separate accounts, as applicable. The Board considered the fee comparisons in light of the differences required to manage different types of accounts.

With respect to the American Funds Growth Portfolio, the Board considered that the Portfolio’s total expenses (exclusive of 12b-1 fees), which reflected the expenses of the underlying master fund, were below the Expense Group median and the Expense Universe median. The Board noted that the Portfolio does not currently pay an advisory fee under the stand-by Advisory Agreement and will not do so in the future unless the Portfolio no longer invests its assets in a master fund. The Board noted, however, that the Portfolio’s contractual management fees under the stand-by Advisory Agreement would be equal to the normalized median of the Expense Group at the Portfolio’s current size. The Board noted that the Adviser is reimbursing expenses so that the Portfolio’s total annual operating expenses are capped. After consideration of all relevant factors, the Board concluded that the advisory fee under the stand-by Advisory Agreement is consistent with industry norms and is fair and reasonable in light of the services to be provided.

Profitability. The Board examined the profitability of the Adviser on an aggregate basis with respect to all Portfolios, as well as on a Portfolio-by-Portfolio basis. With respect to the Asset Allocation Portfolios and Met/Franklin Templeton Founding Strategy Portfolio, the Board noted that the advisory fee is in addition to the fees received by the Adviser and its affiliates with regard to the other Portfolios of the Trust or of Metropolitan Series Fund, Inc. in which the Asset Allocation Portfolios and Met/Franklin Templeton Founding Strategy Portfolio may invest. With respect to the other Portfolios, the Board noted that a major component of profitability of the Adviser was the margin between the sub-advisory fees that the Adviser receives from the Trust and the portion of those fees paid to the Sub-Advisers. In this regard, the Board took into account certain comparative information in the Lipper report. The Board also reviewed the Adviser’s unaudited income statements and balance sheet information supplied by the Adviser regarding costs borne by the Adviser’s affiliates which support the operations of the Adviser but are not reflected on the unaudited income statements of the Adviser, as well as considered the profitability of the insurance products, the function of which is supported in part by the Adviser’s revenues under the Advisory Agreement, and other information and analysis prepared by the Adviser. With respect to the American Funds Bond Portfolio, American Funds Growth Portfolio, American Funds Growth-Income Portfolio, American Funds Global Small Capitalization Portfolio and American Funds International Portfolio, the Board noted that the Adviser currently does not receive an advisory fee. The Board also considered that the Distributor, MetLife Investors Distribution Company, receives 12b-1 payments to support the distribution of the products. The Board concluded after extensive discussions with management that the profitability of the Adviser and its affiliates from their relationship with each Portfolio was reasonable in light of all relevant factors.

In considering the profitability to the Sub-Advisers and their affiliates of their relationships with the Portfolios, the Board noted that the fees under the Sub-Advisory Agreements were paid by the Adviser out of the advisory fees that it receives under the Advisory Agreement. The Board also relied on the ability of the Adviser to negotiate the Sub-Advisory Agreements and the fees thereunder at arm’s length. The Board reviewed portfolio specific data with regard to the profitability of the Portfolios to each Sub-Adviser, as available, and analyzed the reasonableness of such profitability finding no indication of excessive profitability. However, the Board placed more reliance on the fact that the Sub-Advisory Agreement was negotiated at arm’s length and that the advisory fee was paid by the Adviser than on Sub-Adviser profitability.

Economies of scale. The Board also considered the effect of the Portfolios’ growth in size on their performances and fees. The Board noted that the fee schedules for all but eleven of the Portfolios contain breakpoints that reduce the fee rate above specified asset levels. The Board noted those Portfolios that did not contain breakpoints in the advisory fee and took into account management’s discussion of the same. The Board noted that those Portfolios with advisory fee schedules containing breakpoints generally reflect the inclusion of breakpoints in the sub-advisory fee schedule for such Portfolios. The Board considered the effective fees under the Advisory Agreement for each Portfolio as a percentage of assets at different asset levels and possible economies of scale that may be realized if the assets of the Portfolio grow. Among other data, the Board examined the effect of each Portfolio’s growth in size on various fee schedules and reviewed the Lipper and Bobroff Reports, which compared fee

18

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

American Funds Growth Portfolio

Board of Trustees’ Consideration of Advisory Agreement—(Continued)

schedules among peers. The Board also took into account that the Sub-Adviser fees are paid by the Adviser out of the advisory fee. The Board also noted that if the Portfolios’ assets increase over time, the Portfolios may realize other economies of scale if assets increase proportionally more than certain other fixed expenses.

With respect to the American Funds Growth Portfolio, the Board noted that the Portfolio’s advisory fee under the stand-by Advisory Agreement does not contain breakpoints. The Board noted, however, that the Portfolio’s management fee is below the asset-weighted average of comparable funds at all asset levels. The Board considered the effect of the Portfolio’s current size and potential growth on its performance and fees. The Board noted that if the Portfolio’s assets increased over time, the Portfolio might realize other economies of scale if assets increased proportionally more than certain other fixed expenses. The Board concluded that adding breakpoints to the advisory fee at specified asset levels was not appropriate given the Portfolio’s current size and the fact that the Portfolio is not currently paying the advisory fee. The Board concluded that the advisory fee structure for the Portfolio was reasonable and appropriate.

Other factors. As part of its evaluation of the Adviser’s compensation, the Board considered other benefits that may be realized by the Adviser and its affiliates from their relationship with the Trust. Among them, the Board recognized that an affiliate of the Adviser, MetLife Investors Distribution Company, serves as the Distributor for the Trust, and, as such, receives payments pursuant to Rule 12b-1 from the Portfolios to compensate it for providing shareholder services and selling activities, which could lead to growth in the Trust’s assets and corresponding benefits from such growth, including economies of scale. The Board also considered that affiliates of the Adviser may benefit from certain indirect tax benefits relating to dividend received deductions and foreign tax credits. The Board concluded that ancillary benefits accruing to the Adviser and its affiliates by virtue of the Adviser’s relationship with the Portfolios are fair and reasonable in light of the costs of providing investment management and other services to the Portfolios and the ongoing commitment of the Adviser to the Portfolios.

The Board considered other benefits that may be realized by each Subadviser and its affiliates from their relationship with the Trust, including the opportunity to provide advisory services to additional portfolios of the Trust and reputational benefits. The Board concluded that the benefits accruing to the Subadvisers and their affiliates by virtue of the Subadvisers’ relationships to the Portfolios are fair and reasonable in light of the costs of providing investment advisory services to the Portfolios and the ongoing commitment of the Subadvisers to the Portfolios.

The Board considered any possible conflicts of interest in the form of material benefits or detriments to the Trust resulting from the nature of the Trust’s and the Adviser’s or the Subadvisers’ affiliations. Here, the Board considered possible conflicts of interest that may arise between the Trust and the Adviser or a Subadviser in connection with the services provided to the Trust and the various relationships that they and their affiliates may have with the Trust. The Board considered the procedures for monitoring and managing such potential conflicts.

Conclusion. In considering the renewal of each of the Agreements, the Board, including the Independent Trustees, did not identify any single factor as controlling, and each Trustee may have attributed different weights to various factors. The Board evaluated all information available to them on a Portfolio-by-Portfolio basis, and their determinations were made separately with respect to each Portfolio. Based on all of the above-mentioned considerations, and the recommendations of management, the Board, including a majority of the Independent Trustees, determined that approval of the Advisory Agreement and the Sub-Advisory Agreements was in the best interests of each Portfolio. After full consideration of these and other factors, the Board, including a majority of the Independent Trustees, with the assistance of independent counsel, approved the Advisory Agreement and the Sub-Advisory Agreement with respect to each Portfolio.

19

Simplify your life…

with MetLife eDelivery^® while helping MetLife preserve the planet’s natural resources.

(see details on inside cover)

Met Investors Series Trust American Funds International Portfolio Annual Report December 31, 2009

• get rid of all that paper?

• access important documents whenever you want?

• conveniently receive valuable information online?

Get it all with MetLife eDelivery!

MetLife’s eDelivery service is your resource for electronic delivery of your variable annuity or variable life prospectuses, semiannual and annual reports, and other information. Available to variable product clients of Metropolitan Life Insurance Company, First MetLife Investors Insurance Company, General American Life Insurance Company, MetLife Investors Insurance Company, MetLife Investors USA Insurance Company, MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut and New England Life Insurance Company.*

Why sign up for MetLife eDelivery?

It’s Free** – No cost to enroll or use the service.

It’s Paperless – We’ll email you when your documents are available.

It’s Easy – Enrollment takes just a few minutes.

How do you sign up?

Just type in www.metlife.esourcelink.net to get to MetLife’s online registration form. You will need your policy/account numbers, which can be found on your statements. The form takes only a few minutes to complete. Please note, for jointly owned contracts, both owners will need to register in order to eliminate paper delivery.

  * Not all MetLife products offer eDelivery at this time. ** Your internet provider may impose fees for this service. L0210086208[0911]

Letter from the President

Letter to Policy Holders

February 1, 2010

2009 can best be described as a year of recovery. The year began with the stock market in a broad decline and the economy mired in a deep recession. However, investors’ sentiment improved dramatically during the year as fiscal and monetary authorities took measures to jump start the economy which helped spark a strong market rally in equities and corporate bonds.

The Barclays Capital U.S. Aggregate Bond Index returned 5.9% during 2009. While this was similar to the 5.2% return experienced in 2008, the two years could not have been more different. In 2008, fear drove investors toward the safety of U.S. Treasury securities and away from the risk of corporate bonds, especially those rated below investment grade. In contrast, investors were more willing to embrace risk in 2009. This produced an enormous recovery in below investment grade bonds; the Barclays Capital U.S. Corporate High Yield Index returned over 58% in 2009 after falling 26% in 2008. The Barclays Capital U.S. Treasury Index returned 13.7% in 2008, but declined 3.6% in 2009.

Stock investors also became less pessimistic in 2009. While the stock market indices are still far from the record levels reached in 2007, investors were rewarded in 2009 as stocks returned 26.5% as measured by the Standard & Poor’s 500 Index, its best return since 2003. Foreign stocks, as measured by the MSCI EAFE Index, returned 31.8% during 2009.

On the following pages, you will find a complete review of your Portfolio and its investment performance.

MetLife is committed to building your financial freedom. We appreciate your trust and will continue to focus our efforts on meeting your investment needs.

Sincerely,

Elizabeth M. Forget

President

Met Investors Series Trust

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

American Funds International Portfolio

During the year ended December 31, 2009, the Portfolio had a return of 42.56% for Class C versus 31.78% and 41.45% for its benchmarks, the MSCI EAFE Index¹ and Morgan Stanley Capital International AC World (ex-U.S.) Index².

American Funds International Portfolio managed by MetLife Advisers, LLC vs. MSCI EAFE Index¹ and Morgan Stanley Capital International AC World (ex-U.S.) Index²

	Average Annual Return3 (for the year ended 12/31/09)
	1 Year	3 Year	5 Year	10 Year
American Funds International Portfolio—Class C	42.56%	-0.71%	7.00%	1.61%
MSCI EAFE Index1	31.78%	-6.04%	3.54%	1.17%
Morgan Stanley Capital International AC World (ex-U.S.) Index2	41.45%	-3.49%	5.83%	2.71%

¹ The Morgan Stanley Capital International Europe, Australasia and Far East Index (“MSCI EAFE Index”) is an unmanaged free float-adjusted market capitalization index that is designed to measure developed market equity performance excluding the U.S. and Canada. The index returns shown above were calculated with net dividends: they reflect the reinvestment of dividends after the deduction of the maximum possible withholding taxes.

²The Morgan Stanley Capital International AC World (ex-U.S.) Index (net) is an unmanaged free float-adjusted market capitalization index that is designed to measure equity market performance in the global developed and emerging markets, excluding the United States. The index returns shown above were calculated with net dividends: they reflect the reinvestment of dividends after the deduction of the maximum possible withholding taxes.

³“Average Annual Return” is calculated including reinvestment of all income dividends and capital gain distributions.

The Portfolio and its corresponding Master Fund have essentially the same investment objectives, policies, and strategies. Since the Portfolio commenced operations on April 28, 2008, it does not have a significant operating history. However, hypothetical performance information regarding the Portfolio is presented because the Portfolio’s performance is based on the performance of the Master Fund for the period ended December 31, 2009 adjusted to reflect the Portfolio’s expenses for the period ended December 31, 2009 (including contractual expense waivers).

Past performance does not guarantee future results. The investment return and principal value of an investment in the Portfolio will fluctuate, so that shares, on any given day or when redeemed, may be worth more or less than their original cost. Performance numbers are net of all Portfolio expenses but do not include any insurance, sales, or administration charges of variable annuity or life insurance contracts. If these charges were included, the returns would be lower. The Indexes do not include fees or expenses and are not available for direct investment.

1

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

American Funds International Portfolio

Understanding Your Portfolio’s Expenses

Shareholder Expense Example

As a shareholder of the Portfolio, you incur ongoing costs, including management fees; distribution and service (12b-1) fees; and other Portfolio expenses. This example is intended to help you understand your ongoing costs (in dollars) (referred to as “expenses”) of investing in the Portfolio and compare these costs with the ongoing costs of investing in other mutual funds. The example is based on an investment of $1,000 invested at the beginning of the period and held for the entire period, July 1, 2009 through December 31, 2009.

Actual Expenses

The first line in the table below provides information about actual account values and actual expenses. You may use the information in this line, together with the amount you invested in the Portfolio, to estimate the expenses that you paid over the period. Simply divide your account value by $1,000 (for example, an $8,600 account value divided by $1,000 = 8.6), then multiply the result by the number in the first line under the heading entitled “Expenses Paid During Period” to estimate the expenses you paid on your account during this period.

Hypothetical Example for Comparison Purposes

The second line in the table below provides information about hypothetical account values and hypothetical expenses based on the Portfolio’s actual expense ratio and an assumed rate of return of 5% per year before expenses, which is not the Portfolio’s actual return. The hypothetical account values and expenses may not be used to estimate the actual ending account balance or expenses you paid for the period. You may use this information to compare the ongoing costs of investing in the Portfolio and other funds. To do so, compare this 5% hypothetical example with the 5% hypothetical examples that appear in the shareholder reports of the other funds.

Please note that the expenses shown in the table are meant to highlight your ongoing costs only and do not reflect any fees or charges of your variable insurance product or any additional expenses that participants in certain eligible qualified plans may bear relating to the operations of their plan. Therefore, the second line in the table is useful in comparing ongoing costs only, and will not help you determine the relative total costs of owning different funds. In addition, if these other costs were included, your costs would have been higher.

	Annualized Expense Ratio	Beginning Account Value 7/1/09		Ending Account Value 12/31/09		Expenses Paid During Period* 7/1/09-12/31/09
Class C
Actual	0.65%	$	1,000.00	$	1,240.85	$	3.67
Hypothetical	0.65%		1,000.00		1,021.93		3.31

* Expenses paid are equal to the Portfolio’s annualized expense ratio for the most recent six month period, as shown above, multiplied by the average account value over the period, multiplied by the number of days (184 days) in the most recent fiscal half-year, divided by 365 (to reflect the one-half year period).

2

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

American Funds International Portfolio

PORTFOLIO OF INVESTMENTS

December 31, 2009

(Percentage of Net Assets)

Security Description	Shares	Value
Investment Company Security - 100.0%
American Funds International Fund(a) (Cost - $169,424,558)	11,325,558	$	194,459,825
Total Investments - 100.0% (Cost $169,424,558)			194,459,825
Other Assets And Liabilities (net) - 0.0%			(96,446	)
Net Assets - 100.0%		$	194,363,379

(a) A Portfolio of the American Funds Insurance Series.

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

3

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

American Funds International Portfolio

Various inputs are used in determining the value of the Portfolio’s investments, which are as follows:

Level 1—unadjusted quoted prices in active markets for identical investments

Level 2—other significant observable inputs (including, but not limited to: quoted prices for similar investments in markets that are both active or inactive; inputs other than quoted prices that are observable such as interest rates, yield curves, credit risks, default rates, etc.)

Level 3—significant unobservable inputs based on the best information available in the circumstances, to the extent observable inputs are unavailable (including the Portfolio’s own assumptions in determining the fair value of investments)

The inputs or methodology used for valuing investments are not necessarily an indication of the risk associated with investing in them. For information about the Portfolio’s policy regarding valuation of investments and other significant accounting policies, please refer to Note 2 of the Notes to Financial Statements.

The following table summarizes the inputs used in determining the value the Portfolio’s investments as of December 31, 2009:

ASSETS VALUATION INPUTS

Description	Level 1		Level 2		Level 3		Total
Investment Company Security	$	194,459,825	$	—	$	—	$	194,459,825
TOTAL INVESTMENTS	$	194,459,825	$	—	$	—	$	194,459,825

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

4

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

American Funds International Portfolio

Statement of Assets and Liabilities

December 31, 2009

Assets
Investments at value (a)	$	194,459,825
Receivable for shares sold		325,939
Receivable from Manager		6,258
Total assets		194,792,022
Liabilities
Payables for:
Investments purchased		320,428
Shares redeemed		5,511
Accrued Expenses:
Administration fees		2,000
Distribution and service fees - Class C		87,289
Custodian and accounting fees		2,067
Deferred trustees’ fees		7,518
Other expenses		3,830
Total liabilities		428,643
Net Assets	$	194,363,379
Net Assets Represented by
Paid in surplus	$	170,100,899
Accumulated net realized loss		(2,714,417	)
Unrealized appreciation on investments		25,035,267
Undistributed net investment income		1,941,630
Net Assets	$	194,363,379
Net Assets
Class C	$	194,363,379
Capital Shares Outstanding
Class C		23,876,725
Net Asset Value, Offering Price and Redemption Price Per Share
Class C	$	8.14

(a) Identified cost of investments was $169,424,558.

Statement of Operations

For the Year Ended December 31, 2009

Investment Income
Dividends from Underlying Portfolios	$	2,703,666
Total investment income		2,703,666
Expenses
Administration fees		23,985
Custodian and accounting fees		25,301
Distribution and service fees - Class C		644,800
Audit and tax services		17,179
Legal		43,447
Trustees’ fees and expenses		21,139
Shareholder reporting		9,616
Insurance		1,063
Miscellaneous		6,115
Total expenses		792,645
Less expenses reimbursed by the Manager		(30,609	)
Net expenses		762,036
Net investment income		1,941,630
Net Realized and Unrealized Gain (Loss) on Investments
Net realized gain (loss) on:
Investments		(3,036,813	)
Capital gain distributions from Underlying Portfolios		1,423,063
Net realized loss on investments		(1,613,750	)
Net change in unrealized appreciation on investments		44,540,507
Net realized and unrealized gain on investments		42,926,757
Net Increase in Net Assets from Operations	$	44,868,387

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

5

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

American Funds International Portfolio

Statements of Changes in Net Assets

	Year Ended December 31, 2009			Period Ended December 31, 2008*
Increase (Decrease) in Net Assets:
Operations
Net investment income	$	1,941,630		$	1,365,615
Net realized gain (loss) on investments and capital gain distribution from Master Fund		(1,613,750	)		1,114,528
Net change in unrealized appreciation (depreciation) on investments		44,540,507			(19,505,240	)
Net increase (decrease) in net assets resulting from operations		44,868,387			(17,025,097	)
Distributions to Shareholders
From net investment income
Class C		—			(3,597,911	)
From net realized gains
Class C		(14	)		(1,157	)
Net decrease in net assets resulting from distributions		(14	)		(3,599,068	)
Capital Share Transactions
Proceeds from shares sold
Class C		112,156,528			78,256,528
Net asset value of shares issued through dividend reinvestment
Class C		14			3,599,068
Cost of shares repurchased
Class C		(17,314,731	)		(6,578,236	)
Net increase in net assets from capital share transactions		94,841,811			75,277,360
Net Increase in Net Assets		139,710,184			54,653,195
Net assets at beginning of period		54,653,195			—
Net assets at end of period	$	194,363,379		$	54,653,195
Undistributed net investment income at end of period	$	1,941,630		$	—

* For the period 4/28/2008 (Commencement of operations) through 12/31/2008.

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

6

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

American Funds International Portfolio

Financial Highlights

Selected Per Share Data for the Years or Period Ended:
	Class C
	For the Years Ended December 31,
	2009			2008(b)
Net Asset Value, Beginning of Period	$	5.71		$	10.00
Income (Loss) from Investment Operations:
Net investment income(a)		0.12			0.31
Net realized/unrealized gain (loss) on investments		2.31			(4.20	)
Total from investment operations		2.43			(3.89	)
Less Distributions
Dividends from net investment income		—			(0.40	)
Distributions from net realized capital gains		(0.00	)+		(0.00	)+
Total distributions		(0.00	)+		(0.40	)
Net Asset Value, End of Period	$	8.14		$	5.71
Total Return		42.56	%		(38.86	)%
Ratio of expenses to average net assets after reimbursement		0.65	%		0.65	%*
Ratio of expenses to average net assets before reimbursement and rebates		0.68	%		0.85	%*
Ratio of net investment income to average net assets		1.66	%		6.43	%*
Portfolio turnover rate		2.5	%		7.9	%
Net assets, end of period (in millions)	$	194.4		$	54.7

* Annualized

+ Rounds to less than $0.005 per share.

(a) Per share amounts based on average shares outstanding during the period.

(b) Commencement of operations—4/28/2008.

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

7

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

American Funds International Portfolio

Notes to Financial Statements—December 31, 2009

1. Organization

Met Investors Series Trust (the “Trust”) is registered as an open-end management investment company under the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended (the “1940 Act”). The Trust currently offers forty-eight Portfolios (the “Portfolios”), each of which operates as a distinct investment vehicle of the Trust. The portfolio included in this report is American Funds International Portfolio (the “Portfolio”), which is diversified. Shares in the Trust are not offered directly to the general public and are currently available only to separate accounts established by certain affiliated life insurance companies.

The Trust is managed by MetLife Advisers, LLC (the “Manager”), an affiliate of MetLife, Inc. (“MetLife”).

The Trust has registered four classes of shares: Class A, B, C and E Shares. Class C Shares are currently offered by the Portfolio. Shares of each Class of the Portfolio represent an equal pro rata interest in the Portfolio and generally give the shareholder the same voting, dividend, liquidation, and other rights. Investment income, realized and unrealized capital gains and losses, the common expenses of the Portfolio and certain Portfolio-level expense reductions, if any, are allocated on a pro rata basis to each Class based on the relative net assets of each Class to the net assets of the Portfolio. Each Class of shares differs in its respective distribution expenses.

The Portfolio, a feeder fund, seeks to achieve its investment objective by investing all of its investable assets in a master fund, the International Fund (the “Master Fund”), a fund of the American Funds Insurance Series (“AFIS”). AFIS is an open-end diversified investment management company advised by Capital Research and Management Company (“CRMC”), an indirect, wholly owned subsidiary of The Capital Group Companies, Inc. The financial statements of the Master Fund are provided separately and should be read in conjunction with the Portfolio’s financial statements. As of December 31, 2009, the Portfolio owned approximately 2.09% of the Master Fund.

2. Significant Accounting Policies

The financial statements have been prepared in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (“GAAP”) which require management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of income and expenses during the reporting period. Actual results could differ from these estimates.

The following is a summary of significant accounting policies consistently followed by the Trust in the preparation of its financial statements.

Valuation - Investments in the Master Fund are valued at its closing daily net asset value. The net asset value of the Portfolio is calculated based on the net asset value of the Master Fund in which the Portfolio invests. For information about the use of fair value pricing by the Master Fund, please refer to the Notes to Financial Statements for the Master Fund.

Security Transactions - Security transactions are recorded on a trade date basis. Realized gains and losses on investments and unrealized appreciation and depreciation are determined on the identified cost basis, which is the same basis used for federal income tax purposes.

Investment Income and Expenses - Interest income is recorded on an accrual basis. Discounts and premiums on securities purchased are amortized over the lives of the respective securities. Income and capital gain distributions from the Master Fund are recorded on the ex-dividend date.

Income Taxes - It is the Portfolio’s policy to comply with the requirements of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”), and regulations thereunder, applicable to regulated investment companies and to distribute, with respect to each taxable year, all of its taxable income to shareholders. Therefore, no federal income tax provision is required. The Portfolio files U.S. Federal and various state tax returns. No income tax returns are currently under examination. The Portfolio’s federal tax returns for the prior three fiscal years remain subject to examination by the Internal Revenue Service.

Dividends and Distributions to Shareholders - The Portfolio records dividends and distributions on the ex-dividend date. Net realized gains from security transactions (if any) are generally distributed annually to shareholders. The timing and characterization of certain income and capital gains distributions are determined in accordance with federal tax regulations that may differ from GAAP. Permanent book and tax basis differences relating to shareholder distributions will result in reclassification between under/over distributed net investment income, accumulated net realized gains/losses and paid in surplus. Book-tax differences are primarily due to futures transactions, foreign currency transactions, certain foreign withholding taxes, passive foreign investment companies (PFIC), partnerships, deferred trustees compensation, capital loss carryforwards and losses deferred due to wash sales, as applicable. These adjustments have no impact on net assets or the results of operations.

3. Investment Management Agreement and Other Transactions with Affiliates

Investment Management Agreement - The Trust has entered into a management agreement with the Manager (the “Management Agreement”) for investment management services in connection with the investment management of the Portfolio. The Manager is subject to the supervision

8

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

American Funds International Portfolio

Notes to Financial Statements—December 31, 2009—(Continued)

and direction of the Board of Trustees (the “Board”) and has overall responsibility for the general management and administration of the Trust. The Manager selects the Master Fund in which the Portfolio will invest and monitors the Master Fund investment program. The Manager is an affiliate of MetLife. The Manager currently receives no compensation for its services to the Portfolio. In the event that the Portfolio were to withdraw from the Master Fund and invest its assets directly in investment securities, the Manager would retain the services of an investment adviser and would receive a management fee at an annual rate of percentage of the assets of the Portfolio as follows:

% per annum	Average Daily Net Assets
0.90%	ALL

Transfer Agency Agreement - Metropolitan Life Insurance Company (“MLIC”) serves as the transfer agent for the Trust. MLIC is an affiliate of the Manager. MLIC receives no fees for its services to the Trust under the transfer agency agreement.

Expense Limitation Agreement - The Manager has entered into an expense limitation agreement with the Trust (“Expense Limitation Agreement”) in the interest of limiting expenses of the Portfolio. The Expense Limitation Agreement shall continue in effect with respect to the Portfolio until April 30, 2010. Pursuant to that Expense Limitation Agreement, the Manager has agreed to waive or limit its fees and to assume other expenses so that the total annual operating expenses of the Portfolio other than interest, taxes, brokerage commissions, other expenditures which are capitalized in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America, other extraordinary expenses not incurred in the ordinary course of the Portfolio’s business, and Master Fund fees and expenses, but including amounts payable pursuant to a plan adopted in accordance with Rule 12b-1 under the 1940 Act, are limited to the following expense ratio as a percentage of the Portfolio’s average daily net assets:

Maximum Expense Ratio under current Expense Limitation Agreement	Expenses Deferred in
	2008		2009
	Subject to repayment until December 31,
Class C	2013		2014
0.65%	$	44,363	$	30,609

The expenses reimbursed for the year ended December 31, 2009 are shown as expenses reimbursed in the Statement of Operations of the Portfolio.

If in any year in which the Management Agreement is still in effect, the estimated aggregate portfolio operating expenses of the Portfolio for the fiscal year are less than the Maximum Expense Ratio for that year, subject to approval by the Trust’s Board, the Manager shall be entitled to reimbursement by the Portfolio to the extent that the charge does not cause the expenses in such subsequent year to exceed the Maximum Expense Ratio as stated above. The Portfolio is not obligated to repay any expense paid by the Manager more than five years after the end of the fiscal year in which such expense was incurred.

Distribution Agreements and Plans - The Trust has a distribution agreement with MetLife Investors Distribution Company (“MIDC” or the “Distributor”) in which MIDC serves as the Distributor for the Trust’s Class C Shares. MIDC is a wholly-owned subsidiary of MetLife Investors Group, Inc., an affiliate of the Manager. The Class C distribution plan provides that the Trust, on behalf of the Portfolio, may pay annually up to 1.00% of the average net assets of the Portfolio attributable to its Class C Shares in respect to activities primarily intended to result in the sale of Class C Shares. However, under the Class C distribution agreement, payments to the Distributor for activities pursuant to the Class C distribution plan are currently limited to payments at an annual rate equal to 0.55% of average daily net assets of the Portfolio, attributable to its Class C Shares.

Under the terms of the Class C distribution plan and distribution agreement, the Portfolio is authorized to make payments monthly to the Distributor that may be used to pay or reimburse entities providing distribution and shareholder servicing with respect to the Class C Shares for such entities’ fees or expenses incurred.

Deferred Trustee Compensation - Each Trustee of the Trust who is not currently an employee of the Manager or any of its affiliates receives compensation from the Trust for his or her service to the Portfolio. A deferred compensation plan (the “Plan”) is available to the Trustees on a voluntary basis. Deferred amounts remain in the Trust until distributed in accordance with the provisions of the Plan. The value of a participating Trustee’s deferral account is based on theoretical investments of deferred amounts, on the normal payment dates, in certain portfolios of the Trust or Metropolitan Series Fund, Inc. as designated by the participating Trustee. Changes in the value of participants’ deferral accounts are reflected as Trustees’ fees and expenses in the Statement of Operations. The portion of the accrued obligations allocated to the Portfolio, if any, under the Plan are reflected as Deferred Trustees’ fees in the Statement of Assets and Liabilities.

9

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

American Funds International Portfolio

Notes to Financial Statements—December 31, 2009—(Continued)

4. Shares of Beneficial Interest

Transactions in shares of beneficial interest for the periods ended noted below were as follows:

	Beginning Shares	Sales	Reinvestments	Redemptions		Net Increase in Shares Outstanding	Ending Shares
Class C
12/31/2009	9,573,092	16,824,923	3	(2,521,293	)	14,303,633	23,876,725
4/28/2008-12/31/2008	—	9,816,178	629,208	(872,294	)	9,573,092	9,573,092

The Portfolio is authorized to issue an unlimited number of shares.

5. Investment Transactions

Aggregate cost of purchases and proceeds of sales of investment securities, excluding short-term securities, for the period ended December 31, 2009 were as follows:

Purchases			Sales
U.S. Government	Non-Government		U.S. Government		Non-Government
$—	$	100,374,094	$	—	$	2,928,598

At December 31, 2009, the cost of securities for federal income tax purposes and the unrealized appreciation (depreciation) of investments for federal income tax purposes for the Portfolio were as follows:

Federal Income Tax Cost		Gross Unrealized Appreciation		Gross Unrealized Depreciation		Net Unrealized Appreciation
$	172,751,625	$	21,708,200	$	—	$	21,708,200

6. Contractual Obligations

The Trust has a variety of indemnification obligations under contracts with its service providers. The Trust’s maximum exposure under these arrangements is unknown. However, the Trust has not had prior claims or losses pursuant to these contracts and expects the risk of loss to be remote.

7. Market, Credit and Counterparty Risk

In the normal course of business, the Master Fund in which the Portfolio invests its assets invests in securities and enters into transactions where risks exist due to fluctuations in the market (market risk) or failure of the other party to a transaction to perform (credit risk). The value of securities held by the Master Fund may decline in response to certain events, including those directly involving the companies whose securities are owned by the Master Fund; conditions affecting the general economy; overall market changes; local, regional or global political, social or economic instability; and currency and interest rate and price fluctuations. The Master Fund may be exposed to counterparty risk, or the risk that an entity with which the Master Fund has unsettled or open transactions may default. The potential loss could exceed the value of the financial assets recorded in the financial statements. Financial assets, which potentially expose the Master Fund to credit risk, consist principally of cash due from counterparties and investments. The Master Fund restricts its exposure to credit losses by entering into master agreements with counterparties (approved brokers) with whom it undertakes a significant volume of transactions to include certain safeguards for derivatives and non-standard settlement trades. The credit risk associated with favorable contracts is reduced by a master netting arrangement to the extent that if an event of default occurs, all amounts with the counterparty are terminated and settled on a net basis. The Master Fund’s overall exposure to credit risk on derivative instruments subject to master netting arrangements can change substantially within a short period, as it is affected by each transaction subject to the arrangement.

10

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

American Funds International Portfolio

Notes to Financial Statements—December 31, 2009—(Continued)

8. Income Tax Information

The tax character of distributions paid for the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2008 were as follows:

Ordinary Income			Long-Term Capital Gains				Total
2009	2008		2009		2008		2009		2008
$—	$	1,628,706	$	14	$	1,970,362	$	14	$	3,599,068

As of December 31, 2009, the components of distributable earnings (accumulated losses) on a federal income tax basis were as follows:

Undistributed Ordinary Income	Undistributed Long-Term Gain		Net Unrealized Appreciation		Loss Carryforwards		Total
$1,949,148	$	612,650	$	21,708,200	$	—	$	24,269,998

9. Recent Accounting Pronouncement

On January 21, 2010, the Financial Accounting Standards Board issued Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) 2010-06, “Improving Disclosures About Fair Value Measurements.” The ASU amends Accounting Standards Codification 820 to add new requirements for disclosures about transfers into and out of Levels 1 and 2. It also clarifies existing fair value disclosures about the level of disaggregation and about inputs and valuation techniques used to measure fair value. Additionally, the ASU amends disclosures about providing purchases, sales, issuances, and settlements on a gross basis relating to Level 3 measurements. The ASU guidance is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2009, and for interim periods within those fiscal years, except for the requirement to provide the Level 3 activity of purchases, sales, issuances, and settlements on a gross basis, which will be effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2010, and for interim periods within those fiscal years. Management is currently evaluating the impact the adoption of ASU 2010-06 will have on the Portfolio’s financial statements.

10. Subsequent Events

Management’s evaluation of the impact of all subsequent events on the Portfolio’s financial statements was completed through February 25, 2010, the date the financial statements were issued, and management has determined that as of that date there were no subsequent events requiring adjustments or disclosure in the Portfolio’s financial statements.

11

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

American Funds International Portfolio

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

To the Shareholders and Board of Trustees of Met Investors Series Trust:

We have audited the accompanying statement of assets and liabilities, including the portfolio of investments, of the American Funds International Portfolio, one of the portfolios constituting Met Investors Series Trust (the “Trust”), as of December 31, 2009, and the related statement of operations for the year then ended, and the statements of changes in net assets and the financial highlights for the year ended December 31, 2009 and for the period from April 28, 2008 (commencement of operations) to December 31, 2008. These financial statements and financial highlights are the responsibility of the Trust’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements and financial highlights based on our audits.

We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements and financial highlights are free of material misstatement. The Trust is not required to have, nor were we engaged to perform, an audit of its internal control over financial reporting. Our audits included consideration of internal control over financial reporting as a basis for designing audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the Trust’s internal control over financial reporting. Accordingly, we express no such opinion. An audit also includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements, assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. Our procedures included confirmation of securities owned as of December 31, 2009, by correspondence with the transfer agent. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.

In our opinion, the financial statements and financial highlights referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of the American Funds International Portfolio of the Met Investors Series Trust as of December 31, 2009, the results of its operations for the year then ended, and the changes in its net assets and the financial highlights for the year ended December 31, 2009 and for the period from April 28, 2008 (commencement of operations) to December 31, 2008, in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.

Deloitte & Touche LLP

Boston, Massachusetts

February 25, 2010

12

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Trustees and Officers (Unaudited) December 31, 2009

The Trustees and executive officers of the Trust, their ages and their principal occupations during the past five years are set forth below. Unless otherwise indicated, the business address of each is 5 Park Plaza, Suite 1900 Irvine, California 92614. Each Trustee who is deemed an “interested person,” as such term is defined in the 1940 Act, is indicated by an asterisk. Those Trustees who are not “interested persons” as defined in the 1940 Act are referred to as “Independent Trustees.” Additional information about the Trustees is available in the Statement of Additional Information which is available without charge, upon request, by calling (800) 848-3854.

The Trustees
Name and Age	Position(s) Held with Registrant	Term of Office and Length of Time Served	Principal Occupation(s) During Past 5 Years	Number of Portfolios in Fund Complex+ overseen by Trustee	Other Directorships Held by Trustee
Interested Trustees
Elizabeth M. Forget* (43)	President and Trustee	Indefinite; From December 2000 to present	Since May 2007, Senior Vice President, MetLife, Inc.; since December 2000, President of MetLife Advisers, LLC and its predecessor; December 2003 to April 2007, Vice President, MetLife, Inc.	84	Director, Metropolitan Series Fund, Inc. since August 2006.
Independent Trustees
Stephen M. Alderman (50)	Trustee	Indefinite; From December 2000 to present	Since November 1991, Shareholder in the law firm of Garfield and Merel, Ltd.	48	None
Jack R. Borsting (80)	Trustee	Indefinite; From December 2000 to present	Since 2006, Professor and Dean Emeritus, Marshall School of Business, University of Southern California (USC); from 2001 to 2005, Professor of Business Administration and Dean Emeritus.	48	Director, Los Angeles Orthopedic Hospital, Trustee, The Rose Hills Foundation. Member, Army Science Board.
Robert Boulware (53)	Trustee	Indefinite; From March 2008 to present	From 2004 to 2009, Director of Norwood Promotional Products, Inc.; from 2007 to 2008, Director of Wealthpoint Advisors (a business development company); from 2007 to 2009, Director of Holladay Bank; from 1992-2006, President and Chief Executive Officer of ING Fund Distributor, LLC.	48	Since 2005, Director of Gainsco, Inc. (auto insurance).
Daniel A. Doyle (51)	Trustee	Indefinite; From February 2007 to present	From October 2000 to June 2009, Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of ATC Management, Inc. (public utility); since June 2009, independent business consultant.	48	Director, Wisconsin Sports Development Corporation
Susan C. Gause (57)	Trustee	Indefinite; From March 2008 to present	From 2000 to December 2002, Chief Executive Officer of Allianz Dresdner Asset Management; since 2003, private investor.	48	None

13

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Trustees and Officers (Unaudited)—(Continued) December 31, 2009

Name and Age	Position(s) Held with Registrant	Term of Office and Length of Time Served	Principal Occupation(s) During Past 5 Years	Number of Portfolios in Fund Complex+ overseen by Trustee	Other Directorships Held by Trustee
Independent Trustees - continued
Dawn M. Vroegop (43)	Trustee	Indefinite; From December 2000 to present	From September 1999 to September 2003, Managing Director, Dresdner RCM Global Investors.	84	Director, Metropolitan Series Fund, Inc. since May 2009; from 2003 to present, Director and Finance Committee Chair, City College of San Francisco Foundation

The Executive Officers
Name and Age	Position(s) Held with Registrant	Term of Office and Length of Time Served	Principal Occupation(s) During Past 5 Years
Jeffrey L. Bernier (38)	Vice President	From February 2009 to present	Since December 2007, Vice President, Metropolitan Life Insurance Company; since 2008 Senior Vice President of MetLife Advisers, LLC and its predecessor; from July 2004 to December 2007, Director and Senior Investment Analyst of Investment Management Services for John Hancock Financial Services.
Jeffrey A. Tupper (39)	Chief Financial Officer, Treasurer	From August 2002 to present	Since February 2009, Vice President, MetLife Advisers, LLC. Since October 2006, Assistant Vice President, MetLife Group, Inc. Since February 2001, Assistant Vice President of MetLife Investors Insurance Company.
Richard C. Pearson (66)	Vice President and Secretary	From December 2000 to present	Since June 2001, President or Executive Vice President of MetLife Investors Distribution Company; since January 2001, Executive Vice President, General Counsel and Secretary of MetLife Investors Group, Inc. and Vice President, Secretary and Associate General Counsel of its affiliated life insurance companies; since November 2000, Senior Vice President and General Counsel of MetLife Advisers, LLC and its predecessor.
Jeffrey P. Halperin (42)	Chief Compliance Officer	From November 2006 to present	Since March 2006, Vice President, Corporate Ethics and Compliance Department, MetLife, Inc.; from October 2002 to March 2006, Assistant Vice President; from November 2005 to August 2006, Interim Chief Compliance Officer, Met Investors Series Trust; since April 2007, Chief Compliance Officer, Metropolitan Series Funds; from August 2006 to April 2007, Interim Chief Compliance Officer, Metropolitan Series Funds; since August 2006, Chief Compliance Officer, MetLife Advisers, LLC and its predecessor; since November 2006, Chief Compliance Officer, MetLife Investment Advisors Company, LLC.

+ The Fund Complex includes the Trust (48 portfolios) and Metropolitan Series Fund, Inc. (36 portfolios).

* Ms. Forget is an “interested person” of the Trust as a result of her affiliation with the Manager and the Distributor.

Quarterly Portfolio Schedule

The Trust files Form N-Q for the first and third quarters of each fiscal year. The Trust’s Forms N-Q will be available on the Securities and Exchange Commission’s website at http://www.sec.gov. The Trust’s Forms N-Q may be reviewed and copied at the Securities and Exchange Commission’s

14

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Trustees and Officers (Unaudited)—(Continued) December 31, 2009

Public Reference Room in Washington, D.C. and information on the operation of the Public Reference Room may be obtained by calling 1-800-SEC-0330. Once filed, the most recent Form N-Q will be available without charge, upon request, by calling (800) 848-3854.

Proxy Voting Policies and Procedures

A description of the policies and procedures that the Trust uses to determine how to vote proxies relating to portfolio securities is available without charge, upon request, by calling (800) 848-3854 and on the Securities and Exchange Commission’s website at http://www.sec.gov.

Proxy Voting Record

The Trust, on behalf of each of its Portfolios, has filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission its proxy voting record for the 12-month period ending June 30 on Form N-PX. Form N-PX must be filed by the Trust each year by August 31. Once filed, the most recent Form N-PX will be available without charge, upon request, by calling (800) 848-3854 or on the Securities and Exchange Commission’s website at http://www.sec.gov.

15

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

American Funds International Portfolio

Board of Trustees’ Consideration of Advisory Agreement

At an in-person meeting of the Board of Trustees (the “Board”) of the Met Investors Series Trust (the “Trust”) held on November 10-11, 2009, the Board, including a majority of the Trustees who are not considered to be “interested persons” of the Trust (the “Independent Trustees”) under the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended (the “1940 Act”), approved for an annual period the continuation of the Trust’s advisory agreement (the “Advisory Agreement”) with MetLife Advisers, LLC (the “Adviser”) and the applicable sub-advisory agreements (each a “Sub-Advisory Agreement”, and collectively with the Advisory Agreement, the “Agreements”) between the Adviser and the investment sub-advisers (each a “Sub-Adviser”, and collectively, the “Sub-Advisers”) for each of the series of the Trust, including the American Funds International Portfolio (each a “Portfolio,” and collectively, the “Portfolios”).¹ With respect to the American Funds International Portfolio, a “feeder fund” that invests all of its assets in an American Funds Insurance Series “master fund,” a stand-by Advisory Agreement was approved at the November 11-12, 2009 meeting for the American Funds International Portfolio in the event it no longer invests all of its assets in its American Funds Insurance Series master fund.

In considering the Agreements, the Board reviewed a variety of materials provided by the Adviser and the Sub-Advisers relating to each Portfolio, the Adviser and each Sub-Adviser, including comparative performance, fee and expense information for an appropriate peer group of similar mutual funds, performance information for relevant benchmark indices and other information regarding the nature, extent and quality of services provided by the Adviser and the Sub-Advisers under their respective Agreements. The Board also took into account information provided to the Board in its meetings throughout the year with respect to the services provided by the Adviser and the Sub-Advisers, including quarterly performance reports prepared by management containing reviews of investment results, and periodic presentations from the Sub-Advisers with respect to the Portfolios they manage. The Independent Trustees also assessed reports provided by independent consultants, who reviewed and provided analyses regarding investment performance, fees and expenses, profitability and other information provided by, or at the direction of, the Adviser and the Sub-Advisers, as more fully discussed below.

The Independent Trustees were separately advised by independent legal counsel throughout the process. Prior to voting, the Independent Trustees also received a memorandum from their independent counsel discussing the legal standards for their consideration of the proposed continuation of the Agreements. The Board met in person with personnel of the Adviser prior to the November meeting for the specific purpose of considering the proposed continuation of the Agreements. The Independent Trustees also discussed the proposed continuation of the Agreements in private sessions with their independent legal counsel at which no representatives of management were present.

In considering whether to approve the renewal of the Advisory Agreement with the Adviser and any applicable Sub-Advisory Agreements with respect to each Portfolio, the Board reviewed and analyzed the factors it deemed relevant, including: (1) the nature, extent and quality of the services to be provided to the Portfolios by the Adviser and the Sub-Advisers; (2) the performance of the Portfolios as compared to a peer group and an appropriate index; (3) the Adviser’s and each of the Sub-Adviser’s personnel and operations; (4) the financial condition of the Adviser and of the Sub-Advisers; (5) the level and method of computing each Portfolio’s advisory and sub-advisory fees; (6) the profitability of the Adviser under the Advisory Agreement and of the Sub-Advisers under the Sub-Advisory Agreements; (7) any “fall-out” benefits to the Adviser, the Sub-Advisers and their affiliates (i.e., ancillary benefits realized by the Adviser, the Sub-Advisers or their affiliates from the Adviser’s or Sub-Advisers’ relationship with the Trust); (8) the anticipated effect of growth in size on each Portfolio’s performance and expenses; (9) fees paid to the Sub-Advisers by comparable institutional and retail accounts; and (10) possible conflicts of interest. The Board also considered the nature, quality, and extent of the services to be provided to the Portfolios by the Adviser’s affiliates, including distribution services.

Nature, extent and quality of services. In considering the nature, extent and quality of the services to be provided by the Adviser to the Portfolios, the Board took into account the extensive responsibilities that the Adviser has as investment manager to the Portfolios, including the provision of investment advice to: (i) MetLife Aggressive Strategy Portfolio, MetLife Balanced Strategy Portfolio, MetLife Defensive Strategy Portfolio, MetLife Growth Strategy Portfolio, and MetLife Moderate Strategy Portfolio (together, the “Asset Allocation Portfolios”), (ii) American Funds Balanced Allocation Portfolio, American Funds Growth Allocation Portfolio, and American Funds Moderate Allocation Portfolio (together, the “American Funds of Funds”), and (iii) the Met/Franklin Templeton Founding Strategy Portfolio, the selection of the Sub-Advisers for the other Portfolios and oversight of the Sub-Advisers’ compliance with fund policies and objectives, review of brokerage matters including with respect to trade allocation and best execution, oversight of general fund compliance with federal and state laws, and the implementation of Board directives as they relate to the Portfolios. The Adviser’s role in coordinating the activities of the Portfolios’ other service providers was also considered. The Board also evaluated the expertise and performance of the investment personnel with respect to the Asset Allocation Portfolios, the American Funds of Funds and the Met/Franklin Templeton Founding Strategy Portfolio and of the personnel overseeing the Sub-Advisers of the other Portfolios, and compliance with each Portfolio’s investment restrictions, tax and other requirements. The Board considered information received from the Trust’s Chief Compliance Officer (“CCO”) regarding the Portfolios’ compliance policies and procedures established pursuant to Rule 38a-1 under the 1940 Act, including the policies and procedures in place relating to proxy voting. The Board also took into account its familiarity with management through Board meetings, discussions and reports during the preceding year.

¹ The Met/Templeton International Bond Portfolio recently commenced operations and, therefore, the Agreements with respect to this Portfolio were not up for renewal.

16

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

American Funds International Portfolio

Board of Trustees’ Consideration of Advisory Agreement—(Continued)

The Board also recognized the Adviser^’s reputation and long-standing experience in serving as an investment adviser to the Trust, and considered the benefit to shareholders of investing in funds that are part of a family of variable annuity portfolios offering a variety of investments. In addition, the Board reviewed the financial condition of the Adviser and whether it had the financial wherewithal to provide a high level and quality of services to the Portfolios. In its review, the Board also received and took into account information regarding any services and/or payments provided to the Adviser by the Sub-Advisers in connection with marketing activities.

With respect to the services provided by each of the Sub-Advisers, the Board considered information provided to the Board by each Sub-Adviser, including each Sub-Adviser’s Form ADV, as well as information presented throughout the past year. The Board considered the Sub-Adviser’s current level of staffing and its overall resources, as well as its compensation program. The Board reviewed each Sub-Adviser’s history and investment experience, as well as information regarding the qualifications, background and responsibilities of the Sub-Adviser’s investment and compliance personnel who provide services to the Portfolios. The Board also considered, among other things, the Sub-Adviser’s compliance program and any disciplinary history. The Board noted each Sub-Adviser’s regulatory history, including whether it was currently involved in any regulatory actions or investigations as well as material litigation, and any settlements and ameliatory actions undertaken, as appropriate. The Board also noted that the CCO and his staff conduct regular, periodic compliance reviews with each of the Sub-Advisers and present reports to the Independent Trustees regarding the same, which includes evaluating the regulatory compliance systems of the Sub-Advisers and procedures reasonably designed by them to assure compliance with the federal securities laws, including issues related to late trading and market timing, best execution, fair value pricing, and proxy voting procedures, among others. The Board also took into account the financial condition of each Sub-Adviser.

The Board considered each Sub-Adviser’s investment process and philosophy. The Board took into account that each Sub-Adviser’s responsibilities include the development and maintenance of an investment program for the applicable Portfolio which is consistent with the Portfolio’s investment objectives, the selection of investment securities and the placement of orders for the purchase and sale of such securities, as well as the implementation of compliance controls related to performance of these services. The Board also reviewed each Sub-Adviser’s brokerage policies and practices, including with respect to best execution and soft dollars.

Based on its consideration and review of the foregoing information, the Board concluded that the nature, extent and quality of services provided by the Adviser and by each Sub-Adviser were satisfactory and that there was a reasonable basis on which to conclude that each would provide a high quality of investment services to the Portfolios.

Performance. The Board considered the performance of the Portfolios as described in the quarterly reports prepared by management, and as also analyzed in reports prepared by the Independent Trustees’ independent consultant. The Board noted that the Adviser reviews with the Board on a quarterly basis detailed information about the Portfolios’ performance results, portfolio composition and investment strategies. The Board also reviewed and considered a separate report prepared by Lipper Inc. (“Lipper”), an independent third party, which provided a statistical analysis comparing the Portfolios’ investment performance, expenses, and fees to comparable funds underlying variable insurance products (the “Performance Universe”). In addition, the Independent Trustees met separately with a representative of Bobroff Consulting, Inc., an independent consultant (“Bobroff”), at a special board meeting in September 2009, to review the separate reports prepared by such consultant (“Bobroff Report”), which analyzed the report prepared by Lipper, as well as certain of the other factors to be considered by the Board including supplemental alpha and information coefficient analysis. The Board also considered each Portfolio’s more recent performance subsequent to the performance period covered by the Lipper reports, and management’s discussion of the same, including the effect of current market conditions on each Portfolio’s more recent performance.

The Board closely reviewed the Portfolios’ performance records and the Adviser’s and Sub-Advisers’ management styles and long-term performance records with the Portfolios and comparable funds. The Board focused particular attention on Portfolios with less favorable performance records. The Board was mindful of the Adviser’s focus on each Sub-Adviser’s performance and noted that the Adviser has been active in monitoring and responding to any performance issues with respect to the Portfolios. The Board also took into account its discussions with management regarding factors that contributed to the performance of each Portfolio.

Among other data relating specifically to the American Funds International Portfolio’s performance, the Board took into account that the Portfolio is a “feeder fund” and all of its assets are invested in a “master fund,” a series of the American Funds Insurance Series, which in turn purchases investment securities. The Board noted that the Portfolio commenced operations on April 28, 2008. Among other information relating to the Portfolio’s performance, the Board considered that the Portfolio outperformed both the median of its Performance Universe and its Lipper Index for the one-year and since-inception periods ended July 31, 2009. The Board further considered that the Portfolio outperformed its benchmark, the MSCI EAFE Index, for the one-year period ended August 31, 2009. Based on its review and taking into account the fact that the Portfolio had a limited performance history and the current size of the Portfolio, the Board concluded that the Portfolio’s performance was satisfactory.

Fees and Expenses. The Board gave substantial consideration to the advisory fees payable under the Advisory Agreement and the sub-advisory fees payable under each of the Sub-Advisory Agreements. In this regard, the Board reviewed the advisory fees payable in the aggregate as well as on a Portfolio-by-Portfolio basis based on information provided by the Adviser. The Independent Trustees, with the assistance of Bobroff, also examined the fees paid by each Portfolio in light of fees paid to other investment managers by comparable funds and the method of computing each Portfolio’s fee, as well as considered the fees charged by the Adviser to manage other comparable funds. The Lipper report included

17

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

American Funds International Portfolio

Board of Trustees’ Consideration of Advisory Agreement—(Continued)

comparisons of the Adviser’s fee schedule with that of its peers based on an asset-based analysis of relative fee structures according to the size of each Portfolio. In addition, the Board considered the Portfolios’ advisory and sub-advisory fees and total expenses as compared to similarly situated investment companies underlying variable insurance products deemed to be comparable to the Portfolios as determined by Lipper. The Board considered each Portfolio’s ranking within a smaller group of peer funds chosen by Lipper (the “Expense Group”), as well as the Portfolio’s ranking within broader groups of funds (the “Expense Universe” and the “Sub-advised Expense Universe”). The Board also considered each Portfolio’s contractual sub-advisory fees, as applicable, as compared to the Sub-advised Expense Universe as well as a smaller group of funds (the “Sub-advised Expense Group”). In comparing each Portfolio’s actual and contractual management fee to that of comparable funds, the Board noted that such fee includes both advisory and administrative fees.

The Board noted that the sub-advisory fees for the Portfolios are paid by the Adviser, not the Portfolios, out of the advisory fee. It was further noted that the Adviser negotiates such fees at arm’s length. The Board also considered that the Adviser had entered into expense limitation agreements with certain of the Portfolios as noted below, pursuant to which the Adviser has agreed to waive a portion of its advisory fee and/or reimburse certain expenses as a means of limiting a Portfolio’s total annual operating expenses. In addition, the Board noted that the Adviser effected fee reductions in 2009 with respect to several Portfolios. The Board also noted that the Adviser had re-negotiated the securities lending arrangement with State Street Corporation to further maximize the income to the Portfolios from such program.

With respect to each sub-advised Portfolio, the Board also compared the sub-advisory fees paid by the Adviser to fees charged by the Portfolio’s Sub-Adviser to manage other sub-advised portfolios and portfolios not subject to regulation under the 1940 Act, such as separate accounts, as applicable. The Board considered the fee comparisons in light of the differences required to manage different types of accounts.

With respect to the American Funds International Portfolio, the Board considered that the Portfolio’s total expenses (exclusive of 12b-1 fees), which reflected the expenses of the underlying master fund, were below the Expense Group median and the Expense Universe median. The Board noted that the Portfolio does not currently pay an advisory fee under the stand-by Advisory Agreement and will not do so in the future unless the Portfolio no longer invests its assets in a master fund. The Board noted, however, that the Portfolio’s contractual management fees under the stand-by Advisory Agreement would be slightly below the normalized median of the Expense Group at the Portfolio’s current size. The Board noted that the Adviser is reimbursing expenses so that the Portfolio’s total annual operating expenses are capped. After consideration of all relevant factors, the Board concluded that the advisory fee under the stand-by Advisory Agreement is consistent with industry norms and is fair and reasonable in light of the services to be provided.

Profitability. The Board examined the profitability of the Adviser on an aggregate basis with respect to all Portfolios, as well as on a Portfolio-by-Portfolio basis. With respect to the Asset Allocation Portfolios and Met/Franklin Templeton Founding Strategy Portfolio, the Board noted that the advisory fee is in addition to the fees received by the Adviser and its affiliates with regard to the other Portfolios of the Trust or of Metropolitan Series Fund, Inc. in which the Asset Allocation Portfolios and Met/Franklin Templeton Founding Strategy Portfolio may invest. With respect to the other Portfolios, the Board noted that a major component of profitability of the Adviser was the margin between the sub-advisory fees that the Adviser receives from the Trust and the portion of those fees paid to the Sub-Advisers. In this regard, the Board took into account certain comparative information in the Lipper report. The Board also reviewed the Adviser’s unaudited income statements and balance sheet information supplied by the Adviser regarding costs borne by the Adviser’s affiliates which support the operations of the Adviser but are not reflected on the unaudited income statements of the Adviser, as well as considered the profitability of the insurance products, the function of which is supported in part by the Adviser’s revenues under the Advisory Agreement, and other information and analysis prepared by the Adviser. With respect to the American Funds Bond Portfolio, American Funds Growth Portfolio, American Funds Growth-Income Portfolio, American Funds Global Small Capitalization Portfolio and American Funds International Portfolio, the Board noted that the Adviser currently does not receive an advisory fee. The Board also considered that the Distributor, MetLife Investors Distribution Company, receives 12b-1 payments to support the distribution of the products. The Board concluded after extensive discussions with management that the profitability of the Adviser and its affiliates from their relationship with each Portfolio was reasonable in light of all relevant factors.

In considering the profitability to the Sub-Advisers and their affiliates of their relationships with the Portfolios, the Board noted that the fees under the Sub-Advisory Agreements were paid by the Adviser out of the advisory fees that it receives under the Advisory Agreement. The Board also relied on the ability of the Adviser to negotiate the Sub-Advisory Agreements and the fees thereunder at arm’s length. The Board reviewed portfolio specific data with regard to the profitability of the Portfolios to each Sub-Adviser, as available, and analyzed the reasonableness of such profitability finding no indication of excessive profitability. However, the Board placed more reliance on the fact that the Sub-Advisory Agreement was negotiated at arm’s length and that the advisory fee was paid by the Adviser than on Sub-Adviser profitability.

Economies of scale. The Board also considered the effect of the Portfolios’ growth in size on their performances and fees. The Board noted that the fee schedules for all but eleven of the Portfolios contain breakpoints that reduce the fee rate above specified asset levels. The Board noted those Portfolios that did not contain breakpoints in the advisory fee and took into account management’s discussion of the same. The Board noted that those Portfolios with advisory fee schedules containing breakpoints generally reflect the inclusion of breakpoints in the sub-advisory fee schedule for such Portfolios. The Board considered the effective fees under the Advisory Agreement for each Portfolio as a percentage of assets at different asset levels and possible economies of scale that may be realized if the assets of the Portfolio grow. Among other data, the Board examined the effect of each Portfolio’s growth in size on various fee schedules and reviewed the Lipper and Bobroff Reports, which compared fee

18

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

American Funds International Portfolio

Board of Trustees’ Consideration of Advisory Agreement—(Continued)

schedules among peers. The Board also took into account that the Sub-Adviser fees are paid by the Adviser out of the advisory fee. The Board also noted that if the Portfolios’ assets increase over time, the Portfolios may realize other economies of scale if assets increase proportionally more than certain other fixed expenses.

With respect to the American Funds International Portfolio, the Board noted that the Portfolio’s advisory fee under the stand-by Advisory Agreement does not contain breakpoints. The Board noted, however, that the Portfolio’s management fee is below the asset-weighted average of comparable funds at all asset levels. The Board considered the effect of the Portfolio’s current size and potential growth on its performance and fees. The Board noted that if the Portfolio’s assets increased over time, the Portfolio might realize other economies of scale if assets increased proportionally more than certain other fixed expenses. The Board concluded that adding breakpoints to the advisory fee at specified asset levels was not appropriate given the Portfolio’s current size and the fact that the Portfolio is not currently paying the advisory fee. The Board concluded that the advisory fee structure for the Portfolio was reasonable and appropriate.

Other factors. As part of its evaluation of the Adviser’s compensation, the Board considered other benefits that may be realized by the Adviser and its affiliates from their relationship with the Trust. Among them, the Board recognized that an affiliate of the Adviser, MetLife Investors Distribution Company, serves as the Distributor for the Trust, and, as such, receives payments pursuant to Rule 12b-1 from the Portfolios to compensate it for providing shareholder services and selling activities, which could lead to growth in the Trust’s assets and corresponding benefits from such growth, including economies of scale. The Board also considered that affiliates of the Adviser may benefit from certain indirect tax benefits relating to dividend received deductions and foreign tax credits. The Board concluded that ancillary benefits accruing to the Adviser and its affiliates by virtue of the Adviser’s relationship with the Portfolios are fair and reasonable in light of the costs of providing investment management and other services to the Portfolios and the ongoing commitment of the Adviser to the Portfolios.

The Board considered other benefits that may be realized by each Subadviser and its affiliates from their relationship with the Trust, including the opportunity to provide advisory services to additional portfolios of the Trust and reputational benefits. The Board concluded that the benefits accruing to the Subadvisers and their affiliates by virtue of the Subadvisers’ relationships to the Portfolios are fair and reasonable in light of the costs of providing investment advisory services to the Portfolios and the ongoing commitment of the Subadvisers to the Portfolios.

The Board considered any possible conflicts of interest in the form of material benefits or detriments to the Trust resulting from the nature of the Trust’s and the Adviser’s or the Subadvisers’ affiliations. Here, the Board considered possible conflicts of interest that may arise between the Trust and the Adviser or a Subadviser in connection with the services provided to the Trust and the various relationships that they and their affiliates may have with the Trust. The Board considered the procedures for monitoring and managing such potential conflicts.

Conclusion. In considering the renewal of each of the Agreements, the Board, including the Independent Trustees, did not identify any single factor as controlling, and each Trustee may have attributed different weights to various factors. The Board evaluated all information available to them on a Portfolio-by-Portfolio basis, and their determinations were made separately with respect to each Portfolio. Based on all of the above-mentioned considerations, and the recommendations of management, the Board, including a majority of the Independent Trustees, determined that approval of the Advisory Agreement and the Sub-Advisory Agreements was in the best interests of each Portfolio. After full consideration of these and other factors, the Board, including a majority of the Independent Trustees, with the assistance of independent counsel, approved the Advisory Agreement and the Sub-Advisory Agreement with respect to each Portfolio.

19

Simplify your life…

with MetLife eDelivery^® while helping MetLife preserve the planet’s natural resources.

(see details on inside cover)

Met Investors Series Trust American Funds Moderate Allocation Portfolio Annual Report December 31, 2009

• get rid of all that paper?

• access important documents whenever you want?

• conveniently receive valuable information online?

Get it all with MetLife eDelivery!

MetLife’s eDelivery service is your resource for electronic delivery of your variable annuity or variable life prospectuses, semiannual and annual reports, and other information. Available to variable product clients of Metropolitan Life Insurance Company, First MetLife Investors Insurance Company, General American Life Insurance Company, MetLife Investors Insurance Company, MetLife Investors USA Insurance Company, MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut and New England Life Insurance Company.*

Why sign up for MetLife eDelivery?

It’s Free** – No cost to enroll or use the service.

It’s Paperless – We’ll email you when your documents are available.

It’s Easy – Enrollment takes just a few minutes.

How do you sign up?

Just type in www.metlife.esourcelink.net to get to MetLife’s online registration form. You will need your policy/account numbers, which can be found on your statements. The form takes only a few minutes to complete. Please note, for jointly owned contracts, both owners will need to register in order to eliminate paper delivery.

  * Not all MetLife products offer eDelivery at this time. ** Your internet provider may impose fees for this service. L0210086208[0911]

Letter from the President

Letter to Policy Holders

February 1, 2010

2009 can best be described as a year of recovery. The year began with the stock market in a broad decline and the economy mired in a deep recession. However, investors’ sentiment improved dramatically during the year as fiscal and monetary authorities took measures to jump start the economy which helped spark a strong market rally in equities and corporate bonds.

The Barclays Capital U.S. Aggregate Bond Index returned 5.9% during 2009. While this was similar to the 5.2% return experienced in 2008, the two years could not have been more different. In 2008, fear drove investors toward the safety of U.S. Treasury securities and away from the risk of corporate bonds, especially those rated below investment grade. In contrast, investors were more willing to embrace risk in 2009. This produced an enormous recovery in below investment grade bonds; the Barclays Capital U.S. Corporate High Yield Index returned over 58% in 2009 after falling 26% in 2008. The Barclays Capital U.S. Treasury Index returned 13.7% in 2008, but declined 3.6% in 2009.

Stock investors also became less pessimistic in 2009. While the stock market indices are still far from the record levels reached in 2007, investors were rewarded in 2009 as stocks returned 26.5% as measured by the Standard & Poor’s 500 Index, its best return since 2003. Foreign stocks, as measured by the MSCI EAFE Index, returned 31.8% during 2009.

On the following pages, you will find a complete review of your Portfolio and its investment performance.

MetLife is committed to building your financial freedom. We appreciate your trust and will continue to focus our efforts on meeting your investment needs.

Sincerely,

Elizabeth M. Forget

President

Met Investors Series Trust

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

American Funds Moderate Allocation Portfolio

Managed by MetLife Advisers, LLC

Portfolio Manager Commentary*

Performance

For the year ended December 31, 2009, the American Funds Moderate Allocation Portfolio had a return of 23.90% and 23.40% for Class B and C Shares, respectively, versus 23.79% for its benchmark, the Dow Jones Moderate Index¹.

Market Environment/Conditions

After contracting sharply in the last half of 2008 and the first half of 2009, the Gross Domestic Product expanded at an annualized rate of 3.9% over the last six months of 2009 as companies began to replenish their inventories. Even with this strong second half, the U.S. economy still shrank 2.4% during 2009, its worst performance since 1946. Some economic indicators (the Consumer Confidence Index and the Purchasing Managers Index for example) showed improvement over the course of the year, but two important economic statistics have remained sluggish: the Unemployment Rate topped 10% in October and the percentage of mortgages that are more than 90 days delinquent exceeded 24% at the end of December, compared to 16% a year ago, and 8% two years ago. To combat this economic crisis the, US government applied a two-pronged approach: the Federal Reserve kept the fed funds target rate in the 0.00% to 0.25% range (monetary policy) and the government continued their stimulus spending (fiscal policy).

The Barclays Capital U.S. Aggregate Bond Index returned 5.9% during 2009. Overall, the yield curve shifted slightly higher and steepened during 2009 as the yield on the 5-Year Treasury Bond rose 1.1% from 1.6% to 2.7% and the yield on the 30-Yr Treasury Bond rose 2.0% from 2.6% to 4.6%. More importantly though was the significant tightening of the yield spread between “safe” treasury securities and “risky” corporate and other credit based securities. In this environment, corporate and other spread sector bonds significantly outperformed treasury securities. This produced an enormous recovery in below investment grade bonds: the Barclays Capital US Corporate High Yield Index returned over 58% in 2009 after falling 26% in 2008.

Stocks returned 26.5% in 2009 as measured by the Standard & Poor’s 500 Index, its best calendar year return since 2003. Growth style stocks generally did better than value style stocks across all capitalization ranges. Information Technology, Materials, and Consumer Discretionary were the best performing sectors for the full year, while Energy, Telecomm, and Utilities lagged. However, performance within the Financial Services sector was especially notable for its dramatic rebound: after falling more than 50% early in the year, it was up over 140% from the post crisis low in early March to the end of the year for a full year return of 17.2%. Foreign stocks, as measured by the MSCI EAFE Index⁴ returned 31.8% during 2009.

⁴ The Morgan Stanley Capital International Europe, Australasia and Far East Index (“MSCI EAFE Index”) is an unmanaged free float-adjusted market capitalization index that is designed to measure developed market equity performance, excluding the U.S. and Canada. The index returns shown above were calculated with net dividends: they reflect the reinvestment of dividends after the deduction of the maximum possible withholding taxes.

Portfolio Review/Current Positioning

The American Funds Moderate Allocation Portfolio is structured to be broadly diversified across and within a wide variety of fixed income and equity asset classes to add value and control risk over the long term. The Portfolio strives to achieve its objectives through investment in the various funds of the American Funds Insurance Series (AFIS). Although the Portfolio’s broad asset allocation goal of 50% to fixed income and 50% to equities did not change, there were several very modest changes to the narrower asset class goals during the course of the year. This included the elimination of a formal goal for cash—although we still expect the Portfolio will hold some residual cash through the underlying portfolios—and a slight reduction in the goals for the riskier, non-core fixed income securities, such as high-yield bonds. To achieve these new asset class goals and to improve the overall diversification of the Portfolio, several minor adjustments to the underlying portfolio targets were made as part of the May 1, 2009 restructuring.

In contrast to 2008 when risk was shunned, investors were rewarded for taking on risk during 2009: stocks generally outperformed bonds, while bond issues with lower credit quality ratings outperformed bonds with higher credit quality ratings, growth stocks outperformed value stocks, foreign stocks outperformed domestic stocks, and emerging market country stocks outperformed developed country stocks. Thus, with a 50% goal for common stocks, the underlying equity portfolios were a significant contributor to the Portfolio’s absolute performance. Within its fixed income segment, the Portfolio held a higher overall percentage in “spread” products (including investment grade corporate bonds, mortgage backed securities, and high yield securities) than was held in a broad bond market index, such as the Barclays Capital Aggregate Index.

Even with a significant holding of cash (ranging from 5% to 10%) in the underlying equity portfolios for most of the year, the underlying equity portfolios had strong performance and contributed to both relative and absolute performance. A modest overall tilt to growth style stocks and a slight overweight to foreign securities relative to its target also helped the Portfolio’s relative performance. Within foreign equities, the Portfolio’s exposure to small cap foreign stocks and emerging market stocks through the AFIS Global Small Capitalization Fund and the AFIS New World Fund was a key contributor as these segments both significantly outperformed the return of large foreign stocks from developed counties as represented by the MSCI EAFE Index. The AFIS Growth Fund’s good performance for the year was driven by both good sector weightings and solid stock selection. Within the Energy sector, it underweighted the sluggish energy giant Exxon Mobil and held Canadian oil producer Pacific Rubiales Corp., which rose over 500% during the year. The AFIS Growth—Income Fund also had strong performance due primarily to advantageous sector weightings: overweighting the strong Consumer Discretionary and Information Technology sectors and the relatively weak Consumer Staples and Financial Services sectors.

1

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

American Funds Moderate Allocation Portfolio

Managed by MetLife Advisers, LLC

Portfolio Manager Commentary* (continued)

While high yield bond exposure was slightly below its target allocation of 6%, the Portfolio’s overall exposure to credit based bonds (also including investment grade corporate bonds) helped relative performance. Among the fixed income underlying portfolios, the 2009 returns were directly related to the level of credit exposure: the higher the credit exposure and less held in the safety of U.S. Treasury Securities, the better the performance. AFIS High-Income Bond Fund was the best absolute performer among the underlying bond portfolios, while the AFIS U.S. Government/AAA Rated Securities Fund posted a nearly flat return in response to the rise in treasury yields.

Investment Committee

MetLife Advisers, LLC

*This commentary may include statements that constitute “forward-looking statements” under the U.S. securities laws. Forward-looking statements include, among other things, projections, estimates, and information about possible or future results related to the Portfolio, market or regulatory developments. The views expressed above are not guarantees of future performance or economic results and involve certain risks, uncertainties and assumptions that could cause actual outcomes and results to differ materially from the views expressed herein. The views expressed above are subject to change at any time based upon economic, market, or other conditions and the advisory firm undertakes no obligation to update the views expressed herein. Any discussions of specific securities should not be considered a recommendation to buy or sell those securities. The views expressed above (including any forward-looking statement) may not be relied upon as investment advice or as an indication of the Portfolio’s trading intent. Information about the Portfolio’s holdings, asset allocation or country diversification is historical and is not an indication of future Portfolio composition, which may vary. Direct investment in any index is not possible. The performance of any index mentioned in this commentary has not been adjusted for ongoing management, distribution and operating expenses, and sales charges applicable to mutual fund investments. In addition, the returns do not reflect additional fees charged by separate accounts or variable insurance contracts that an investor in the Portfolio may pay. If these additional fees were reflected, performance would have been lower.

Portfolio Composition as of December 31, 2009

Top Holdings

	Percent of Net Assets
American Funds Growth-Income Fund (Class 1)	35.2%
American Funds U.S. Government/AAA - Rated Securities Fund (Class 1)	22.9%
American Funds Bond Fund (Class 1)	14.5%
American Funds Growth Fund (Class 1)	10.4%
American Funds High-Income Bond Fund (Class 1)	8.0%
American Funds International Fund (Class 1)	6.1%
American Funds Global Small Capitalization Fund (Class 1)	1.0%
American Funds New World Fund (Class 1)	1.0%
American Funds Global Bond Fund (Class 1)	1.0%

2

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

American Funds Moderate Allocation Portfolio

American Funds Moderate Allocation Portfolio managed by

MetLife Advisers, LLC vs. Dow Jones Moderate Index¹

	Average Annual Return (for the year ended 12/31/09)2
	1 Year	Since Inception3
American Funds Moderate Allocation Portfolio—Class B	23.90%	-2.24%
Class C	23.40%	-2.55%
Dow Jones Moderate Index1	23.79%	-3.36%

The performance of Class B shares will differ from that of the other class because of the difference in expenses paid by policyholders investing in the different share classes.

¹ The Dow Jones Moderate Index is a benchmark designed for asset allocation strategists who are willing to take 60% of the risk of the global securities market. It is a total returns index that is a time-varying weighted average of stocks, bonds, and cash using a combination of various indices (both domestic and foreign) from Barclays and Dow Jones.

² “Average Annual Return” is calculated including reinvestment of all income dividends and capital gain distributions.

³Inception of the Class B and Class C shares is 4/28/08. Index returns are based on an inception date of 4/28/08.

Past performance does not guarantee future results. The investment return and principal value of an investment in the Portfolio will fluctuate, so that shares, on any given day or when redeemed, may be worth more or less than their original cost. Performance numbers are net of all Portfolio expenses but do not include any insurance, sales, or administration charges of variable annuity or life insurance contracts. If these charges were included, the returns would be lower. The Indexes do not include fees or expenses and are not available for direct investment.

3

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

American Funds Moderate Allocation Portfolio

Understanding Your Portfolio’s Expenses

Shareholder Expense Example

As a shareholder of the Portfolio, you incur ongoing costs, including management fees; distribution and service (12b-1) fees; and other Portfolio expenses. This example is intended to help you understand your ongoing costs (in dollars) (referred to as “expenses”) of investing in the Portfolio and compare these costs with the ongoing costs of investing in other mutual funds. The example is based on an investment of $1,000 invested at the beginning of the period and held for the entire period, July 1, 2009 through December 31, 2009.

Actual Expenses

The first line for each share class of the Portfolio in the table below provides information about actual account values and actual expenses. You may use the information in this line, together with the amount you invested in the particular share class of the Portfolio, to estimate the expenses that you paid over the period. Simply divide your account value by $1,000 (for example, an $8,600 account value divided by $1,000 = 8.6), then multiply the result by the number in the first line under the heading entitled “Expenses Paid During Period” to estimate the expenses you paid on your account during this period.

Hypothetical Example for Comparison Purposes

The second line for each share class of the Portfolio in the table below provides information about hypothetical account values and hypothetical expenses based on the Portfolio’s actual expense ratio and an assumed rate of return of 5% per year before expenses, which is not the Portfolio’s actual return. The hypothetical account values and expenses may not be used to estimate the actual ending account balance or expenses you paid for the period. You may use this information to compare the ongoing costs of investing in the Portfolio and other funds. To do so, compare this 5% hypothetical example with the 5% hypothetical examples that appear in the shareholder reports of the other funds.

Please note that the expenses shown in the table are meant to highlight your ongoing costs only and do not reflect any fees or charges of your variable insurance product or any additional expenses that participants in certain eligible qualified plans may bear relating to the operations of their plan. Therefore, the second line for each share class in the table is useful in comparing ongoing costs only, and will not help you determine the relative total costs of owning different funds. In addition, if these other costs were included, your costs would have been higher.

	Annualized Expense Ratio	Beginning Account Value 7/1/09		Ending Account Value 12/31/09		Expenses Paid During Period* 7/1/09-12/31/09
Class B(a)(b)
Actual	0.75%	$	1,000.00	$	1,145.70	$	4.06
Hypothetical	0.75%		1,000.00		1,021.42		3.82
Class C(a)(b)
Actual	1.05%	$	1,000.00	$	1,143.70	$	5.67
Hypothetical	1.05%		1,000.00		1,019.91		5.35

* Expenses paid are equal to the Portfolio’s annualized expense ratio for the most recent six month period, as shown above, multiplied by the average account value over the period, multiplied by the number of days (184 days) in the most recent fiscal half-year, divided by 365 (to reflect the one-half year period).

(a) The annualized expense ratio shown reflects an expense limitation agreement between MetLife Advisers, LLC and the Portfolio as described in Note 3 of the Notes to Financial Statements.

(b) The annualized expense ratio reflects the expenses of both the Portfolio and the Underlying Portfolios in which it invests.

4

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

American Funds Moderate Allocation Portfolio

PORTFOLIO OF INVESTMENTS

December 31, 2009

(Percentage of Net Assets)

Security Description	Shares	Value
Investment Company Securities - 100.1%
American Funds Bond Fund (Class 1)(a)	22,062,421	$	227,904,803
American Funds Global Bond Fund (Class 1)(a)	1,298,217		15,020,367
American Funds Global Small Capitalization Fund (Class 1)(a)	901,763		16,231,742
American Funds Growth Fund (Class 1)(a)	3,530,565		163,994,762
American Funds Growth-Income Fund (Class 1)(a)	17,684,535		554,763,862
American Funds High-Income Bond Fund (Class 1)(a)	11,981,642		125,687,426
American Funds International Fund (Class 1)(a)	5,573,989		95,705,392
American Funds New World Fund (Class 1)(a)	809,966		16,231,718
American Funds U.S. Government/AAA - Rated Securities Fund (Class 1)(a)	29,666,554		361,338,628
Total Investment Company Securities (Cost $1,427,314,106)			1,576,878,700
Total Investments - 100.1% (Cost $1,427,314,106)			1,576,878,700
Other Assets And Liabilities (net) - (0.1)%			(822,011	)
Net Assets - 100.0%		$	1,576,056,689

(a) A Portfolio of the American Funds Insurance Series.

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

5

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

American Funds Moderate Allocation Portfolio

Various inputs are used in determining the value of the Portfolio’s investments, which are as follows:

Level 1—unadjusted quoted prices in active markets for identical investments

Level 2—other significant observable inputs (including, but not limited to: quoted prices for similar investments in markets that are both active or inactive; inputs other than quoted prices that are observable such as interest rates, yield curves, credit risks, default rates, etc.)

Level 3—significant unobservable inputs based on the best information available in the circumstances, to the extent observable inputs are unavailable (including the Portfolio’s own assumptions in determining the fair value of investments)

The inputs or methodology used for valuing investments are not necessarily an indication of the risk associated with investing in them. For information about the Portfolio’s policy regarding valuation of investments and other significant accounting policies, please refer to Note 2 of the Notes to Financial Statements.

The following table summarizes the inputs used in determining the value the Portfolio’s investments as of December 31, 2009:

ASSETS VALUATION INPUTS

Description	Level 1		Level 2		Level 3		Total
Investment Company Securities	$	1,576,878,700	$	—	$	—	$	1,576,878,700
TOTAL INVESTMENTS	$	1,576,878,700	$	—	$	—	$	1,576,878,700

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

6

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

American Funds Moderate Allocation Portfolio

Statement of Assets and Liabilities

December 31, 2009

Assets
Investments at value (a)	$	1,576,878,700
Receivable for shares sold		909,985
Receivable from Manager		10,292
Total assets		1,577,798,977
Liabilities
Payables for:
Investments purchased		875,511
Shares redeemed		34,474
Accrued Expenses:
Management fees		96,838
Distribution and service fees - Class B		133
Distribution and service fees - Class C		714,583
Administration fees		2,000
Custodian and accounting fees		2,067
Deferred trustees’ fees		7,518
Other expenses		9,164
Total liabilities		1,742,288
Net Assets	$	1,576,056,689
Net Assets Represented by
Paid in surplus	$	1,428,402,095
Accumulated net realized loss		(31,038,274	)
Unrealized appreciation on investments		149,564,594
Undistributed net investment income		29,128,274
Net Assets	$	1,576,056,689
Net Assets
Class B	$	667,224
Class C		1,575,389,465
Capital Shares Outstanding
Class B		71,916
Class C		170,631,449
Net Asset Value, Offering Price and Redemption Price Per Share
Class B	$	9.28
Class C		9.23

(a) Identified cost of investments was $1,427,314,106.

Statement of Operations

For the Year Ended December 31, 2009

Investment Income
Dividends from Underlying Portfolios	$	33,966,089
Total investment income		33,966,089
Expenses
Management fees		919,275
Administration fees		23,985
Custodian and accounting fees		25,301
Distribution and service fees - Class B		930
Distribution and service fees - Class C		5,337,187
Audit and tax services		17,179
Legal		44,299
Trustees’ fees and expenses		21,139
Shareholder reporting		69,117
Insurance		8,350
Miscellaneous		3,700
Total expenses		6,470,462
Less expenses reimbursed by the Manager		(162,910	)
Net expenses		6,307,552
Net investment income		27,658,537
Net Realized and Unrealized Gain (Loss) on Investments
Net realized gain (loss) on:
Investments		(28,894,579	)
Capital gain distributions from Underlying Portfolios		2,159,318
Net realized loss on investments and capital gain distributions from Underlying Portfolios		(26,735,261	)
Net change in unrealized appreciation on investments		225,268,605
Net realized and unrealized gain on investments		198,533,344
Net Increase in Net Assets from Operations	$	226,191,881

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

7

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

American Funds Moderate Allocation Portfolio

Statements of Changes in Net Assets

	Year Ended December 31, 2009			Period Ended December 31, 2008*
Increase (Decrease) in Net Assets:
Operations
Net investment income	$	27,658,537		$	12,810,203
Net realized gain (loss) on investments and capital gains from Underlying Portfolios		(26,735,261	)		293,520
Net change in unrealized appreciation (depreciation) on investments		225,268,605			(75,704,011	)
Net increase (decrease) in net assets resulting from operations		226,191,881			(62,600,288	)
Distributions to Shareholders
From net investment income
Class B		—			(3,519	)
Class C		—			(16,002,152	)
From net realized gains
Class B		—			(3	)
Class C		—			(14,308	)
Net decrease in net assets resulting from distributions		—			(16,019,982	)
Capital Share Transactions
Proceeds from shares sold
Class B		567,805			1,102,862
Class C		959,957,441			545,471,962
Net asset value of shares issued through dividend reinvestment
Class B		—			3,522
Class C		—			16,016,460
Cost of shares repurchased
Class B		(94,618	)		(912,370	)
Class C		(59,997,632	)		(33,630,354	)
Net increase in net assets from capital share transactions		900,432,996			528,052,082
Net Increase in Net Assets		1,126,624,877			449,431,812
Net assets at beginning of period		449,431,812			—
Net assets at end of period	$	1,576,056,689		$	449,431,812
Undistributed net investment income at end of period	$	29,128,274		$	—

* For the period 4/28/08 (Commencement of operations) through 12/31/08.

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

8

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

American Funds Moderate Allocation Portfolio

Financial Highlights

Selected Per Share Data for the Years or Period Ended:
	Class B
	For the Years Ended December 31,
	2009			2008(b)
Net Asset Value, Beginning of Period	$	7.49		$	10.00
Income (Loss) from Investment Operations:
Net investment income(a)		0.28			0.11
Net realized/unrealized gain (loss) on investments		1.51			(2.34	)
Total from investment operations		1.79			(2.23	)
Less Distributions
Dividends from net investment income		—			(0.28	)
Distributions from net realized capital gains		—			(0.00	)+
Total distributions		—			(0.28	)
Net Asset Value, End of Period	$	9.28		$	7.49
Total Return		23.90	%		(22.30	)%
Ratio of expenses to average net assets after reimbursement(c)		0.35	%		0.35	%*
Ratio of expenses to average net assets before reimbursement and rebates(d)		0.37	%		0.85	%*
Ratio of net investment income to average net assets(e)		3.32	%		1.75	%*
Portfolio turnover rate		13.6	%		12.8	%
Net assets, end of period (in millions)	$	0.7		$	0.1
	Class C
	For the Years Ended December 31,
	2009			2008(b)
Net Asset Value, Beginning of Period	$	7.48		$	10.00
Income (Loss) from Investment Operations:
Net investment income(a)		0.24			0.49
Net realized/unrealized gain (loss) on investments		1.51			(2.73	)
Total from investment operations		1.75			(2.24	)
Less Distributions
Dividends from net investment income		—			(0.28	)
Distributions from net realized capital gains		—			(0.00	)+
Total distributions		—			(0.28	)
Net Asset Value, End of Period	$	9.23		$	7.48
Total Return		23.40	%		(22.40	)%
Ratio of expenses to average net assets after reimbursement(c)		0.65	%		0.65	%*
Ratio of expenses to average net assets before reimbursement and rebates(d)		0.67	%		0.70	%*
Ratio of net investment income to average net assets(e)		2.85	%		8.74	%*
Portfolio turnover rate		13.6	%		12.8	%
Net assets, end of period (in millions)	$	1,575.4		$	449.3

* Annualized

+ Rounds to less than $0.005 per share.

(a) Per share amounts based on average shares outstanding during the period.

(b) Commencement of operations—04/28/2008.

(c) The ratio of operating expenses to average net assets does not include expenses of the Underlying Portfolios in which the Portfolio invests.

(d) See Note 3 of the Notes to Financial Statements.

(e) Recognition of net investment income by the Portfolio is affected by the timing of the declaration of dividends by the Underlying Portfolios in which it invests.

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

9

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

American Funds Moderate Allocation Portfolio

Notes to Financial Statements—December 31, 2009

1. Organization

Met Investors Series Trust (the “Trust”) is registered as an open-end management investment company under the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended (the “1940 Act”). The Trust currently offers forty-eight Portfolios (the “Portfolios”), each of which operates as a distinct investment vehicle of the Trust. The portfolio included in this report is American Funds Moderate Allocation Portfolio (the “Portfolio”), which is non-diversified. Shares in the Trust are not offered directly to the general public and are currently available only to separate accounts established by certain affiliated life insurance companies.

The Trust is managed by MetLife Advisers, LLC (the “Manager”), an affiliate of MetLife, Inc.

The Trust has registered four classes of shares: Class A, B, C and E Shares. Class B and C Shares are currently offered by the Portfolio. Shares of each Class of the Portfolio represent an equal pro rata interest in the Portfolio and generally give the shareholder the same voting, dividend, liquidation, and other rights. Investment income, realized and unrealized capital gains and losses, the common expenses of the Portfolio and certain Portfolio-level expense reductions, if any, are allocated on a pro rata basis to each Class based on the relative net assets of each Class to the net assets of the Portfolio. Each Class of shares differs in its respective distribution expenses.

The Portfolio is designed on established principles of asset allocation and risk tolerance. The Portfolio will invest substantially all of its assets in certain funds of the American Funds Insurance Series (“AFIS”), which invest either in equity securities or fixed income securities, as applicable (“Underlying Portfolios”). AFIS is an open-end diversified investment management company advised by Capital Research and Management Company (“CRMC”), an indirect, wholly owned subsidiary of The Capital Group Companies, Inc.

2. Significant Accounting Policies

The financial statements have been prepared in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (“GAAP”) which require management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of income and expenses during the reporting period. Actual results could differ from these estimates.

The following is a summary of significant accounting policies consistently followed by the Trust in the preparation of its financial statements.

Valuation - Investments in the Underlying Portfolios are valued at their closing daily net asset value. The net asset value of the Portfolio is calculated based on the net asset values of the Underlying Portfolios in which the Portfolio invests. For information about the use of fair value pricing by the Underlying Portfolios that are funds of AFIS, please refer to the prospectus of the Underlying Portfolios.

Security Transactions - Security transactions are recorded on a trade date basis. Realized gains and losses on investments and unrealized appreciation and depreciation are determined on the identified cost basis, which is the same basis used for federal income tax purposes.

Investment Income and Expenses - Interest income is recorded on an accrual basis. Discounts and premiums on securities purchased are amortized over the lives of the respective securities. Income and capital gain distributions from the Underlying Portfolios are recorded on the ex-dividend date.

Income Taxes - It is the Portfolio’s policy to comply with the requirements of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”), and regulations thereunder, applicable to regulated investment companies and to distribute, with respect to each taxable year, all of its taxable income to shareholders. Therefore, no federal income tax provision is required. The Portfolio files U.S. Federal and various state tax returns. No income tax returns are currently under examination. The Portfolio’s federal tax returns for the prior three fiscal years remain subject to examination by the Internal Revenue Service.

Dividends and Distributions to Shareholders - The Portfolio records dividends and distributions on the ex-dividend date. Net realized gains from security transactions (if any) are generally distributed annually to shareholders. The timing and characterization of certain income and capital gains distributions are determined in accordance with federal tax regulations that may differ from GAAP. Permanent book and tax basis differences relating to shareholder distributions will result in reclassification between under/over distributed net investment income, accumulated net realized gains/losses and paid in surplus. Book-tax differences are primarily due to futures transactions, foreign currency transactions, certain foreign withholding taxes, passive foreign investment companies (PFIC), partnerships, deferred trustees compensation, capital loss carryforwards and losses deferred due to wash sales, as applicable. These adjustments have no impact on net assets or the results of operations.

3. Investment Management Agreement and Other Transactions with Affiliates

Investment Management Agreement - The Trust has entered into a management agreement (the “Management Agreement”) with the Manager for investment management services in connection with the investment management of the Portfolio. The Manager is subject to the supervision and direction of the Board of Trustees (the “Board”) and has overall responsibility for the general management and administration of the Trust.

10

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

American Funds Moderate Allocation Portfolio

Notes to Financial Statements—December 31, 2009—(Continued)

11

Under the terms of the Portfolio’s Management Agreement, the Portfolio pays the Manager a monthly fee based upon annual rates applied to the Portfolio’s average daily net assets as follows:

Management Fees earned by the Manager for the period ended December 31, 2009	% per annum		Average Daily Net Assets
$919,275	0.100	%	First $500 Million
	0.075	%	$500 Million to $1 Billion
	0.050	%	Over $1 Billion

Prior to November 12, 2009, the management fee for the Portfolio was 10 basis points. The management fee earned for the period January 1, 2009 through November 11, 2009 was $765,042.

Transfer Agency Agreement - Metropolitan Life Insurance Company (“MLIC”) serves as the transfer agent for the Trust. MLIC is an affiliate of the Manager. MLIC receives no fees for its services to the Trust under the transfer agency agreement.

Expense Limitation Agreement - The Manager has entered into an expense limitation agreement with the Trust (“Expense Limitation Agreement”) in the interest of limiting expenses of the Portfolio. The Expense Limitation Agreement shall continue in effect with respect to the Portfolio until April 30, 2010. Pursuant to that Expense Limitation Agreement, the Manager has agreed to waive or limit its fees and to assume other expenses so that the total annual operating expenses of the Portfolio other than interest, taxes, brokerage commissions, other expenditures which are capitalized in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America, other extraordinary expenses not incurred in the ordinary course of the Portfolio’s business, and Underlying Portfolios’ fees and expenses, but including amounts payable pursuant to a plan adopted in accordance with Rule 12b-1 under the 1940 Act, are limited to the following expense ratios as a percentage of the Portfolio’s average daily net assets:

Maximum Expense Ratio under current        Expense Limitation Agreement			Expenses Deferred in
			2008		2009
			Subject to repayment until December 31,
Class B	Class C		2013		2014
0.35%	0.65	%	$	79,192	$	162,910

The expenses reimbursed for the year ended December 31, 2009 are shown as expenses reimbursed in the Statement of Operations of the Portfolio.

If in any year in which the Management Agreement is still in effect, the estimated aggregate portfolio operating expenses of the Portfolio for the fiscal year are less than the Maximum Expense Ratios for that year, subject to approval by the Trust’s Board, the Manager shall be entitled to reimbursement by the Portfolio to the extent that the charge does not cause the expenses in such subsequent year to exceed the Maximum Expense Ratios as stated above. The Portfolio is not obligated to repay any expense paid by the Manager more than five years after the end of the fiscal year in which such expense was incurred.

Distribution Agreements and Plans - The Trust has distribution agreements with MetLife Investors Distribution Company (“MIDC” or the “Distributor”) in which MIDC serves as the Distributor for the Trust’s Class B and Class C Shares. MIDC is a wholly-owned subsidiary of MetLife Investors Group, Inc., an affiliate of the Manager. The Class B and Class C distribution plans provide that the Trust, on behalf of the Portfolio, may pay annually up to 0.50% and 1.00%, respectively, of the average net assets of the Portfolio attributable to its Class B and Class C Shares in respect to activities primarily intended to result in the sale of Class B and Class C Shares. However, under the Class B and Class C distribution agreements, payments to the Distributor for activities pursuant to the Class B and Class C distribution plans are currently limited to payments at an annual rate equal to 0.25% and 0.55% of average daily net assets of the Portfolio, attributable to its Class B and Class C Shares, respectively.

Under the terms of the Class B and Class C distribution plans and distribution agreements, the Portfolio is authorized to make payments monthly to the Distributor that may be used to pay or reimburse entities providing distribution and shareholder servicing with respect to the Class B and Class C Shares for such entities’ fees or expenses incurred.

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

American Funds Moderate Allocation Portfolio

Notes to Financial Statements—December 31, 2009—(Continued)

3. Investment Management Agreement and Other Transactions with Affiliates - continued

Deferred Trustee Compensation - Each Trustee of the Trust who is not currently an employee of the Manager or any of its affiliates receives compensation from the Trust for his or her service to the Portfolio. A deferred compensation plan (the “Plan”) is available to the Trustees on a voluntary basis. Deferred amounts remain in the Trust until distributed in accordance with the provisions of the Plan. The value of a participating Trustee’s deferral account is based on theoretical investments of deferred amounts, on the normal payment dates, in certain portfolios of the Trust or Metropolitan Series Fund, Inc. as designated by the participating Trustee. Changes in the value of participants’ deferral accounts are reflected as Trustees’ fees and expenses in the Statement of Operations. The portion of the accrued obligations allocated to the Portfolio, if any, under the Plan are reflected as Deferred Trustees’ fees in the Statement of Assets and Liabilities.

4. Shares of Beneficial Interest

Transactions in shares of beneficial interest for the periods ended noted below were as follows:

	Beginning Shares	Sales	Reinvestments	Redemptions		Net Increase in Shares Outstanding	Ending Shares
Class B
12/31/2009	13,369	69,590	—	(11,043	)	58,547	71,916
04/28/2008-12/31/2008	—	112,605	472	(99,708	)	13,369	13,369
Class C
12/31/2009	60,077,943	117,777,308	—	(7,223,802	)	110,553,506	170,631,449
04/28/2008-12/31/2008	—	61,995,367	2,149,861	(4,067,285	)	60,077,943	60,077,943

The Portfolio is authorized to issue an unlimited number of shares.

5. Investment Transactions

Aggregate cost of purchases and proceeds of sales of investment securities, excluding short-term securities, for the period ended December 31, 2009 were as follows:

Purchases				Sales
U.S. Government		Non-Government		U.S. Government		Non-Government
$	—	$	1,063,259,663	$	—	$	132,439,086

At December 31, 2009, the cost of securities for federal income tax purposes and the unrealized appreciation (depreciation) of investments for federal income tax purposes for the Portfolio were as follows:

Federal Income Tax Cost	Gross Unrealized Appreciation		Gross Unrealized Depreciation			Net Unrealized Appreciation
$1,457,430,455	$	151,661,807	$	(32,213,562	)	$	119,448,245

6. Contractual Obligations

The Trust has a variety of indemnification obligations under contracts with its service providers. The Trust’s maximum exposure under these arrangements is unknown. However, the Trust has not had prior claims or losses pursuant to these contracts and expects the risk of loss to be remote.

7. Market, Credit and Counterparty Risk

In the normal course of business, the Underlying Portfolios in which the Portfolio invests its assets invest in securities and enter into transactions where risks exist due to fluctuations in the market (market risk) or failure of the other party to a transaction to perform (credit risk). The value of securities held by the Underlying Portfolios may decline in response to certain events, including those directly involving the companies whose securities are owned by the Underlying Portfolios; conditions affecting the general economy; overall market changes; local, regional or global political, social or economic instability; and currency and interest rate and price fluctuations. The Underlying Portfolios may be exposed to

12

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

American Funds Moderate Allocation Portfolio

Notes to Financial Statements—December 31, 2009—(Continued)

7. Market, Credit and Counterparty Risk - continued

counterparty risk, or the risk that an entity with which the Underlying Portfolios have unsettled or open transactions may default. The potential loss could exceed the value of the financial assets recorded in the financial statements. Financial assets, which potentially expose the Underlying Portfolios to credit risk, consist principally of cash due from counterparties and investments. The Underlying Portfolios restrict their exposure to credit losses by entering into master agreements with counterparties (approved brokers) with whom it undertakes a significant volume of transactions to include certain safeguards for derivatives and non-standard settlement trades. The credit risk associated with favorable contracts is reduced by a master netting arrangement to the extent that if an event of default occurs, all amounts with the counterparty are terminated and settled on a net basis. The Underlying Portfolios’ overall exposure to credit risk on derivative instruments subject to master netting arrangements can change substantially within a short period, as it is affected by each transaction subject to the arrangement.

8. Transactions in Securities of Affiliated Issuers

The Asset Allocation Portfolio does not invest in the Underlying Portfolios for the purpose of exercising management or control; however, investments by the Asset Allocation Portfolio within its principal investment strategies may represent a significant portion of the Underlying Portfolio’s net assets. Transactions in the Underlying Portfolios during the year ended December 31, 2009 were as follows:

Underlying Portfolio	Number of shares held at December 31, 2008	Shares purchased during the period	Shares sold during the period		Number of shares held at December 31, 2009
American Funds Bond Fund (Class 1)*	4,727,692	17,444,213	(109,484	)	22,062,421
American Funds Global Bond Fund (Class1)	2,657,742	2,125,894	(3,485,419	)	1,298,217
American Funds Global Small Capitalization Fund (Class 1)	792,403	923,681	(814,321	)	901,763
American Funds Growth Fund (Class 1)	1,604,824	2,573,893	(648,152	)	3,530,565
American Funds Growth-Income Fund (Class 1)	5,520,650	12,518,530	(354,645	)	17,684,535
American Funds High-Income Bond Fund (Class 1)*	5,820,787	9,299,798	(3,138,943	)	11,981,642
American Funds International Fund (Class 1)	1,562,442	4,491,232	(479,685	)	5,573,989
American Funds New World Fund (Class 1)	684,337	764,776	(639,147	)	809,966
American Funds U.S. Government/AAA - Rated Securities Fund (Class 1)*	8,524,649	21,472,127	(330,222	)	29,666,554

* The Portfolio had ownership of at least 25% of the outstanding voting securities of the Underlying Portfolio as of December 31, 2009. Once filed, the most recent Annual Report of the Underlying Portfolio will be available without charge, upon request, by calling (800) 848-3854 or on the Securities and Exchange Commission’s website at http://www.sec.gov.

Underlying Portfolio	Net Realized Gain (Loss) on Investments during the period			Capital Gain Distributions from Affiliates during the period		Income earned from Affiliates during the period		Ending Value
American Funds Bond Fund (Class 1)	$	(170,930	)	$	—	$	6,505,965	$	227,904,803
American Funds Global Bond Fund (Class1)		(902,052	)		—		212,062		15,020,367
American Funds Global Small Capitalization Fund (Class 1)		(1,540,018	)		—		60,369		16,231,742
American Funds Growth Fund (Class 1)		(11,776,398	)		—		1,108,463		163,994,762
American Funds Growth-Income Fund (Class 1)		(4,427,757	)		—		7,988,821		554,763,862
American Funds High-Income Bond Fund (Class 1)		(6,752,108	)		—		7,629,856		125,687,426
American Funds International Fund (Class 1)		(1,878,004	)		313,602		1,345,631		95,705,392
American Funds New World Fund (Class 1)		(1,606,714	)		—		218,902		16,231,718
American Funds U.S. Government/AAA - Rated Securities Fund (Class 1)		159,402			375,979		10,365,757		361,338,628

13

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

American Funds Moderate Allocation Portfolio

Notes to Financial Statements—December 31, 2009—(Continued)

9. Income Tax Information

The tax character of distributions paid for the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2008 were as follows:

Ordinary Income			Long-Term Capital Gains			Total
2009	2008		2009	2008		2009	2008
$—	$	13,274,050	$—	$	2,745,932	$—	$	16,019,982

As of December 31, 2009, the components of distributable earnings (accumulated losses) on a federal income tax basis were as follows:

Undistributed Ordinary Income	Undistributed Long-Term Gain		Net Unrealized Appreciation		Loss Carryforwards			Total
$29,135,792	$	—	$	119,448,245	$	(921,925	)	$	147,662,112

The Portfolio utilizes the provisions of the federal income tax laws that provide for the carryforward of capital losses for eight years, offsetting such losses against any future net realized capital gains. At December 31, 2009, the accumulated capital loss carryforwards and expiration dated by the Portfolio were as follows:

Expiring 12/31/2017	Total
$921,925	$	921,925

10. Recent Accounting Pronouncement

On January 21, 2010, the Financial Accounting Standards Board issued Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) 2010-06, “Improving Disclosures About Fair Value Measurements.” The ASU amends Accounting Standards Codification 820 to add new requirements for disclosures about transfers into and out of Levels 1 and 2. It also clarifies existing fair value disclosures about the level of disaggregation and about inputs and valuation techniques used to measure fair value. Additionally, the ASU amends disclosures about providing purchases, sales, issuances, and settlements on a gross basis relating to Level 3 measurements. The ASU guidance is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2009, and for interim periods within those fiscal years, except for the requirement to provide the Level 3 activity of purchases, sales, issuances, and settlements on a gross basis, which will be effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2010, and for interim periods within those fiscal years. Management is currently evaluating the impact the adoption of ASU 2010-06 will have on the Portfolio’s financial statements.

11. Subsequent Events

Management’s evaluation of the impact of all subsequent events on the Portfolio’s financial statements was completed through February 25, 2010, the date the financial statements were issued, and management has determined that as of that date there were no subsequent events requiring adjustments or disclosure in the Portfolio’s financial statements.

14

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

American Funds Moderate Allocation Portfolio

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

To the Shareholders and Board of Trustees of Met Investors Series Trust:

We have audited the accompanying statement of assets and liabilities, including the portfolio of investments, of the American Funds Moderate Allocation Portfolio, one of the portfolios constituting Met Investors Series Trust (the “Trust”), as of December 31, 2009, and the related statement of operations for the year then ended, and the statements of changes in net assets and the financial highlights for the year ended December 31, 2009 and for the period from April 28, 2008 (commencement of operations) to December 31, 2008. These financial statements and financial highlights are the responsibility of the Trust’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements and financial highlights based on our audits.

We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements and financial highlights are free of material misstatement. The Trust is not required to have, nor were we engaged to perform, an audit of its internal control over financial reporting. Our audits included consideration of internal control over financial reporting as a basis for designing audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the Trust’s internal control over financial reporting. Accordingly, we express no such opinion. An audit also includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements, assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. Our procedures included confirmation of securities owned as of December 31, 2009, by correspondence with the transfer agent. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.

In our opinion, the financial statements and financial highlights referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of the American Funds Moderate Allocation Portfolio of the Met Investors Series Trust as of December 31, 2009, the results of its operations for the year then ended, and the changes in its net assets and the financial highlights for the year ended December 31, 2009 and for the period from April 28, 2008 (commencement of operations) to December 31, 2008, in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.

Deloitte & Touche LLP

Boston, Massachusetts

February 25, 2010

15

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Trustees and Officers (Unaudited) December 31, 2009

The Trustees and executive officers of the Trust, their ages and their principal occupations during the past five years are set forth below. Unless otherwise indicated, the business address of each is 5 Park Plaza, Suite 1900 Irvine, California 92614. Each Trustee who is deemed an “interested person,” as such term is defined in the 1940 Act, is indicated by an asterisk. Those Trustees who are not “interested persons” as defined in the 1940 Act are referred to as “Independent Trustees.” Additional information about the Trustees is available in the Statement of Additional Information which is available without charge, upon request, by calling (800) 848-3854.

The Trustees
Name and Age	Position(s) Held with Registrant	Term of Office and Length of Time Served	Principal Occupation(s) During Past 5 Years	Number of Portfolios in Fund Complex+ overseen by Trustee	Other Directorships Held by Trustee
Interested Trustees
Elizabeth M. Forget* (43)	President and Trustee	Indefinite; From December 2000 to present	Since May 2007, Senior Vice President, MetLife, Inc.; since December 2000, President of MetLife Advisers, LLC and its predecessor; December 2003 to April 2007, Vice President, MetLife, Inc.	84	Director, Metropolitan Series Fund, Inc. since August 2006.
Independent Trustees
Stephen M. Alderman (50)	Trustee	Indefinite; From December 2000 to present	Since November 1991, Shareholder in the law firm of Garfield and Merel, Ltd.	48	None
Jack R. Borsting (80)	Trustee	Indefinite; From December 2000 to present	Since 2006, Professor and Dean Emeritus, Marshall School of Business, University of Southern California (USC); from 2001 to 2005, Professor of Business Administration and Dean Emeritus.	48	Director, Los Angeles Orthopedic Hospital, Trustee, The Rose Hills Foundation. Member, Army Science Board.
Robert Boulware (53)	Trustee	Indefinite; From March 2008 to present	From 2004 to 2009, Director of Norwood Promotional Products, Inc.; from 2007 to 2008, Director of Wealthpoint Advisors (a business development company); from 2007 to 2009, Director of Holladay Bank; from 1992-2006, President and Chief Executive Officer of ING Fund Distributor, LLC.	48	Since 2005, Director of Gainsco, Inc. (auto insurance).
Daniel A. Doyle (51)	Trustee	Indefinite; From February 2007 to present	From October 2000 to June 2009, Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of ATC Management, Inc. (public utility); since June 2009, independent business consultant.	48	Director, Wisconsin Sports Development Corporation
Susan C. Gause (57)	Trustee	Indefinite; From March 2008 to present	From 2000 to December 2002, Chief Executive Officer of Allianz Dresdner Asset Management; since 2003, private investor.	48	None

16

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Trustees and Officers (Unaudited)—(Continued) December 31, 2009

Name and Age	Position(s) Held with Registrant	Term of Office and Length of Time Served	Principal Occupation(s) During Past 5 Years	Number of Portfolios in Fund Complex+ overseen by Trustee	Other Directorships Held by Trustee
Independent Trustees - continued
Dawn M. Vroegop (43)	Trustee	Indefinite; From December 2000 to present	From September 1999 to September 2003, Managing Director, Dresdner RCM Global Investors.	84	Director, Metropolitan Series Fund, Inc. since May 2009; from 2003 to present, Director and Finance Committee Chair, City College of San Francisco Foundation

The Executive Officers
Name and Age	Position(s) Held with Registrant	Term of Office and Length of Time Served	Principal Occupation(s) During Past 5 Years
Jeffrey L. Bernier (38)	Vice President	From February 2009 to present	Since December 2007, Vice President, Metropolitan Life Insurance Company; since 2008 Senior Vice President of MetLife Advisers, LLC and its predecessor; from July 2004 to December 2007, Director and Senior Investment Analyst of Investment Management Services for John Hancock Financial Services.
Jeffrey A. Tupper (39)	Chief Financial Officer, Treasurer	From August 2002 to present	Since February 2009, Vice President, MetLife Advisers, LLC. Since October 2006, Assistant Vice President, MetLife Group, Inc. Since February 2001, Assistant Vice President of MetLife Investors Insurance Company.
Richard C. Pearson (66)	Vice President and Secretary	From December 2000 to present	Since June 2001, President or Executive Vice President of MetLife Investors Distribution Company; since January 2001, Executive Vice President, General Counsel and Secretary of MetLife Investors Group, Inc. and Vice President, Secretary and Associate General Counsel of its affiliated life insurance companies; since November 2000, Senior Vice President and General Counsel of MetLife Advisers, LLC and its predecessor.
Jeffrey P. Halperin (42)	Chief Compliance Officer	From November 2006 to present	Since March 2006, Vice President, Corporate Ethics and Compliance Department, MetLife, Inc.; from October 2002 to March 2006, Assistant Vice President; from November 2005 to August 2006, Interim Chief Compliance Officer, Met Investors Series Trust; since April 2007, Chief Compliance Officer, Metropolitan Series Funds; from August 2006 to April 2007, Interim Chief Compliance Officer, Metropolitan Series Funds; since August 2006, Chief Compliance Officer, MetLife Advisers, LLC and its predecessor; since November 2006, Chief Compliance Officer, MetLife Investment Advisors Company, LLC.

+ The Fund Complex includes the Trust (48 portfolios) and Metropolitan Series Fund, Inc. (36 portfolios).

* Ms. Forget is an “interested person” of the Trust as a result of her affiliation with the Manager and the Distributor.

Quarterly Portfolio Schedule

The Trust files Form N-Q for the first and third quarters of each fiscal year. The Trust’s Forms N-Q will be available on the Securities and Exchange Commission’s website at http://www.sec.gov. The Trust’s Forms N-Q may be reviewed and copied at the Securities and Exchange Commission’s Public Reference Room in Washington, D.C. and information on the operation of the Public Reference Room may be obtained by calling 1-800-SEC-0330. Once filed, the most recent Form N-Q will be available without charge, upon request, by calling (800) 848-3854.

17

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Trustees and Officers (Unaudited)—(Continued) December 31, 2009

Proxy Voting Policies and Procedures

A description of the policies and procedures that the Trust uses to determine how to vote proxies relating to portfolio securities is available without charge, upon request, by calling (800) 848-3854 and on the Securities and Exchange Commission’s website at http://www.sec.gov.

Proxy Voting Record

The Trust, on behalf of each of its Portfolios, has filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission its proxy voting record for the 12-month period ending June 30 on Form N-PX. Form N-PX must be filed by the Trust each year by August 31. Once filed, the most recent Form N-PX will be available without charge, upon request, by calling (800) 848-3854 or on the Securities and Exchange Commission’s website at http://www.sec.gov.

18

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

American Funds Moderate Allocation Portfolio

Board of Trustees’ Consideration of Advisory Agreement

At an in-person meeting of the Board of Trustees (the “Board”) of the Met Investors Series Trust (the “Trust”) held on November 10-11, 2009, the Board, including a majority of the Trustees who are not considered to be “interested persons” of the Trust (the “Independent Trustees”) under the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended (the “1940 Act”), approved for an annual period the continuation of the Trust’s advisory agreement (the “Advisory Agreement”) with MetLife Advisers, LLC (the “Adviser”) and the applicable sub-advisory agreements (each a “Sub-Advisory Agreement”, and collectively with the Advisory Agreement, the “Agreements”) between the Adviser and the investment sub-advisers (each a “Sub-Adviser”, and collectively, the “Sub-Advisers”) for each of the series of the Trust, including the American Funds Moderate Allocation Portfolio (each a “Portfolio,” and collectively, the “Portfolios”).¹ As the Adviser has the day to day responsibility for managing the American Funds Moderate Allocation Portfolio’s investments, the Board only approved an Advisory Agreement with respect to the American Funds Moderate Allocation Portfolio.

In considering the Agreements, the Board reviewed a variety of materials provided by the Adviser and the Sub-Advisers relating to each Portfolio, the Adviser and each Sub-Adviser, including comparative performance, fee and expense information for an appropriate peer group of similar mutual funds, performance information for relevant benchmark indices and other information regarding the nature, extent and quality of services provided by the Adviser and the Sub-Advisers under their respective Agreements. The Board also took into account information provided to the Board in its meetings throughout the year with respect to the services provided by the Adviser and the Sub-Advisers, including quarterly performance reports prepared by management containing reviews of investment results, and periodic presentations from the Sub-Advisers with respect to the Portfolios they manage. The Independent Trustees also assessed reports provided by independent consultants, who reviewed and provided analyses regarding investment performance, fees and expenses, profitability and other information provided by, or at the direction of, the Adviser and the Sub-Advisers, as more fully discussed below.

The Independent Trustees were separately advised by independent legal counsel throughout the process. Prior to voting, the Independent Trustees also received a memorandum from their independent counsel discussing the legal standards for their consideration of the proposed continuation of the Agreements. The Board met in person with personnel of the Adviser prior to the November meeting for the specific purpose of considering the proposed continuation of the Agreements. The Independent Trustees also discussed the proposed continuation of the Agreements in private sessions with their independent legal counsel at which no representatives of management were present.

In considering whether to approve the renewal of the Advisory Agreement with the Adviser and any applicable Sub-Advisory Agreements with respect to each Portfolio, the Board reviewed and analyzed the factors it deemed relevant, including: (1) the nature, extent and quality of the services to be provided to the Portfolios by the Adviser and the Sub-Advisers; (2) the performance of the Portfolios as compared to a peer group and an appropriate index; (3) the Adviser’s and each of the Sub-Adviser’s personnel and operations; (4) the financial condition of the Adviser and of the Sub-Advisers; (5) the level and method of computing each Portfolio’s advisory and sub-advisory fees; (6) the profitability of the Adviser under the Advisory Agreement and of the Sub-Advisers under the Sub-Advisory Agreements; (7) any “fall-out” benefits to the Adviser, the Sub-Advisers and their affiliates (i.e., ancillary benefits realized by the Adviser, the Sub-Advisers or their affiliates from the Adviser’s or Sub-Advisers’ relationship with the Trust); (8) the anticipated effect of growth in size on each Portfolio’s performance and expenses; (9) fees paid to the Sub-Advisers by comparable institutional and retail accounts; and (10) possible conflicts of interest. The Board also considered the nature, quality, and extent of the services to be provided to the Portfolios by the Adviser’s affiliates, including distribution services.

Nature, extent and quality of services. In considering the nature, extent and quality of the services to be provided by the Adviser to the Portfolios, the Board took into account the extensive responsibilities that the Adviser has as investment manager to the Portfolios, including the provision of investment advice to: (i) MetLife Aggressive Strategy Portfolio, MetLife Balanced Strategy Portfolio, MetLife Defensive Strategy Portfolio, MetLife Growth Strategy Portfolio, and MetLife Moderate Strategy Portfolio (together, the “Asset Allocation Portfolios”), (ii) American Funds Balanced Allocation Portfolio, American Funds Growth Allocation Portfolio, and American Funds Moderate Allocation Portfolio (together, the “American Funds of Funds”), and (iii) the Met/Franklin Templeton Founding Strategy Portfolio, the selection of the Sub-Advisers for the other Portfolios and oversight of the Sub-Advisers’ compliance with fund policies and objectives, review of brokerage matters including with respect to trade allocation and best execution, oversight of general fund compliance with federal and state laws, and the implementation of Board directives as they relate to the Portfolios. The Adviser’s role in coordinating the activities of the Portfolios’ other service providers was also considered. The Board also evaluated the expertise and performance of the investment personnel with respect to the Asset Allocation Portfolios, the American Funds of Funds and the Met/Franklin Templeton Founding Strategy Portfolio and of the personnel overseeing the Sub-Advisers of the other Portfolios, and compliance with each Portfolio’s investment restrictions, tax and other requirements. The Board considered information received from the Trust’s Chief Compliance Officer (“CCO”) regarding the Portfolios’ compliance policies and procedures established pursuant to Rule 38a-1 under the 1940 Act, including the policies and procedures in place relating to proxy voting. The Board also took into account its familiarity with management through Board meetings, discussions and reports during the preceding year.

The Board considered that an Investment Committee, consisting of investment professionals from across MetLife, meets at least quarterly to review the asset allocations and discuss the performance of the Asset Allocation Portfolios, the American Funds of Funds and the Met/Franklin Templeton Founding Strategy Portfolio.

¹ The Met/Templeton International Bond Portfolio recently commenced operations and, therefore, the Agreements with respect to this Portfolio were not up for renewal.

19

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

American Funds Moderate Allocation Portfolio

Board of Trustees’ Consideration of Advisory Agreement—(Continued)

The Board also recognized the Adviser^’s reputation and long-standing experience in serving as an investment adviser to the Trust, and considered the benefit to shareholders of investing in funds that are part of a family of variable annuity portfolios offering a variety of investments. In addition, the Board reviewed the financial condition of the Adviser and whether it had the financial wherewithal to provide a high level and quality of services to the Portfolios. In its review, the Board also received and took into account information regarding any services and/or payments provided to the Adviser by the Sub-Advisers in connection with marketing activities.

With respect to the services provided by each of the Sub-Advisers, the Board considered information provided to the Board by each Sub-Adviser, including each Sub-Adviser’s Form ADV, as well as information presented throughout the past year. The Board considered the Sub-Adviser’s current level of staffing and its overall resources, as well as its compensation program. The Board reviewed each Sub-Adviser’s history and investment experience, as well as information regarding the qualifications, background and responsibilities of the Sub-Adviser’s investment and compliance personnel who provide services to the Portfolios. The Board also considered, among other things, the Sub-Adviser’s compliance program and any disciplinary history. The Board noted each Sub-Adviser’s regulatory history, including whether it was currently involved in any regulatory actions or investigations as well as material litigation, and any settlements and ameliatory actions undertaken, as appropriate. The Board also noted that the CCO and his staff conduct regular, periodic compliance reviews with each of the Sub-Advisers and present reports to the Independent Trustees regarding the same, which includes evaluating the regulatory compliance systems of the Sub-Advisers and procedures reasonably designed by them to assure compliance with the federal securities laws, including issues related to late trading and market timing, best execution, fair value pricing, and proxy voting procedures, among others. The Board also took into account the financial condition of each Sub-Adviser.

The Board considered each Sub-Adviser’s investment process and philosophy. The Board took into account that each Sub-Adviser’s responsibilities include the development and maintenance of an investment program for the applicable Portfolio which is consistent with the Portfolio’s investment objectives, the selection of investment securities and the placement of orders for the purchase and sale of such securities, as well as the implementation of compliance controls related to performance of these services. The Board also reviewed each Sub-Adviser’s brokerage policies and practices, including with respect to best execution and soft dollars.

Based on its consideration and review of the foregoing information, the Board concluded that the nature, extent and quality of services provided by the Adviser and by each Sub-Adviser were satisfactory and that there was a reasonable basis on which to conclude that each would provide a high quality of investment services to the Portfolios.

Performance. The Board considered the performance of the Portfolios as described in the quarterly reports prepared by management, and as also analyzed in reports prepared by the Independent Trustees’ independent consultant. The Board noted that the Adviser reviews with the Board on a quarterly basis detailed information about the Portfolios’ performance results, portfolio composition and investment strategies. The Board also reviewed and considered a separate report prepared by Lipper Inc. (“Lipper”), an independent third party, which provided a statistical analysis comparing the Portfolios’ investment performance, expenses, and fees to comparable funds underlying variable insurance products (the “Performance Universe”). In addition, the Independent Trustees met separately with a representative of Bobroff Consulting, Inc., an independent consultant (“Bobroff”), at a special board meeting in September 2009, to review the separate reports prepared by such consultant (“Bobroff Report”), which analyzed the report prepared by Lipper, as well as certain of the other factors to be considered by the Board including supplemental alpha and information coefficient analysis. The Board also considered each Portfolio’s more recent performance subsequent to the performance period covered by the Lipper reports, and management’s discussion of the same, including the effect of current market conditions on each Portfolio’s more recent performance.

The Board closely reviewed the Portfolios’ performance records and the Adviser’s and Sub-Advisers’ management styles and long-term performance records with the Portfolios and comparable funds. The Board focused particular attention on Portfolios with less favorable performance records. The Board was mindful of the Adviser’s focus on each Sub-Adviser’s performance and noted that the Adviser has been active in monitoring and responding to any performance issues with respect to the Portfolios. The Board also took into account its discussions with management regarding factors that contributed to the performance of each Portfolio.

Among other data relating specifically to the American Funds Moderate Allocation Portfolio’s performance, the Board considered that the Portfolio outperformed both the median of its Performance Universe and its Lipper Index for the one-year and since-inception periods ended July 31, 2009. The Board further considered that the Portfolio outperformed its benchmark, the Dow Jones Moderate Index, for the one-year period ended August 31, 2009. Based on its review and taking into account the limited performance history of the Portfolio, the Board concluded that the Portfolio’s performance was satisfactory.

Fees and Expenses. The Board gave substantial consideration to the advisory fees payable under the Advisory Agreement and the sub-advisory fees payable under each of the Sub-Advisory Agreements. In this regard, the Board reviewed the advisory fees payable in the aggregate as well as on a Portfolio-by-Portfolio basis based on information provided by the Adviser. The Independent Trustees, with the assistance of Bobroff, also examined the fees paid by each Portfolio in light of fees paid to other investment managers by comparable funds and the method of computing each Portfolio’s fee, as well as considered the fees charged by the Adviser to manage other comparable funds. The Lipper report included comparisons of the Adviser’s fee schedule with that of its peers based on an asset-based analysis of relative fee structures according to the size of each Portfolio. In addition, the Board considered the Portfolios’ advisory and sub-advisory fees and total expenses as compared to similarly

20

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

American Funds Moderate Allocation Portfolio

Board of Trustees’ Consideration of Advisory Agreement—(Continued)

situated investment companies underlying variable insurance products deemed to be comparable to the Portfolios as determined by Lipper. The Board considered each Portfolio’s ranking within a smaller group of peer funds chosen by Lipper (the “Expense Group”), as well as the Portfolio’s ranking within broader groups of funds (the “Expense Universe” and the “Sub-advised Expense Universe”). The Board also considered each Portfolio’s contractual sub-advisory fees, as applicable, as compared to the Sub-advised Expense Universe as well as a smaller group of funds (the “Sub-advised Expense Group”). In comparing each Portfolio’s actual and contractual management fee to that of comparable funds, the Board noted that such fee includes both advisory and administrative fees.

The Board noted that the sub-advisory fees for the Portfolios are paid by the Adviser, not the Portfolios, out of the advisory fee. It was further noted that the Adviser negotiates such fees at arm’s length. The Board also considered that the Adviser had entered into expense limitation agreements with certain of the Portfolios as noted below, pursuant to which the Adviser has agreed to waive a portion of its advisory fee and/or reimburse certain expenses as a means of limiting a Portfolio’s total annual operating expenses. In addition, the Board noted that the Adviser effected fee reductions in 2009 with respect to several Portfolios. The Board also noted that the Adviser had re-negotiated the securities lending arrangement with State Street Corporation to further maximize the income to the Portfolios from such program.

With respect to each sub-advised Portfolio, the Board also compared the sub-advisory fees paid by the Adviser to fees charged by the Portfolio’s Sub-Adviser to manage other sub-advised portfolios and portfolios not subject to regulation under the 1940 Act, such as separate accounts, as applicable. The Board considered the fee comparisons in light of the differences required to manage different types of accounts.

With respect to the American Funds Moderate Allocation Portfolio, the Board considered that the Portfolio’s actual management fees were below the Expense Group median and Expense Universe median and that total expenses (exclusive of 12b-1 fees) were below the Expense Group median and equal to the Expense Universe median. The Board also noted that the Portfolio’s contractual management fees were below the normalized median of the Expense Group at the Portfolio’s current size. The Board noted that the Adviser is reimbursing expenses so that the Portfolio’s total annual operating expenses are capped. The Board also noted that the Adviser was proposing a reduction to its advisory fee through the implementation of additional breakpoints, effective November 12, 2009. After consideration of all relevant factors, the Board concluded that the advisory fee is consistent with industry norms and is fair and reasonable in light of the services to be provided.

Profitability. The Board examined the profitability of the Adviser on an aggregate basis with respect to all Portfolios, as well as on a Portfolio-by-Portfolio basis. With respect to the Asset Allocation Portfolios and Met/Franklin Templeton Founding Strategy Portfolio, the Board noted that the advisory fee is in addition to the fees received by the Adviser and its affiliates with regard to the other Portfolios of the Trust or of Metropolitan Series Fund, Inc., in which the Asset Allocation Portfolios and Met/Franklin Templeton Founding Strategy Portfolio may invest. With respect to the other Portfolios, the Board noted that a major component of profitability of the Adviser was the margin between the sub-advisory fees that the Adviser receives from the Trust and the portion of those fees paid to the Sub-Advisers. In this regard, the Board took into account certain comparative information in the Lipper report. The Board also reviewed the Adviser’s unaudited income statements and balance sheet information supplied by the Adviser regarding costs borne by the Adviser’s affiliates which support the operations of the Adviser but are not reflected on the unaudited income statements of the Adviser, as well as considered the profitability of the insurance products, the function of which is supported in part by the Adviser’s revenues under the Advisory Agreement, and other information and analysis prepared by the Adviser. With respect to the American Funds Bond Portfolio, American Funds Growth Portfolio, American Funds Growth-Income Portfolio, American Funds Global Small Capitalization Portfolio and American Funds International Portfolio, the Board noted that the Adviser currently does not receive an advisory fee. The Board also considered that the Distributor, MetLife Investors Distribution Company, receives 12b-1 payments to support the distribution of the products. The Board concluded after extensive discussions with management that the profitability of the Adviser and its affiliates from their relationship with each Portfolio was reasonable in light of all relevant factors.

In considering the profitability to the Sub-Advisers and their affiliates of their relationships with the Portfolios, the Board noted that the fees under the Sub-Advisory Agreements were paid by the Adviser out of the advisory fees that it receives under the Advisory Agreement. The Board also relied on the ability of the Adviser to negotiate the Sub-Advisory Agreements and the fees thereunder at arm’s length. The Board reviewed portfolio specific data with regard to the profitability of the Portfolios to each Sub-Adviser, as available, and analyzed the reasonableness of such profitability finding no indication of excessive profitability. However, the Board placed more reliance on the fact that the Sub-Advisory Agreement was negotiated at arm’s length and that the advisory fee was paid by the Adviser than on Sub-Adviser profitability.

Economies of scale. The Board also considered the effect of the Portfolios’ growth in size on their performances and fees. The Board noted that the fee schedules for all but eleven of the Portfolios contain breakpoints that reduce the fee rate above specified asset levels. The Board noted those Portfolios that did not contain breakpoints in the advisory fee and took into account management’s discussion of the same. The Board noted that those Portfolios with advisory fee schedules containing breakpoints generally reflect the inclusion of breakpoints in the sub-advisory fee schedule for such Portfolios. The Board considered the effective fees under the Advisory Agreement for each Portfolio as a percentage of assets at different asset levels and possible economies of scale that may be realized if the assets of the Portfolio grow. Among other data, the Board examined the effect of each Portfolio’s growth in size on various fee schedules and reviewed the Lipper and Bobroff Reports, which compared fee schedules among peers. The Board also took into account that the Sub-Adviser fees are paid by the Adviser out of the advisory fee. The Board also noted that if the Portfolios’ assets increase over time, the Portfolios may realize other economies of scale if assets increase proportionally more than certain other fixed expenses.

21

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

American Funds Moderate Allocation Portfolio

Board of Trustees’ Consideration of Advisory Agreement—(Continued)

With respect to the American Funds Moderate Allocation Portfolio, the Board noted that management was proposing that breakpoints be added to the Portfolio’s advisory fee. The Board noted that the Portfolio’s management fee is below the asset-weighted average of comparable funds at all asset levels. The Board considered the effect of the Portfolio’s current size and potential growth on its performance and fees. The Board noted that if the Portfolio’s assets increased over time, the Portfolio might realize other economies of scale if assets increased proportionally more than certain other fixed expenses. The Board concluded that the advisory fee structure for the Portfolio, including the proposed breakpoints, was reasonable and appropriately reflects potential economies of scale.

Other factors. As part of its evaluation of the Adviser’s compensation, the Board considered other benefits that may be realized by the Adviser and its affiliates from their relationship with the Trust. Among them, the Board recognized that an affiliate of the Adviser, MetLife Investors Distribution Company, serves as the Distributor for the Trust, and, as such, receives payments pursuant to Rule 12b-1 from the Portfolios to compensate it for providing shareholder services and selling activities, which could lead to growth in the Trust’s assets and corresponding benefits from such growth, including economies of scale. The Board also considered that affiliates of the Adviser may benefit from certain indirect tax benefits relating to dividend received deductions and foreign tax credits. The Board concluded that ancillary benefits accruing to the Adviser and its affiliates by virtue of the Adviser’s relationship with the Portfolios are fair and reasonable in light of the costs of providing investment management and other services to the Portfolios and the ongoing commitment of the Adviser to the Portfolios.

The Board considered other benefits that may be realized by each Subadviser and its affiliates from their relationship with the Trust, including the opportunity to provide advisory services to additional portfolios of the Trust and reputational benefits. The Board concluded that the benefits accruing to the Subadvisers and their affiliates by virtue of the Subadvisers’ relationships to the Portfolios are fair and reasonable in light of the costs of providing investment advisory services to the Portfolios and the ongoing commitment of the Subadvisers to the Portfolios.

The Board considered any possible conflicts of interest in the form of material benefits or detriments to the Trust resulting from the nature of the Trust’s and the Adviser’s or the Subadvisers’ affiliations. Here, the Board considered possible conflicts of interest that may arise between the Trust and the Adviser or a Subadviser in connection with the services provided to the Trust and the various relationships that they and their affiliates may have with the Trust. The Board considered the procedures for monitoring and managing such potential conflicts.

In addition, the Board reviewed the advisory fee to be paid to the Adviser for the American Funds of Funds and concluded that the advisory fee to be paid to the Adviser with respect to the Portfolios is based on services to be provided that are in addition to, rather than duplicative of, the services provided pursuant to the advisory agreements for the underlying funds in which the Portfolios invest and that the additional services are necessary because of the differences between the investment policies, strategies and techniques of the Portfolios and those of the underlying funds.

Conclusion. In considering the renewal of each of the Agreements, the Board, including the Independent Trustees, did not identify any single factor as controlling, and each Trustee may have attributed different weights to various factors. The Board evaluated all information available to them on a Portfolio-by-Portfolio basis, and their determinations were made separately with respect to each Portfolio. Based on all of the above-mentioned considerations, and the recommendations of management, the Board, including a majority of the Independent Trustees, determined that approval of the Advisory Agreement and the Sub-Advisory Agreements was in the best interests of each Portfolio. After full consideration of these and other factors, the Board, including a majority of the Independent Trustees, with the assistance of independent counsel, approved the Advisory Agreement and the Sub-Advisory Agreement with respect to each Portfolio.

22

Simplify your life…

with MetLife eDelivery^® while helping MetLife preserve the planet’s natural resources.

(see details on inside cover)

Met Investors Series Trust Batterymarch Growth and Income Portfolio Annual Report December 31, 2009

• get rid of all that paper?

• access important documents whenever you want?

• conveniently receive valuable information online?

Get it all with MetLife eDelivery!

MetLife’s eDelivery service is your resource for electronic delivery of your variable annuity or variable life prospectuses, semiannual and annual reports, and other information. Available to variable product clients of Metropolitan Life Insurance Company, First MetLife Investors Insurance Company, General American Life Insurance Company, MetLife Investors Insurance Company, MetLife Investors USA Insurance Company, MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut and New England Life Insurance Company.*

Why sign up for MetLife eDelivery?

It’s Free** – No cost to enroll or use the service.

It’s Paperless – We’ll email you when your documents are available.

It’s Easy – Enrollment takes just a few minutes.

How do you sign up?

Just type in www.metlife.esourcelink.net to get to MetLife’s online registration form. You will need your policy/account numbers, which can be found on your statements. The form takes only a few minutes to complete. Please note, for jointly owned contracts, both owners will need to register in order to eliminate paper delivery.

  * Not all MetLife products offer eDelivery at this time. ** Your internet provider may impose fees for this service. L0210086208[0911]

Letter from the President

Letter to Policy Holders

February 1, 2010

2009 can best be described as a year of recovery. The year began with the stock market in a broad decline and the economy mired in a deep recession. However, investors’ sentiment improved dramatically during the year as fiscal and monetary authorities took measures to jump start the economy which helped spark a strong market rally in equities and corporate bonds.

The Barclays Capital U.S. Aggregate Bond Index returned 5.9% during 2009. While this was similar to the 5.2% return experienced in 2008, the two years could not have been more different. In 2008, fear drove investors toward the safety of U.S. Treasury securities and away from the risk of corporate bonds, especially those rated below investment grade. In contrast, investors were more willing to embrace risk in 2009. This produced an enormous recovery in below investment grade bonds; the Barclays Capital U.S. Corporate High Yield Index returned over 58% in 2009 after falling 26% in 2008. The Barclays Capital U.S. Treasury Index returned 13.7% in 2008, but declined 3.6% in 2009.

Stock investors also became less pessimistic in 2009. While the stock market indices are still far from the record levels reached in 2007, investors were rewarded in 2009 as stocks returned 26.5% as measured by the Standard & Poor’s 500 Index, its best return since 2003. Foreign stocks, as measured by the MSCI EAFE Index, returned 31.8% during 2009.

On the following pages, you will find a complete review of your Portfolio and its investment performance.

MetLife is committed to building your financial freedom. We appreciate your trust and will continue to focus our efforts on meeting your investment needs.

Sincerely,

Elizabeth M. Forget

President

Met Investors Series Trust

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Batterymarch Growth and Income Portfolio

Managed by Batterymarch Financial Management, Inc.

Portfolio Manager Commentary*

Performance

For the year ended December 31, 2009, the Batterymarch Growth and Income Portfolio had a return of 21.90% for Class A Shares, versus 26.46% for its benchmark, the S&P 500 Index¹.

Market Environment / Conditions

Investor questions about the condition of the US financial system and the impact of government intervention led to broad declines early in the reporting period. Market volatility reached near record highs, and sentiment and government intervention continued to distort long term equity values. The decline persisted into March of 2009, making it one of the most dramatic declines in market history.

A rebound was sparked in early March with financial stocks leading the pack. From the start of the reversal rally in mid-March 2009 through much of the next two quarters, deep value, lower-quality names with high debt levels and poor prior performance rebounded sharply, outperforming more fundamentally sound stocks by huge margins. The early part of the rally was narrow in breadth, with only deep value measures such as price-to-book being predictive.

We believe that fundamentals, the very basis of our investment process, will continue to be the primary driver of long-term returns. Thus while we muted our active positions during the rally to manage risk exposures, we continued to adhere to our investment philosophy of investing in stocks which rank well across a range of dimensions including not only value, but growth, cash flow, technicals and expectations. At the same time we worked to enhance our process to address sustainable market shifts.

Unlike in the period from mid-March through September when stock performance was driven by deep value and price reversals, the market began to gradually broaden out across sectors and dimensions during the fourth quarter. This return to more fundamentally-driven markets appears to have started with small cap stocks and by year end had begun to extend into the larger cap segment of the market.

Portfolio Review / Current Positioning

As of the end of the first quarter of the calendar year, relative performance was strongly ahead of the benchmark. However, from the start of the reversal rally in mid March through the third quarter, Batterymarch’s preference for high quality stocks that score well across a range of fundamental dimensions struggled. Investors rewarded deep value to the exclusion of everything else, which is contrary to our stock selection model based on a range of fundamental measures. Only certain value measures were predictive. Many others were perverse.

In this period, risk controls (i.e. diversification and modest sector bets) were less effective than one would traditionally expect given the extraordinarily broad range of stock returns.

In the final quarter of the year, we saw Batterymarch’s process again adding value as broader measures of stock selection become predictive. Relative performance in this final quarter was much improved, although performance for the full calendar year still lagged the benchmark.

Stock selection was the primary detractor from relative performance for the year, especially in the retail industry. Underweighting Amazon.com, Inc., which returned over 162% in the benchmark for the year, was the biggest detractor in that sector. Stock selection also detracted significantly in the software & services industry. Holding a non-benchmark name, Endo Pharmaceutical Holdings, Inc. was the largest detractor overall at the stock level given its negative absolute return for the period held. From an allocation perspective, an underweight to materials detracted, given that sector’s strong return in the benchmark overall.

The greatest contributor to relative performance for the year was stock selection in the materials and energy sectors. Overweighting technology, which had the highest absolute return in the benchmark for the year, also contributed. Owning Seagate Technology in that sector, a non-benchmark name, was the greatest contributor at the stock level returning approximately 140% for the period held.

As of the end of the period, the portfolio remained broadly diversified and attractively valued as compared to the benchmark, with a lower one-year forward P/E (price to earnings) ratio than the benchmark (12.7X vs. 14.0X) and a strong two-year forward earnings per share growth rate comparable to the benchmark (25.8% vs. 25.9%). Technology and health care were the most overweight sectors, while consumer staples and financials-banks were underweighted.

Yu-Nien (Charles) Ko, CFA and Stephen A. Lanzendorf, CFA

Senior Portfolio Managers and Co-Directors of the U.S. Investment team

Batterymarch Financial Management, Inc.

*This commentary may include statements that constitute “forward-looking statements” under the U.S. securities laws. Forward-looking statements include, among other things, projections, estimates, and information about possible or future results related to the Portfolio, market or regulatory developments. The views expressed above are not guarantees of future performance or economic results and involve certain risks, uncertainties and assumptions that could cause actual outcomes and results to differ materially from the views expressed herein. The views expressed above are subject to change at any time based upon economic, market, or other conditions and the subadvisory firm undertakes no obligation to update the views expressed herein. Any discussions of specific securities should not be considered a recommendation to buy or sell those securities. The views expressed above (including any forward-looking statement) may not be relied upon as investment advice or as an indication of the Portfolio’s trading intent. Information about the Portfolio’s holdings, asset allocation or country diversification is historical and is not an indication of future Portfolio composition, which may vary. Direct

1

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Batterymarch Growth and Income Portfolio

Managed by Batterymarch Financial Management, Inc.

Portfolio Manager Commentary* (continued)

investment in any index is not possible. The performance of any index mentioned in this commentary has not been adjusted for ongoing management, distribution and operating expenses, and sales charges applicable to mutual fund investments. In addition, the returns do not reflect additional fees charged by separate accounts or variable insurance contracts that an investor in the Portfolio may pay. If these additional fees were reflected, performance would have been lower.

Portfolio Composition as of December 31, 2009

Top Holdings

	Percent of Net Assets
Exxon Mobil Corp.	2.9%
Microsoft Corp.	2.7%
International Business Machines Corp.	2.6%
Apple, Inc.	2.3%
Hewlett-Packard Co.	1.9%
Chevron Corp.	1.9%
Procter & Gamble Co. (The)	1.9%
Pfizer, Inc.	1.7%
AT&T, Inc.	1.7%
Cisco Systems, Inc.	1.6%

Top Sectors

	Percent of Portfolio Market Value
Non-Cyclical	22.6%
Technology	16.1%
Financials	12.9%
Communications	9.9%
Energy	9.6%
Industrials	8.1%
Cyclical	7.8%
Short-Term Investments	6.8%
Utilities	3.1%
Basic Materials	3.1%

2

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Batterymarch Growth and Income Portfolio

Batterymarch Growth and Income Portfolio managed by

Batterymarch Financial Management, Inc. vs. S&P 500 Index¹

	Average Annual Return2 (for the year ended 12/31/09)
	1 Year	3 Year	5 Year	10 Year
Batterymarch Growth and Income Portfolio—Class A	21.90%	-6.02%	-0.68%	-2.46%
S&P 500 Index1	26.46%	-5.63%	0.42%	-0.95%

¹ The S&P 500 Index is an unmanaged index consisting of 500 stocks chosen for market size, liquidity, and industry group representation. It is a market-value weighted index (stock price times number of shares outstanding), with each stock’s weight in the Index proportionate to its market value.

²“Average Annual Return” is calculated including reinvestment of all income dividends and capital gains distributions.

Inception of Class A shares is 5/16/83. Index returns are based on an inception date of 5/16/83. On May 1, 2006, the assets of The Travelers Growth and Income Stock Account for Variable Annuities were transferred to the Portfolio. The historical performance prior to this period is the performance of the Portfolio’s predecessor insurance company separate account managed by an entity which became an affiliate of the Advisor in December 2005 using the same investment objective and similar investment strategies as the Portfolio. The separate account’s performance reflects all expenses including Contract charges since such charges were not separately stated from other account expenses. Subsequent to May 1, 2006, the Portfolio’s performance will not reflect Contract charges. If Contract charges had been excluded from the performance calculations, the performance numbers would have been higher. Prior to May 1, 2006, the Portfolio was not registered under the Investment Company Act of 1940 (“1940 Act”) and was not subject to certain investment limitations, diversification requirements, and other restrictions imposed by the 1940 Act and the Internal Revenue Code, which, if applicable, may have adversely affected its performance.

Past performance does not guarantee future results. The investment return and principal value of an investment in the Portfolio will fluctuate, so that shares, on any given day or when redeemed, may be worth more or less than their original cost. Performance numbers are net of all Portfolio expenses but do not include any insurance, sales, or administration charges of variable annuity or life insurance contracts. If these charges were included, the returns would be lower. The Index does not include fees or expenses and is not available for direct investment.

3

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Batterymarch Growth and Income Portfolio

Understanding Your Portfolio’s Expenses

Shareholder Expense Example

As a shareholder of the Portfolio, you incur ongoing costs, including management fees; distribution and service (12b-1) fees; and other Portfolio expenses. This example is intended to help you understand your ongoing costs (in dollars) (referred to as “expenses”) of investing in the Portfolio and compare these costs with the ongoing costs of investing in other mutual funds. The example is based on an investment of $1,000 invested at the beginning of the period and held for the entire period, July 1, 2009 through December 31, 2009.

Actual Expenses

The first line in the table below provides information about actual account values and actual expenses. You may use the information in this line, together with the amount you invested in the Portfolio, to estimate the expenses that you paid over the period. Simply divide your account value by $1,000 (for example, an $8,600 account value divided by $1,000 = 8.6), then multiply the result by the number in the first line under the heading entitled “Expenses Paid During Period” to estimate the expenses you paid on your account during this period.

Hypothetical Example for Comparison Purposes

The second line in the table below provides information about hypothetical account values and hypothetical expenses based on the Portfolio’s actual expense ratio and an assumed rate of return of 5% per year before expenses, which is not the Portfolio’s actual return. The hypothetical account values and expenses may not be used to estimate the actual ending account balance or expenses you paid for the period. You may use this information to compare the ongoing costs of investing in the Portfolio and other funds. To do so, compare this 5% hypothetical example with the 5% hypothetical examples that appear in the shareholder reports of the other funds.

Please note that the expenses shown in the table are meant to highlight your ongoing costs only and do not reflect any fees or charges of your variable insurance product or any additional expenses that participants in certain eligible qualified plans may bear relating to the operations of their plan. Therefore, the second line in the table is useful in comparing ongoing costs only, and will not help you determine the relative total costs of owning different funds. In addition, if these other costs were included, your costs would have been higher.

	Annualized Expense Ratio	Beginning Account Value 7/1/09		Ending Account Value 12/31/09		Expenses Paid During Period* 7/1/09-12/31/09
Class A
Actual	0.65%	$	1,000.00	$	1,209.80	$	3.62
Hypothetical	0.65%		1,000.00		1,021.93		3.31

* Expenses paid are equal to the Portfolio’s annualized expense ratio for the most recent six month period, as shown above, multiplied by the average account value over the period, multiplied by the number of days (184 days) in the most recent fiscal half-year, divided by 365 (to reflect the one-half year period).

4

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Batterymarch Growth and Income Portfolio

PORTFOLIO OF INVESTMENTS

December 31, 2009

(Percentage of Net Assets)

Security Description	Shares	Value
Common Stocks - 99.6%
Aerospace & Defense - 3.0%
Boeing Co. (The)	12,741	$	689,670
General Dynamics Corp.	19,916		1,357,674
Honeywell International, Inc.	14,666		574,907
Lockheed Martin Corp.	21,063		1,587,097
Northrop Grumman Corp.	13,600		759,560
Raytheon Co.	31,916		1,644,312
United Technologies Corp.	19,341		1,342,459
			7,955,679
Air Freight & Logistics - 0.6%
C.H. Robinson Worldwide, Inc.	9,800		575,554
FedEx Corp.	4,900		408,905
United Parcel Service, Inc. - Class B	11,210		643,118
			1,627,577
Airlines - 0.4%
Delta Air Lines, Inc.*	82,200		935,436
Automobiles - 0.4%
Ford Motor Co.*	111,850		1,118,500
Beverages - 2.3%
Coca-Cola Co.	57,250		3,263,250
Coca-Cola Enterprises, Inc.	50,630		1,073,356
PepsiCo, Inc.	26,092		1,586,394
			5,923,000
Biotechnology - 1.7%
Amgen, Inc.*	32,241		1,823,874
Celgene Corp.*	8,500		473,280
Cephalon, Inc.*(a)	20,100		1,254,441
Gilead Sciences, Inc.*	18,426		797,477
			4,349,072
Building Products - 0.2%
Masco Corp.	42,700		589,687
Capital Markets - 3.5%
Affiliated Managers Group, Inc.*(a)	9,900		666,765
AllianceBernstein Holding LP	18,100		508,610
Ameriprise Financial, Inc.	37,382		1,451,169
Bank of New York Mellon Corp.	22,187		620,570
Blackstone Group LP (The)	30,400		398,848
Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. (The)	12,111		2,044,821
Morgan Stanley	46,712		1,382,675
State Street Corp.	14,790		643,957
TD Ameritrade Holding Corp.*	44,768		867,604
Waddell & Reed Financial, Inc. - Class A	15,900		485,586
			9,070,605
Chemicals - 1.0%
Dow Chemical Co. (The)	40,700		1,124,541
E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co.	17,196		578,990
Monsanto Co.	9,939		812,513
			2,516,044

Security Description	Shares	Value
Commercial & Professional Services - 0.2%
Brink’s Co. (The)	11,000	$	267,740
R.R. Donnelley & Sons Co.	6,500		144,755
			412,495
Commercial Banks - 2.9%
Bank of Montreal	21,300		1,130,604
BOK Financial Corp.	5,000		237,600
Commerce Bancshares, Inc.	9,500		367,840
Credicorp, Ltd.	10,620		817,953
M&T Bank Corp.	14,800		989,972
Royal Bank of Canada	14,148		757,625
U.S. Bancorp	45,879		1,032,736
Wells Fargo & Co.	81,044		2,187,378
			7,521,708
Communications Equipment - 2.5%
Cisco Systems, Inc.*	178,364		4,270,034
Motorola, Inc.*	107,400		833,424
QUALCOMM, Inc.	30,852		1,427,214
			6,530,672
Computers & Peripherals - 8.5%
Apple, Inc.*	28,242		5,955,108
Dell, Inc.*	76,704		1,101,469
EMC Corp.*	64,400		1,125,068
Hewlett-Packard Co.	95,856		4,937,543
International Business Machines Corp.	51,835		6,785,202
SanDisk Corp.*	29,700		861,003
Seagate Technology	86,800		1,578,892
			22,344,285
Construction & Engineering - 0.5%
Foster Wheeler AG*	20,100		591,744
KBR, Inc.	35,500		674,500
			1,266,244
Consumer Finance - 1.1%
American Express Co.	23,950		970,454
AmeriCredit Corp.*(a)	42,600		811,104
Capital One Financial Corp.	26,720		1,024,445
			2,806,003
Containers & Packaging - 0.0%
Pactiv Corp.*	4,700		113,458
Diversified Consumer Services - 0.2%
ITT Educational Services, Inc.*(a)	4,536		435,275
Diversified Financial Services - 2.6%
Bank of America Corp.	161,187		2,427,476
Citigroup, Inc.	141,920		469,755
JPMorgan Chase & Co.	95,703		3,987,944
			6,885,175
Diversified Telecommunication Services - 3.1%
AT&T, Inc.	159,223		4,463,021
Verizon Communications, Inc.	107,095		3,548,057
			8,011,078

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

5

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Batterymarch Growth and Income Portfolio

PORTFOLIO OF INVESTMENTS - continued

December 31, 2009

(Percentage of Net Assets)

Security Description	Shares	Value
Electric Utilities - 0.8%
DPL, Inc.	34,600	$	954,960
Exelon Corp.	10,560		516,067
Pinnacle West Capital Corp.	14,000		512,120
			1,983,147
Electrical Equipment - 0.2%
Emerson Electric Co.	13,900		592,140
Electronic Equipment, Instruments & Components - 0.4%
Flextronics International, Ltd.*	92,000		672,520
Tech Data Corp.*	9,300		433,938
			1,106,458
Energy Equipment & Services - 1.6%
National-Oilwell Varco, Inc.	16,030		706,762
Noble Corp.	29,800		1,212,860
Oil States International, Inc.*(a)	23,800		935,102
Schlumberger, Ltd.	21,486		1,398,524
			4,253,248
Food & Staples Retailing - 2.6%
Costco Wholesale Corp.	7,327		433,539
CVS Caremark Corp.	41,620		1,340,580
Kroger Co. (The)	67,540		1,386,596
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.	55,995		2,992,933
Walgreen Co.	19,400		712,368
			6,866,016
Food Products - 1.7%
Archer-Daniels-Midland Co.	26,200		820,322
Dean Foods Co.*	50,790		916,252
Del Monte Foods Co.	75,910		860,819
General Mills, Inc.	11,500		814,315
Hormel Foods Corp.	7,800		299,910
Kraft Foods, Inc. - Class A	24,100		655,038
			4,366,656
Gas Utilities - 0.9%
AGL Resources, Inc.	28,700		1,046,689
Atmos Energy Corp.	16,700		490,980
Energen Corp.	19,900		931,320
			2,468,989
Health Care Equipment & Supplies - 2.1%
Baxter International, Inc.	18,400		1,079,712
C.R. Bard, Inc.	6,200		482,980
Covidien Plc	22,776		1,090,743
Hospira, Inc.*	24,100		1,229,100
Medtronic, Inc.	39,500		1,737,210
			5,619,745
Health Care Providers & Services - 2.8%
Aetna, Inc.	42,500		1,347,250
AmerisourceBergen Corp.	28,200		735,174
Coventry Health Care, Inc.*	27,990		679,877
Humana, Inc.*	9,500		416,955
McKesson Corp.	11,900		743,750

Security Description	Shares	Value
Health Care Providers & Services - continued
Medco Health Solutions, Inc.*	13,800	$	881,958
UnitedHealth Group, Inc.	46,075		1,404,366
WellPoint, Inc.*	19,200		1,119,168
			7,328,498
Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure - 1.3%
McDonald’s Corp.	21,958		1,371,058
Starbucks Corp.*	85,220		1,965,173
			3,336,231
Household Durables - 1.1%
Garmin, Ltd.(a)	41,249		1,266,344
Jarden Corp.	13,900		429,649
Leggett & Platt, Inc.	36,990		754,596
Newell Rubbermaid, Inc.	35,340		530,454
			2,981,043
Household Products - 2.5%
Colgate-Palmolive Co.	9,460		777,139
Kimberly-Clark Corp.	15,000		955,650
Procter & Gamble Co. (The)	80,162		4,860,222
			6,593,011
Independent Power Producers & Energy Traders - 0.6%
AES Corp. (The)*	44,700		594,957
Constellation Energy Group, Inc.	27,400		963,658
			1,558,615
Industrial Conglomerates - 2.2%
3M Co.	14,061		1,162,423
General Electric Co.	224,904		3,402,797
Tyco International, Ltd.*	37,100		1,323,728
			5,888,948
Insurance - 2.4%
Aflac, Inc.	30,740		1,421,725
Allstate Corp. (The)	31,100		934,244
American Financial Group, Inc.	33,100		825,845
Genworth Financial, Inc. - Class A*	45,000		510,750
Progressive Corp. (The)*	39,600		712,404
Prudential Financial, Inc.	17,100		850,896
Travelers Cos., Inc. (The)	18,700		932,382
			6,188,246
Internet & Catalog Retail - 0.6%
Amazon.com, Inc.*	3,300		443,916
Expedia, Inc.*(a)	45,000		1,156,950
			1,600,866
Internet Software & Services - 1.4%
eBay, Inc.*	27,400		644,996
Google, Inc. - Class A*	4,700		2,913,906
			3,558,902
IT Services - 2.4%
Accenture Plc - Class A	18,300		759,450
Broadridge Financial Solutions, Inc.	17,900		403,824

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

6

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Batterymarch Growth and Income Portfolio

PORTFOLIO OF INVESTMENTS - continued

December 31, 2009

(Percentage of Net Assets)

Security Description	Shares	Value
IT Services - continued
Cognizant Technology Solutions Corp. - Class A*	15,500	$	702,150
Computer Sciences Corp.*	32,400		1,863,972
Hewitt Associates, Inc. - Class A*(a)	26,400		1,115,664
Lender Processing Services, Inc.	15,600		634,296
SAIC, Inc.*(a)	24,080		456,075
Western Union Co. (The)	25,441		479,563
			6,414,994
Life Sciences Tools & Services - 0.3%
Life Technologies Corp.*	15,000		783,450
Machinery - 0.6%
Illinois Tool Works, Inc.	19,300		926,207
Joy Global, Inc.	12,176		628,160
			1,554,367
Media - 2.6%
Comcast Corp. - Class A	96,804		1,632,115
Gannett Co., Inc.(a)	35,000		519,750
News Corp. - Class A	66,600		911,754
Time Warner Cable, Inc.	28,250		1,169,268
Time Warner, Inc.	19,645		572,455
Viacom, Inc. - Class B*	30,200		897,846
Walt Disney Co. (The)(a)	35,730		1,152,293
			6,855,481
Metals & Mining - 1.5%
AK Steel Holding Corp.(a)	38,400		819,840
Freeport-McMoRan Copper & Gold, Inc.*	14,300		1,148,147
Steel Dynamics, Inc.	70,825		1,255,019
Yamana Gold, Inc.	55,950		636,711
			3,859,717
Multi-Utilities - 1.0%
Integrys Energy Group, Inc.(a)	17,900		751,621
NSTAR(a)	8,400		309,120
Public Service Enterprise Group, Inc.	28,210		937,982
TECO Energy, Inc.	47,400		768,828
			2,767,551
Multiline Retail - 1.4%
Dollar Tree, Inc.*(a)	13,200		637,560
Family Dollar Stores, Inc.	50,700		1,410,981
Kohl’s Corp.*	5,400		291,222
Target Corp.	26,517		1,282,627
			3,622,390
Office Electronics - 0.2%
Xerox Corp.(a)	71,800		607,428
Oil, Gas & Consumable Fuels - 8.7%
Alpha Natural Resources, Inc.*	7,300		316,674
Anadarko Petroleum Corp.	10,490		654,786
Apache Corp.	17,500		1,805,475

Security Description	Shares	Value
Oil, Gas & Consumable Fuels - continued
Chevron Corp.	63,439	$	4,884,169
ConocoPhillips Co.	59,058		3,016,092
Devon Energy Corp.	8,075		593,512
Exxon Mobil Corp.	111,426		7,598,139
Marathon Oil Corp.	26,000		811,720
Occidental Petroleum Corp.	19,466		1,583,559
Peabody Energy Corp.	33,240		1,502,780
			22,766,906
Paper & Forest Products - 0.8%
International Paper Co.	81,860		2,192,211
Pharmaceuticals - 7.6%
Abbott Laboratories	27,579		1,488,990
Bristol-Myers Squibb Co.	100,375		2,534,469
Eli Lilly & Co.	18,276		652,636
Endo Pharmaceuticals Holdings, Inc.*(a)	58,000		1,189,580
Johnson & Johnson	51,654		3,327,034
Merck & Co., Inc.	103,904		3,796,652
Mylan, Inc.*(a)	34,400		633,992
Pfizer, Inc.	251,626		4,577,077
Watson Pharmaceuticals, Inc.*	44,000		1,742,840
			19,943,270
Real Estate Investment Trusts (REITs) - 0.6%
Annaly Capital Management, Inc.	29,600		513,560
Hospitality Properties Trust	12,800		303,488
Liberty Property Trust	22,600		723,426
			1,540,474
Real Estate Management & Development - 0.4%
Brookfield Properties Corp.(a)	82,100		995,052
Semiconductors & Semiconductor Equipment - 1.6%
Intel Corp.	158,369		3,230,728
Texas Instruments, Inc.	38,974		1,015,662
			4,246,390
Software - 5.6%
BMC Software, Inc.*	31,840		1,276,784
CA, Inc.	25,900		581,714
Microsoft Corp.	235,780		7,188,932
Oracle Corp.	151,900		3,727,626
Symantec Corp.*	33,000		590,370
Synopsys, Inc.*(a)	56,233		1,252,871
			14,618,297
Specialty Retail - 2.3%
Aeropostale, Inc.*(a)	14,700		500,535
Gap, Inc. (The)	21,600		452,520
Home Depot, Inc. (The)	44,128		1,276,623
Lowe’s Cos., Inc.	28,500		666,615
Ross Stores, Inc.	17,400		743,154
TJX Cos., Inc. (The)	63,290		2,313,250
			5,952,697

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

7

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Batterymarch Growth and Income Portfolio

PORTFOLIO OF INVESTMENTS - continued

December 31, 2009

(Percentage of Net Assets)

Security Description	Shares/Par Amount		Value
Textiles, Apparel & Luxury Goods - 0.2%
NIKE, Inc. - Class B		7,560	$	499,489
Thrifts & Mortgage Finance - 0.4%
Hudson City Bancorp, Inc.		69,950		960,413
Tobacco - 1.3%
Altria Group, Inc.		66,425		1,303,923
Philip Morris International, Inc.		41,688		2,008,944
				3,312,867
Wireless Telecommunication Services - 0.2%
Rogers Communications, Inc. - Class B(a)		16,900		523,900
Total Common Stocks (Cost $249,184,688)				260,720,096
Short-Term Investments - 7.3%
Mutual Funds - 6.8%
State Street Navigator Securities Lending Prime Portfolio(b)		17,705,902		17,705,902
Repurchase Agreement - 0.5%
Fixed Income Clearing Corp., Repurchase Agreement, dated 12/31/2009 at 0.005% to be repurchased at $1,462,001 on 01/04/10 collateralized by $1,485,000 Federal National Mortgage Association at 3.000% due 05/12/14 with a value of $1,494,281.	$	1,462,000		1,462,000
Total Short-Term Investments (Cost $19,167,902)				19,167,902
Total Investments - 106.9% (Cost $268,352,590)				279,887,998
Other Assets and Liabilities (net) - (6.9)%				(18,168,328	)
Net Assets - 100.0%			$	261,719,670

* Non-income producing security.

(a) All or a portion of security is on loan.

(b) Represents investment of collateral received from securities lending transactions.

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

8

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Batterymarch Growth and Income Portfolio

Various inputs are used in determining the value of the Portfolio’s investments, which are as follows:

Level 1—unadjusted quoted prices in active markets for identical investments

Level 2—other significant observable inputs (including, but not limited to: quoted prices for similar investments in markets that are both active or inactive; inputs other than quoted prices that are observable such as interest rates, yield curves, credit risks, default rates, etc.)

Level 3—significant unobservable inputs based on the best information available in the circumstances, to the extent observable inputs are unavailable (including the Portfolio’s own assumptions in determining the fair value of investments)

The inputs or methodology used for valuing investments are not necessarily an indication of the risk associated with investing in them. For information about the Portfolio’s policy regarding valuation of investments and other significant accounting policies, please refer to Note 2 of the Notes to Financial Statements.

The following table summarizes the inputs used in determining the value the Portfolio’s investments as of December 31, 2009:

ASSETS VALUATION INPUTS

Description	Level 1		Level 2		Level 3		Total
Total Common Stocks*	$	260,720,096	$	—	$	—	$	260,720,096
Short-Term Investments
Mutual Funds		17,705,902		—		—		17,705,902
Repurchase Agreement		—		1,462,000		—		1,462,000
Total Short-Term Investments		17,705,902		1,462,000		—		19,167,902
TOTAL INVESTMENTS	$	278,425,998	$	1,462,000	$	—	$	279,887,998

* See Portfolio of Investments for additional detailed categorizations.

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

9

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Batterymarch Growth and Income Portfolio

Statement of Assets and Liabilities

December 31, 2009

Assets
Investments at value (a)(b)	$	278,425,998
Repurchase Agreement		1,462,000
Cash		12,131
Receivable for investments sold		3,640,249
Receivable for shares sold		72
Dividends receivable		332,607
Receivable from Manager		38,135
Total assets		283,911,192
Liabilities
Payables for:
Investments purchased		4,192,705
Shares redeemed		120,460
Collateral for securities loaned		17,705,902
Accrued Expenses:
Management fees		144,440
Administration fees		1,843
Custodian and accounting fees		1,429
Deferred trustees’ fees		7,518
Other expenses		17,225
Total liabilities		22,191,522
Net Assets	$	261,719,670
Net Assets Represented by
Paid in surplus	$	316,228,628
Accumulated net realized loss		(69,716,485	)
Unrealized appreciation on investments and foreign currency transactions		11,535,421
Undistributed net investment income		3,672,106
Net Assets	$	261,719,670
Net Assets
Class A	$	261,719,670
Capital Shares Outstanding
Class A		17,941,464
Net Asset Value, Offering Price and Redemption Price Per Share
Class A	$	14.59

(a) Identified cost of investments, excluding repurchase agreement, was $266,890,590.

(b) Includes securities loaned at value of $17,276,691.

Statement of Operations

For the Year Ended December 31, 2009

Investment Income
Dividends (a)	$	5,131,543
Interest (b)		99,716
Total investment income		5,231,259
Expenses
Management fees		1,520,493
Administration fees		20,697
Custodian and accounting fees		31,634
Audit and tax services		32,502
Legal		36,351
Trustees’ fees and expenses		22,763
Shareholder reporting		36,025
Insurance		138
Miscellaneous		10,009
Total expenses		1,710,612
Less expenses reimbursed by the Manager		(172,848	)
Less broker commission recapture		(17,271	)
Net expenses		1,520,493
Net investment income		3,710,766
Net Realized and Unrealized Gain (Loss) on Investments and Foreign Currency Transactions
Net realized gain (loss) on:
Investments		(13,610,303	)
Foreign currency transactions		111
Net realized loss on investments and foreign currency transactions		(13,610,192	)
Net change in unrealized appreciation on investments		57,097,033
Net realized and unrealized gain on investments and foreign currency transactions		43,486,841
Net Increase in Net Assets from Operations	$	47,197,607

(a) Net of foreign withholding taxes of $16,803.

(b) Includes net income on securities loaned of $99,559.

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

10

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Batterymarch Growth and Income Portfolio

Statements of Changes in Net Assets

	Year Ended December 31, 2009			Year Ended December 31, 2008
Increase (Decrease) in Net Assets:
Operations
Net investment income	$	3,710,766		$	5,264,864
Net realized loss on investments and foreign currency transactions		(13,610,192	)		(53,165,613	)
Net change in unrealized appreciation (depreciation) on investments and foreign currency transactions		57,097,033			(102,980,469	)
Net increase (decrease) in net assets resulting from operations		47,197,607			(150,881,218	)
Distributions to Shareholders
From net investment income
Class A		(5,218,829	)		(4,974,136	)
From net realized gains
Class A		—			(49,532,248	)
Net decrease in net assets resulting from distributions		(5,218,829	)		(54,506,384	)
Capital Share Transactions
Proceeds from shares sold
Class A		1,434,440			1,473,554
Net asset value of shares issued through dividend reinvestment
Class A		5,218,829			54,506,384
Cost of shares repurchased
Class A		(26,001,578	)		(51,777,739	)
Net increase (decrease) in net assets from capital share transactions		(19,348,309	)		4,202,199
Net Increase (Decrease) in Net Assets		22,630,469			(201,185,403	)
Net assets at beginning of period		239,089,201			440,274,604
Net assets at end of period	$	261,719,670		$	239,089,201
Undistributed net investment income at end of period	$	3,672,106		$	5,204,969

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

11

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Batterymarch Growth and Income Portfolio

Financial Highlights

Selected Per Share Data for the Years or Period Ended:
	Class A
	For the Years Ended December 31,
	2009			2008			2007			2006(b)
Net Asset Value, Beginning of Period	$	12.27		$	22.52		$	22.56		$	20.73
Income (Loss) from Investment Operations
Net investment income(a)		0.20			0.26			0.24			0.19
Net realized/unrealized gain (loss) on investment activity		2.40			(7.61	)		1.50			1.64
Total from investment operations		2.60			(7.35	)		1.74			1.83
Less Distributions
Dividends from net investment income		(0.28	)		(0.26	)		(0.20	)		—
Distributions from net realized capital gains		—			(2.64	)		(1.58	)		—
Total distributions		(0.28	)		(2.90	)		(1.78	)		—
Net Asset Value, End of Period	$	14.59		$	12.27		$	22.52		$	22.56
Total Return		21.90	%		(36.87	)%		7.85	%		8.83	%
Ratio of expenses to average net assets after reimbursement		0.65	%		0.65	%		0.65	%		0.65	%*
Ratio of expenses to average net assets before reimbursement and rebates		0.73	%		0.69	%		0.71	%		0.72	%*
Ratio of net investment income to average net assets		1.59	%		1.52	%		1.06	%		1.32	%*
Portfolio turnover rate		73.7	%		69.2	%		81.4	%		63.6	%
Net assets, end of period (in millions)	$	261.7		$	239.1		$	440.3		$	483.0

* Annualized

(a) Per share amounts based on average shares outstanding during the period.

(b) Commencement of operations—05/01/2006.

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

12

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Batterymarch Growth and Income Portfolio

Notes to Financial Statements—December 31, 2009

1. Organization

Met Investors Series Trust (the “Trust”) is registered as an open-end management investment company under the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended (the “1940 Act”). The Trust currently offers forty-eight Portfolios (the “Portfolios”), each of which operates as a distinct investment vehicle of the Trust. The portfolio included in this report is Batterymarch Growth and Income Portfolio (the “Portfolio”), which is diversified. Shares in the Trust are not offered directly to the general public and are currently available only to separate accounts established by certain affiliated life insurance companies.

The Trust is managed by MetLife Advisers, LLC (the “Manager”), an affiliate of MetLife, Inc.

The Trust has registered four classes of shares: Class A, B, C and E Shares. Class A Shares are currently offered by the Portfolio. Shares of each Class of the Portfolio represent an equal pro rata interest in the Portfolio and generally give the shareholder the same voting, dividend, liquidation, and other rights. Investment income, realized and unrealized capital gains and losses, the common expenses of the Portfolio and certain Portfolio-level expense reductions, if any, are allocated on a pro rata basis to each Class based on the relative net assets of each Class to the net assets of the Portfolio. Each Class of shares differs in its respective distribution expenses.

2. Significant Accounting Policies

The financial statements have been prepared in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (“GAAP”) which require management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of income and expenses during the reporting period. Actual results could differ from these estimates.

The following is a summary of significant accounting policies consistently followed by the Trust in the preparation of its financial statements.

Valuation - Equity securities for which the primary market is on a domestic exchange (except the NASDAQ) will be valued at the last sale price on the day of valuation or, if there was no sale that day, at the last reported bid price, using prices as of the close of trading. Equity securities traded over-the-counter and quoted on NASDAQ are valued at the NASDAQ Official Closing Price. Equity securities not quoted on NASDAQ that are actively traded in the over-the-counter market, including listed securities for which the primary market is believed to be over-the-counter, will be valued at the most recently quoted bid price provided by the principal market makers. Short positions traded in the OTC market are valued at the last available ask price.

Debt securities (other than short term obligations with a remaining maturity of sixty days or less) are generally valued on the basis of evaluated or composite bid quotations obtained by independent pricing services and/or brokers and dealers selected by the relevant adviser pursuant to authorization of the Board of Trustees (the “Board”). Such quotations take into account appropriate factors such as trading in similar groups of securities, yield, quality, coupon rate, maturity, type of issue, trading characteristics and other data. Short term obligations with a remaining maturity of sixty days or less are valued at amortized cost which approximates fair market value.

Financial futures contracts and options thereon, which are traded on exchanges, are valued at their closing prices as of the close of such exchanges. Exchange traded options are valued at the mean price. Swap agreements and options traded in the over the counter (“OTC”) market are valued based upon quoted fair valuations received daily by the Portfolio from a pricing service or counterparty. Forward currency exchange contracts are valued daily at forward foreign currency exchange rates. Investments in mutual funds are valued at the daily net asset value (“NAV”) of the mutual fund.

The Portfolio has retained a third party pricing service to fair value its equity investments that are traded principally on a foreign exchange or market which closes prior to the Portfolio’s time of valuation. The fair value of each security that is traded principally on an exchange or market outside of the United States generally is calculated by applying a valuation factor provided by the third party pricing service to the last sales price for that security, or, if there is no reported sale during the day, the last reported bid price for that security.

If market values are not readily available, or if available market quotations are not reliable, securities are priced at their fair value as determined by the Manager using procedures approved by the Board. The Portfolio may use fair value pricing if the value of a security has been materially affected by events occurring before the Portfolio’s calculation of NAV but after the close of the primary markets on which the security is traded. The Portfolio may also use fair value pricing if reliable market quotations are unavailable due to infrequent trading or if trading in a particular security was halted during the day and did not resume prior to the Portfolio’s calculation of NAV.

Security Transactions - Security transactions are recorded on a trade date basis. Realized gains and losses on investments and unrealized appreciation and depreciation are determined on the identified cost basis, which is the same basis used for federal income tax purposes. The Portfolio may purchase and sell securities on a “when-issued” or “delayed delivery” basis, with settlement to occur at a later date. The value of the security so purchased is subject to market fluctuations during this period. The Portfolio segregates assets having an aggregate value at least equal to the amount of the when-issued or delayed delivery purchase commitments until payment is made.

13

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Batterymarch Growth and Income Portfolio

Notes to Financial Statements—December 31, 2009—(Continued)

2. Significant Accounting Policies - continued

Investment Income and Expenses - Interest income is recorded on an accrual basis. Discounts and premiums on securities purchased are amortized over the lives of the respective securities. Dividend income is recorded on the ex-dividend date. Foreign dividend income is recorded on the ex-dividend date or as soon as practicable after the Portfolio has determined the existence of a dividend declaration after exercising reasonable due diligence. Foreign income and foreign capital gains on some foreign securities may be subject to foreign withholding taxes, which are accrued as applicable.

Income Taxes - It is the Portfolio’s policy to comply with the requirements of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”), and regulations thereunder, applicable to regulated investment companies and to distribute, with respect to each taxable year, all of its taxable income to shareholders. Therefore, no federal income tax provision is required. The Portfolio files U.S. Federal and various state tax returns. No income tax returns are currently under examination. The Portfolio’s federal tax returns for the prior three fiscal years remain subject to examination by the Internal Revenue Service.

Dividends and Distributions to Shareholders - The Portfolio records dividends and distributions on the ex-dividend date. Net realized gains from security transactions (if any) are generally distributed annually to shareholders. The timing and characterization of certain income and capital gains distributions are determined in accordance with federal tax regulations that may differ from GAAP. Permanent book and tax basis differences relating to shareholder distributions will result in reclassification between under/over distributed net investment income, accumulated net realized gains/losses and paid in surplus. Book-tax differences are primarily due to futures transactions, foreign currency transactions, certain foreign withholding taxes, passive foreign investment companies (PFIC), partnerships, deferred trustees compensation, capital loss carryforwards and losses deferred due to wash sales, as applicable. These adjustments have no impact on net assets or the results of operations.

Securities Lending - The Portfolio may lend its securities to certain qualified brokers who borrow securities in order to complete certain transactions. By lending its investment securities, the Portfolio attempts to increase its net investment income through the receipt of income on the loan. Any gain or loss in the market price of the securities loaned that might occur and any interest earned or dividends declared during the term of the loan would accrue to the account of the Portfolio.

Upon entering into a securities lending transaction, the Portfolio receives cash or other securities as collateral in an amount equal to or exceeding 102% of the current market value of the loaned securities (105% for foreign equity securities). Any cash received as collateral is generally invested by State Street Bank and Trust Company, acting in its capacity as securities lending agent (the “Agent”), in the State Street Navigator Securities Lending Prime Portfolio, which is a money market fund registered under the 1940 Act. A portion of net income (income after the deduction of expenses and fees of the Navigator Securities Lending Prime Portfolio) on the collateral is rebated to the borrower of the securities and the remainder is split between the Agent and the Portfolio. On loans collateralized by U.S. Treasuries, a fee is received from the borrower and is allocated between the Portfolio and the Agent. Risks of delay in recovery of the securities or even loss of rights in the collateral may occur should the borrower of the securities fail financially. Risks may also arise to the extent that the value of the collateral decreases below the value of the securities loaned.

Repurchase Agreements - The Portfolio may enter into repurchase agreements with selected commercial banks and broker-dealers, under which the Portfolio acquires securities as collateral and agrees to resell the securities at an agreed upon time and at an agreed upon price. The Portfolio accrues interest for the difference between the amount it pays for the securities and the amount it receives upon resale. At the time the Portfolio enters into a repurchase agreement, the value of the collateral securities, including accrued interest, will be equal to or exceed the value of the repurchase agreement and, for repurchase agreements that mature in more than one day, the seller will agree that the value of the collateral securities, including accrued interest, will continue to be at least equal to the value of the repurchase agreement.

Foreign Currency Translation - The books and records of the Portfolio are maintained in U.S. dollars. Foreign currencies, investments and other assets and liabilities are translated into U.S. dollars on a daily basis using prevailing exchange rates. Purchases and sales of securities are translated at the rates of exchange prevailing when such securities were acquired or sold. Income is translated at rates of exchange prevailing when interest is accrued or dividends are recorded.

The Portfolio does not isolate that portion of operations resulting from changes in foreign exchange rates on investments from the fluctuations arising from changes in market prices of securities held. Such fluctuations are included with the net realized and unrealized gain or loss from investments.

Reported net realized foreign exchange gains or losses arise from activity in forward foreign currency exchange contracts; sales of foreign currencies; currency gains or losses realized between the trade and settlement dates on securities transactions; and the difference between the amounts of dividends, interest, and foreign withholding taxes recorded on the Portfolio’s books and the U.S. dollar equivalent of the amounts actually received or paid. Net unrealized foreign exchange gains or losses arise from changes in the value of assets and liabilities other than investments in securities at fiscal year end; from changes in the exchange rates of foreign currency held; and from changes in the contract value of forward foreign currency exchange contracts.

Directed Brokerage Agreement - The Trust has entered into a directed brokerage arrangement with State Street Global Markets (“SSGM”). Under the arrangement, the Portfolio directs certain trades to SSGM in return for a recapture credit. SSGM issues a cash rebate to the Portfolio. Amounts paid to the Portfolio are shown separately as an expense reduction on the Statement of Operations of the Portfolio.

14

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Batterymarch Growth and Income Portfolio

Notes to Financial Statements—December 31, 2009—(Continued)

3. Investment Management Agreement and Other Transactions with Affiliates

Investment Management Agreement - The Trust has entered into a management agreement with the Manager (the “Management Agreement”) for investment management services in connection with the investment management of the Portfolio. The Manager is subject to the supervision and direction of the Board and has overall responsibility for the general management and administration of the Trust. The Manager has entered into an advisory agreement with Batterymarch Financial Management, Inc. (the “Adviser”) for investment advisory services in connection with the investment management of the Portfolio.

Subject to the supervision and direction of the Board, the Manager supervises the Adviser and has full discretion with respect to the retention or renewal of the advisory agreement. The Manager pays the Adviser a fee based on the Portfolio’s average daily net assets.

Under the terms of the Portfolio’s Management Agreement, the Portfolio pays the Manager a monthly fee based upon annual rates applied to the Portfolio’s average daily net assets as follows:

Management Fees earned by the Manager for the period ended December 31, 2009	% per annum		Average Daily Net Assets
$1,520,493	0.65	%	First $500 Million
	0.55	%	$500 Million to $1 Billion
	0.50	%	$1 Billion to $1.5 Billion
	0.45	%	$1.5 Billion to $2 Billion
	0.40	%	Over $2 Billion

Transfer Agency Agreement - Metropolitan Life Insurance Company (“MLIC”) serves as the transfer agent for the Trust. MLIC is an affiliate of the Manager. MLIC receives no fees for its services to the Trust under the transfer agency agreement.

Expense Limitation Agreement - The Manager has entered into an expense limitation agreement with the Trust (“Expense Limitation Agreement”) in the interest of limiting expenses of the Portfolio. The Expense Limitation Agreement for the Portfolio is permanent. Pursuant to that Expense Limitation Agreement, the Manager has agreed to waive or limit its fees and to assume other expenses so that the total annual operating expenses of the Portfolio other than interest, taxes, brokerage commissions, other expenditures which are capitalized in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America, and other extraordinary expenses not incurred in the ordinary course of the Portfolio’s business, but including amounts payable pursuant to a plan adopted in accordance with Rule 12b-1 under the 1940 Act, are limited to the following expense ratio as a percentage of the Portfolio’s average daily net assets:

Maximum Expense Ratio under current Expense Limitation Agreement			Expenses Reimbursed in
Class A Expense Ratio		Average Daily Net Assets	2006		2007		2008		2009
0.65	%	First $500 Million	$	226,089	$	223,355	$	139,303	$	172,848
0.55	%	$500 Million to $1 Billion
0.50	%	$1 Billion to $1.5 Billion
0.45	%	$1.5 Billion to $2 Billion
0.40	%	Over $2 Billion

The expenses reimbursed for the year ended December 31, 2009 are shown as expenses reimbursed in the Statement of Operations of the Portfolio.

If in any year in which the Management Agreement is still in effect, the estimated aggregate portfolio operating expenses of the Portfolio for the fiscal year are less than the Maximum Expense Ratio for that year, subject to approval by the Trust’s Board, the Manager shall be entitled to reimbursement by the Portfolio to the extent that the charge does not cause the expenses in such subsequent year to exceed the Maximum Expense Ratio as stated above. The Portfolio is not obligated to repay any expense paid by the Manager more than five years after the end of the fiscal year in which such expense was incurred.

15

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Batterymarch Growth and Income Portfolio

Notes to Financial Statements—December 31, 2009—(Continued)

3. Investment Management Agreement and Other Transactions with Affiliates - continued

Distribution Agreements and Plans - The Trust has distribution agreements with MetLife Investors Distribution Company (“MIDC” or the “Distributor”) in which MIDC serves as the Distributor for the Trust’s Class A Shares. MIDC is a wholly-owned subsidiary of MetLife Investors Group, Inc., an affiliate of the Manager.

Deferred Trustee Compensation - Each Trustee of the Trust who is not currently an employee of the Manager or any of its affiliates receives compensation from the Trust for his or her service to the Portfolio. A deferred compensation plan (the “Plan”) is available to the Trustees on a voluntary basis. Deferred amounts remain in the Trust until distributed in accordance with the provisions of the Plan. The value of a participating Trustee’s deferral account is based on theoretical investments of deferred amounts, on the normal payment dates, in certain portfolios of the Trust or Metropolitan Series Fund, Inc. as designated by the participating Trustee. Changes in the value of participants’ deferral accounts are reflected as Trustees’ fees and expenses in the Statement of Operations. The portion of the accrued obligations allocated to the Portfolio, if any, under the Plan are reflected as Deferred Trustees’ fees in the Statement of Assets and Liabilities.

4. Shares of Beneficial Interest

Transactions in shares of beneficial interest for the periods ended noted below were as follows:

	Beginning Shares	Sales	Reinvestments	Redemptions		Net Decrease in Shares Outstanding		Ending Shares
Class A
12/31/2009	19,490,238	106,398	468,476	(2,123,648	)	(1,548,774	)	17,941,464
12/31/2008	19,554,703	80,917	2,980,119	(3,125,501	)	(64,465	)	19,490,238

The Portfolio is authorized to issue an unlimited number of shares.

5. Investment Transactions

Aggregate cost of purchases and proceeds of sales of investment securities, excluding short-term securities, for the period ended December 31, 2009 were as follows:

Purchases			Sales
U.S. Government	Non-Government		U.S. Government	Non-Government
$—	$	171,146,428	$—	$	190,460,365

At December 31, 2009, the cost of securities for federal income tax purposes and the unrealized appreciation (depreciation) of investments for federal income tax purposes for the Portfolio were as follows:

Federal Income Tax Cost	Gross Unrealized Appreciation		Gross Unrealized Depreciation			Net Unrealized Appreciation
$270,754,553	$	262,191,216	$	(253,057,771	)	$	9,133,445

6. Securities Lending

As of December 31, 2009, the Portfolio had loaned securities which were collateralized by short-term investments. The value of securities loaned and the value of the related collateral were as follows:

Value of Securities	Value of Cash Collateral		Value of Non-Cash Collateral*		Total Collateral
$17,276,691	$	17,705,902	$	—	$	17,705,902

* The Portfolio cannot repledge or resell this collateral. The non-cash collateral is typically comprised of government securities and/or bank letters of credit.

16

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Batterymarch Growth and Income Portfolio

Notes to Financial Statements—December 31, 2009—(Continued)

7. Contractual Obligations

The Trust has a variety of indemnification obligations under contracts with its service providers. The Trust’s maximum exposure under these arrangements is unknown. However, the Trust has not had prior claims or losses pursuant to these contracts and expects the risk of loss to be remote.

8. Market, Credit and Counterparty Risk

In the normal course of business, the Portfolio invests in securities and enters into transactions where risks exist due to fluctuations in the market (market risk) or failure of the other party to a transaction to perform (credit risk). The value of securities held by the Portfolio may decline in response to certain events, including those directly involving the companies whose securities are owned by the Portfolio; conditions affecting the general economy; overall market changes; local, regional or global political, social or economic instability; and currency and interest rate and price fluctuations. The Portfolio may be exposed to counterparty risk, or the risk that an entity with which the Portfolio has unsettled or open transactions may default. The potential loss could exceed the value of the financial assets recorded in the financial statements. Financial assets, which potentially expose the Portfolio to credit risk, consist principally of cash due from counterparties and investments. The Portfolio restricts its exposure to credit losses by entering into master agreements with counterparties (approved brokers) with whom it undertakes a significant volume of transactions to include certain safeguards for derivatives and non-standard settlement trades. The credit risk associated with favorable contracts is reduced by a master netting arrangement to the extent that if an event of default occurs, all amounts with the counterparty are terminated and settled on a net basis. The Portfolio’s overall exposure to credit risk on derivative instruments subject to master netting arrangements can change substantially within a short period, as it is affected by each transaction subject to the arrangement.

9. Income Tax Information

The tax character of distributions paid for the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2008 were as follows:

Ordinary Income				Long-Term Capital Gains				Total
2009		2008		2009		2008		2009		2008
$	5,218,829	$	14,582,981	$	—	$	39,923,403	$	5,218,829	$	54,506,384

As of December 31, 2009, the components of distributable earnings (accumulated losses) on a federal income tax basis were as follows:

Undistributed Ordinary Income	Undistributed Long-Term Gain		Net Unrealized Appreciation		Loss Carryforwards			Total
$3,679,624	$	—	$	9,133,458	$	(67,314,522	)	$	(54,501,440	)

The Portfolio utilizes the provisions of the federal income tax laws that provide for the carryforward of capital losses for eight years, offsetting such losses against any future net realized capital gains. At December 31, 2009, the accumulated capital loss carryforwards and expiration dates by the Portfolio were as follows:

Expiring 12/31/2016		Expiring 12/31/2017		Total
$	53,126,534	$	14,187,988	$	67,314,522

10. Recent Accounting Pronouncement

On January 21, 2010, the Financial Accounting Standards Board issued Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) 2010-06, “Improving Disclosures About Fair Value Measurements.” The ASU amends Accounting Standards Codification 820 to add new requirements for disclosures about transfers into and out of Levels 1 and 2. It also clarifies existing fair value disclosures about the level of disaggregation and about inputs and valuation techniques used to measure fair value. Additionally, the ASU amends disclosures about providing purchases, sales, issuances, and settlements on a gross basis relating to Level 3 measurements. The ASU guidance is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2009, and for interim periods within those fiscal years, except for the requirement to provide the Level 3 activity of purchases, sales, issuances, and settlements on a gross basis, which will be effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2010, and for interim periods within those fiscal years. Management is currently evaluating the impact the adoption of ASU 2010-06 will have on the Portfolio’s financial statements.

17

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Batterymarch Growth and Income Portfolio

Notes to Financial Statements—December 31, 2009—(Continued)

11. Subsequent Events

Management’s evaluation of the impact of all subsequent events on the Portfolio’s financial statements was completed through February 26, 2010, the date the financial statements were issued, and management has determined that as of that date there were no subsequent events requiring adjustments or disclosure in the Portfolio’s financial statements.

18

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Batterymarch Growth and Income Portfolio

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

To the Shareholders and Board of Trustees of Met Investors Series Trust:

We have audited the accompanying statement of assets and liabilities, including the portfolio of investments, of Batterymarch Growth and Income Portfolio, one of the portfolios constituting Met Investors Series Trust (the “Trust”), as of December 31, 2009, and the related statement of operations for the year then ended, the statements of changes in net assets each of the two years in the period then ended, and the financial highlights for each of the periods presented. These financial statements and financial highlights are the responsibility of the Trust’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements and financial highlights based on our audits.

We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements and financial highlights are free of material misstatement. The Trust is not required to have, nor were we engaged to perform, an audit of its internal control over financial reporting. Our audits included consideration of internal control over financial reporting as a basis for designing audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the Trust’s internal control over financial reporting. Accordingly, we express no such opinion. An audit also includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements, assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. Our procedures included confirmation of securities owned as of December 31, 2009, by correspondence with the custodian and brokers; where replies were not received from brokers, we performed other auditing procedures. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.

In our opinion, the financial statements and financial highlights referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of Batterymarch Growth and Income Portfolio of Met Investors Series Trust as of December 31, 2009, the results of its operations for the year then ended, the changes in its net assets for each of the two years in the period then ended, and the financial highlights for each of the periods presented, in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.

Deloitte & Touche LLP

Boston, Massachusetts

February 26, 2010

19

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Trustees and Officers (Unaudited) December 31, 2009

The Trustees and executive officers of the Trust, their ages and their principal occupations during the past five years are set forth below. Unless otherwise indicated, the business address of each is 5 Park Plaza, Suite 1900 Irvine, California 92614. Each Trustee who is deemed an “interested person,” as such term is defined in the 1940 Act, is indicated by an asterisk. Those Trustees who are not “interested persons” as defined in the 1940 Act are referred to as “Independent Trustees.” Additional information about the Trustees is available in the Statement of Additional Information which is available without charge, upon request, by calling (800) 848-3854.

The Trustees
Name and Age	Position(s) Held with Registrant	Term of Office and Length of Time Served	Principal Occupation(s) During Past 5 Years	Number of Portfolios in Fund Complex+ overseen by Trustee	Other Directorships Held by Trustee
Interested Trustees
Elizabeth M. Forget* (43)	President and Trustee	Indefinite; From December 2000 to present	Since May 2007, Senior Vice President, MetLife, Inc.; since December 2000, President of MetLife Advisers, LLC and its predecessor; December 2003 to April 2007, Vice President, MetLife, Inc.	84	Director, Metropolitan Series Fund, Inc. since August 2006.
Independent Trustees
Stephen M. Alderman (50)	Trustee	Indefinite; From December 2000 to present	Since November 1991, Shareholder in the law firm of Garfield and Merel, Ltd.	48	None
Jack R. Borsting (80)	Trustee	Indefinite; From December 2000 to present	Since 2006, Professor and Dean Emeritus, Marshall School of Business, University of Southern California (USC); from 2001 to 2005, Professor of Business Administration and Dean Emeritus.	48	Director, Los Angeles Orthopedic Hospital, Trustee, The Rose Hills Foundation. Member, Army Science Board.
Robert Boulware (53)	Trustee	Indefinite; From March 2008 to present	From 2004 to 2009, Director of Norwood Promotional Products, Inc.; from 2007 to 2008, Director of Wealthpoint Advisors (a business development company); from 2007 to 2009, Director of Holladay Bank; from 1992-2006, President and Chief Executive Officer of ING Fund Distributor, LLC.	48	Since 2005, Director of Gainsco, Inc. (auto insurance).
Daniel A. Doyle (51)	Trustee	Indefinite; From February 2007 to present	From October 2000 to June 2009, Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of ATC Management, Inc. (public utility); since June 2009, independent business consultant.	48	Director, Wisconsin Sports Development Corporation
Susan C. Gause (57)	Trustee	Indefinite; From March 2008 to present	From 2000 to December 2002, Chief Executive Officer of Allianz Dresdner Asset Management; since 2003, private investor.	48	None

20

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Trustees and Officers (Unaudited)—(Continued) December 31, 2009

Name and Age	Position(s) Held with Registrant	Term of Office and Length of Time Served	Principal Occupation(s) During Past 5 Years	Number of Portfolios in Fund Complex+ overseen by Trustee	Other Directorships Held by Trustee
Independent Trustees - continued
Dawn M. Vroegop (43)	Trustee	Indefinite; From December 2000 to present	From September 1999 to September 2003, Managing Director, Dresdner RCM Global Investors.	84	Director, Metropolitan Series Fund, Inc. since May 2009; from 2003 to present, Director and Finance Committee Chair, City College of San Francisco Foundation

The Executive Officers
Name and Age	Position(s) Held with Registrant	Term of Office and Length of Time Served	Principal Occupation(s) During Past 5 Years
Jeffrey L. Bernier (38)	Vice President	From February 2009 to present	Since December 2007, Vice President, Metropolitan Life Insurance Company; since 2008 Senior Vice President of MetLife Advisers, LLC and its predecessor; from July 2004 to December 2007, Director and Senior Investment Analyst of Investment Management Services for John Hancock Financial Services.
Jeffrey A. Tupper (39)	Chief Financial Officer, Treasurer	From August 2002 to present	Since February 2009, Vice President, MetLife Advisers, LLC. Since October 2006, Assistant Vice President, MetLife Group, Inc. Since February 2001, Assistant Vice President of MetLife Investors Insurance Company.
Richard C. Pearson (66)	Vice President and Secretary	From December 2000 to present	Since June 2001, President or Executive Vice President of MetLife Investors Distribution Company; since January 2001, Executive Vice President, General Counsel and Secretary of MetLife Investors Group, Inc. and Vice President, Secretary and Associate General Counsel of its affiliated life insurance companies; since November 2000, Senior Vice President and General Counsel of MetLife Advisers, LLC and its predecessor.
Jeffrey P. Halperin (42)	Chief Compliance Officer	From November 2006 to present	Since March 2006, Vice President, Corporate Ethics and Compliance Department, MetLife, Inc.; from October 2002 to March 2006, Assistant Vice President; from November 2005 to August 2006, Interim Chief Compliance Officer, Met Investors Series Trust; since April 2007, Chief Compliance Officer, Metropolitan Series Funds; from August 2006 to April 2007, Interim Chief Compliance Officer, Metropolitan Series Funds; since August 2006, Chief Compliance Officer, MetLife Advisers, LLC and its predecessor; since November 2006, Chief Compliance Officer, MetLife Investment Advisors Company, LLC.

+ The Fund Complex includes the Trust (48 portfolios) and Metropolitan Series Fund, Inc. (36 portfolios).

* Ms. Forget is an “interested person” of the Trust as a result of her affiliation with the Manager and the Distributor.

Quarterly Portfolio Schedule

The Trust files Form N-Q for the first and third quarters of each fiscal year. The Trust’s Forms N-Q will be available on the Securities and Exchange Commission’s website at http://www.sec.gov. The Trust’s Forms N-Q may be reviewed and copied at the Securities and Exchange Commission’s

21

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Trustees and Officers (Unaudited)—(Continued) December 31, 2009

Public Reference Room in Washington, D.C. and information on the operation of the Public Reference Room may be obtained by calling 1-800-SEC-0330. Once filed, the most recent Form N-Q will be available without charge, upon request, by calling (800) 848-3854.

Proxy Voting Policies and Procedures

A description of the policies and procedures that the Trust uses to determine how to vote proxies relating to portfolio securities is available without charge, upon request, by calling (800) 848-3854 and on the Securities and Exchange Commission’s website at http://www.sec.gov.

Proxy Voting Record

The Trust, on behalf of each of its Portfolios, has filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission its proxy voting record for the 12-month period ending June 30 on Form N-PX. Form N-PX must be filed by the Trust each year by August 31. Once filed, the most recent Form N-PX will be available without charge, upon request, by calling (800) 848-3854 or on the Securities and Exchange Commission’s website at http://www.sec.gov.

22

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Batterymarch Growth and Income Portfolio

Board of Trustees’ Consideration of Advisory and Sub-Advisory Agreements

At an in-person meeting of the Board of Trustees (the “Board”) of the Met Investors Series Trust (the “Trust”) held on November 10-11, 2009, the Board, including a majority of the Trustees who are not considered to be “interested persons” of the Trust (the “Independent Trustees”) under the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended (the “1940 Act”), approved for an annual period the continuation of the Trust’s advisory agreement (the “Advisory Agreement”) with MetLife Advisers, LLC (the “Adviser”) and the applicable sub-advisory agreements (each a “Sub-Advisory Agreement”, and collectively with the Advisory Agreement, the “Agreements”) between the Adviser and the investment sub-advisers (each a “Sub-Adviser”, and collectively, the “Sub-Advisers”) for each of the series of the Trust, including the Batterymarch Growth and Income Portfolio (each a “Portfolio,” and collectively, the “Portfolios”).¹

In considering the Agreements, the Board reviewed a variety of materials provided by the Adviser and the Sub-Advisers relating to each Portfolio, the Adviser and each Sub-Adviser, including comparative performance, fee and expense information for an appropriate peer group of similar mutual funds, performance information for relevant benchmark indices and other information regarding the nature, extent and quality of services provided by the Adviser and the Sub-Advisers under their respective Agreements. The Board also took into account information provided to the Board in its meetings throughout the year with respect to the services provided by the Adviser and the Sub-Advisers, including quarterly performance reports prepared by management containing reviews of investment results, and periodic presentations from the Sub-Advisers with respect to the Portfolios they manage. The Independent Trustees also assessed reports provided by independent consultants, who reviewed and provided analyses regarding investment performance, fees and expenses, profitability and other information provided by, or at the direction of, the Adviser and the Sub-Advisers, as more fully discussed below.

The Independent Trustees were separately advised by independent legal counsel throughout the process. Prior to voting, the Independent Trustees also received a memorandum from their independent counsel discussing the legal standards for their consideration of the proposed continuation of the Agreements. The Board met in person with personnel of the Adviser prior to the November meeting for the specific purpose of considering the proposed continuation of the Agreements. The Independent Trustees also discussed the proposed continuation of the Agreements in private sessions with their independent legal counsel at which no representatives of management were present.

In considering whether to approve the renewal of the Advisory Agreement with the Adviser and any applicable Sub-Advisory Agreements with respect to each Portfolio, the Board reviewed and analyzed the factors it deemed relevant, including: (1) the nature, extent and quality of the services to be provided to the Portfolios by the Adviser and the Sub-Advisers; (2) the performance of the Portfolios as compared to a peer group and an appropriate index; (3) the Adviser’s and each of the Sub-Adviser’s personnel and operations; (4) the financial condition of the Adviser and of the Sub-Advisers; (5) the level and method of computing each Portfolio’s advisory and sub-advisory fees; (6) the profitability of the Adviser under the Advisory Agreement and of the Sub-Advisers under the Sub-Advisory Agreements; (7) any “fall-out” benefits to the Adviser, the Sub-Advisers and their affiliates (i.e., ancillary benefits realized by the Adviser, the Sub-Advisers or their affiliates from the Adviser’s or Sub-Advisers’ relationship with the Trust); (8) the anticipated effect of growth in size on each Portfolio’s performance and expenses; (9) fees paid to the Sub-Advisers by comparable institutional and retail accounts; and (10) possible conflicts of interest. The Board also considered the nature, quality, and extent of the services to be provided to the Portfolios by the Adviser’s affiliates, including distribution services.

Nature, extent and quality of services. In considering the nature, extent and quality of the services to be provided by the Adviser to the Portfolios, the Board took into account the extensive responsibilities that the Adviser has as investment manager to the Portfolios, including the provision of investment advice to: (i) MetLife Aggressive Strategy Portfolio, MetLife Balanced Strategy Portfolio, MetLife Defensive Strategy Portfolio, MetLife Growth Strategy Portfolio, and MetLife Moderate Strategy Portfolio (together, the “Asset Allocation Portfolios”), (ii) American Funds Balanced Allocation Portfolio, American Funds Growth Allocation Portfolio, and American Funds Moderate Allocation Portfolio (together, the “American Funds of Funds”), and (iii) the Met/Franklin Templeton Founding Strategy Portfolio, the selection of the Sub-Advisers for the other Portfolios and oversight of the Sub-Advisers’ compliance with fund policies and objectives, review of brokerage matters including with respect to trade allocation and best execution, oversight of general fund compliance with federal and state laws, and the implementation of Board directives as they relate to the Portfolios. The Adviser’s role in coordinating the activities of the Portfolios’ other service providers was also considered. The Board also evaluated the expertise and performance of the investment personnel with respect to the Asset Allocation Portfolios, the American Funds of Funds and the Met/Franklin Templeton Founding Strategy Portfolio and of the personnel overseeing the Sub-Advisers of the other Portfolios, and compliance with each Portfolio’s investment restrictions, tax and other requirements. The Board considered information received from the Trust’s Chief Compliance Officer (“CCO”) regarding the Portfolios’ compliance policies and procedures established pursuant to Rule 38a-1 under the 1940 Act, including the policies and procedures in place relating to proxy voting. The Board also took into account its familiarity with management through Board meetings, discussions and reports during the preceding year.

The Board also recognized the Adviser^’s reputation and long-standing experience in serving as an investment adviser to the Trust, and considered the benefit to shareholders of investing in funds that are part of a family of variable annuity portfolios offering a variety of investments. In addition, the Board reviewed the financial condition of the Adviser and whether it had the financial wherewithal to provide a high level and quality of services to the Portfolios. In its review, the Board also received and took into account information regarding any services and/or payments provided to the Adviser by the Sub-Advisers in connection with marketing activities.

¹ The Met/Templeton International Bond Portfolio recently commenced operations and, therefore, the Agreements with respect to this Portfolio were not up for renewal.

23

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Batterymarch Growth and Income Portfolio

Board of Trustees’ Consideration of Advisory and Sub-Advisory Agreements—(Continued)

With respect to the services provided by each of the Sub-Advisers, the Board considered information provided to the Board by each Sub-Adviser, including each Sub-Adviser’s Form ADV, as well as information presented throughout the past year. The Board considered the Sub-Adviser’s current level of staffing and its overall resources, as well as its compensation program. The Board reviewed each Sub-Adviser’s history and investment experience, as well as information regarding the qualifications, background and responsibilities of the Sub-Adviser’s investment and compliance personnel who provide services to the Portfolios. The Board also considered, among other things, the Sub-Adviser’s compliance program and any disciplinary history. The Board noted each Sub-Adviser’s regulatory history, including whether it was currently involved in any regulatory actions or investigations as well as material litigation, and any settlements and ameliatory actions undertaken, as appropriate. The Board also noted that the CCO and his staff conduct regular, periodic compliance reviews with each of the Sub-Advisers and present reports to the Independent Trustees regarding the same, which includes evaluating the regulatory compliance systems of the Sub-Advisers and procedures reasonably designed by them to assure compliance with the federal securities laws, including issues related to late trading and market timing, best execution, fair value pricing, and proxy voting procedures, among others. The Board also took into account the financial condition of each Sub-Adviser.

The Board considered each Sub-Adviser’s investment process and philosophy. The Board took into account that each Sub-Adviser’s responsibilities include the development and maintenance of an investment program for the applicable Portfolio which is consistent with the Portfolio’s investment objectives, the selection of investment securities and the placement of orders for the purchase and sale of such securities, as well as the implementation of compliance controls related to performance of these services. The Board also reviewed each Sub-Adviser’s brokerage policies and practices, including with respect to best execution and soft dollars.

Based on its consideration and review of the foregoing information, the Board concluded that the nature, extent and quality of services provided by the Adviser and by each Sub-Adviser were satisfactory and that there was a reasonable basis on which to conclude that each would provide a high quality of investment services to the Portfolios.

Performance. The Board considered the performance of the Portfolios as described in the quarterly reports prepared by management, and as also analyzed in reports prepared by the Independent Trustees’ independent consultant. The Board noted that the Adviser reviews with the Board on a quarterly basis detailed information about the Portfolios’ performance results, portfolio composition and investment strategies. The Board also reviewed and considered a separate report prepared by Lipper Inc. (“Lipper”), an independent third party, which provided a statistical analysis comparing the Portfolios’ investment performance, expenses, and fees to comparable funds underlying variable insurance products (the “Performance Universe”). In addition, the Independent Trustees met separately with a representative of Bobroff Consulting, Inc., an independent consultant (“Bobroff”), at a special board meeting in September 2009, to review the separate reports prepared by such consultant (“Bobroff Report”), which analyzed the report prepared by Lipper, as well as certain of the other factors to be considered by the Board including supplemental alpha and information coefficient analysis. The Board also considered each Portfolio’s more recent performance subsequent to the performance period covered by the Lipper reports, and management’s discussion of the same, including the effect of current market conditions on each Portfolio’s more recent performance.

The Board closely reviewed the Portfolios’ performance records and the Adviser’s and Sub-Advisers’ management styles and long-term performance records with the Portfolios and comparable funds. The Board focused particular attention on Portfolios with less favorable performance records. The Board was mindful of the Adviser’s focus on each Sub-Adviser’s performance and noted that the Adviser has been active in monitoring and responding to any performance issues with respect to the Portfolios. The Board also took into account its discussions with management regarding factors that contributed to the performance of each Portfolio.

Among other data relating specifically to the Batterymarch Growth and Income Portfolio’s performance, the Board considered that the Portfolio underperformed the median of its Performance Universe for the one-year period, was at the median of its Performance Universe for the three-year period, and outperformed the median of its Performance Universe for the since inception period each ended July 31, 2009. The Board also considered that the Portfolio underperformed its Lipper Index for the one-, three- and since inception periods ended July 31, 2009. The Board further considered that the Portfolio underperformed its benchmark, the S&P 500 Index, for the one- and three- year periods ended August 31, 2009. The Board took into account management’s discussion of the actions taken to address the Portfolio’s performance and noted the Fund’s more recent improved performance. Based on its review, the Board concluded that the Portfolio’s overall performance was satisfactory.

Fees and Expenses. The Board gave substantial consideration to the advisory fees payable under the Advisory Agreement and the sub-advisory fees payable under each of the Sub-Advisory Agreements. In this regard, the Board reviewed the advisory fees payable in the aggregate as well as on a Portfolio-by-Portfolio basis based on information provided by the Adviser. The Independent Trustees, with the assistance of Bobroff, also examined the fees paid by each Portfolio in light of fees paid to other investment managers by comparable funds and the method of computing each Portfolio’s fee, as well as considered the fees charged by the Adviser to manage other comparable funds. The Lipper report included comparisons of the Adviser’s fee schedule with that of its peers based on an asset-based analysis of relative fee structures according to the size of each Portfolio. In addition, the Board considered the Portfolios’ advisory and sub-advisory fees and total expenses as compared to similarly situated investment companies underlying variable insurance products deemed to be comparable to the Portfolios as determined by Lipper. The Board considered each Portfolio’s ranking within a smaller group of peer funds chosen by Lipper (the “Expense Group”), as well as the Portfolio’s ranking within broader groups of funds (the “Expense Universe” and the “Sub-advised Expense Universe”). The Board also considered

24

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Batterymarch Growth and Income Portfolio

Board of Trustees’ Consideration of Advisory and Sub-Advisory Agreements—(Continued)

each Portfolio’s contractual sub-advisory fees, as applicable, as compared to the Sub-advised Expense Universe as well as a smaller group of funds (the “Sub-advised Expense Group”). In comparing each Portfolio’s actual and contractual management fee to that of comparable funds, the Board noted that such fee includes both advisory and administrative fees.

The Board noted that the sub-advisory fees for the Portfolios are paid by the Adviser, not the Portfolios, out of the advisory fee. It was further noted that the Adviser negotiates such fees at arm’s length. The Board also considered that the Adviser had entered into expense limitation agreements with certain of the Portfolios as noted below, pursuant to which the Adviser has agreed to waive a portion of its advisory fee and/or reimburse certain expenses as a means of limiting a Portfolio’s total annual operating expenses. In addition, the Board noted that the Adviser effected fee reductions in 2009 with respect to several Portfolios. The Board also noted that the Adviser had re-negotiated the securities lending arrangement with State Street Corporation to further maximize the income to the Portfolios from such program.

With respect to each sub-advised Portfolio, the Board also compared the sub-advisory fees paid by the Adviser to fees charged by the Portfolio’s Sub-Adviser to manage other sub-advised portfolios and portfolios not subject to regulation under the 1940 Act, such as separate accounts, as applicable. The Board considered the fee comparisons in light of the differences required to manage different types of accounts.

With respect to the Batterymarch Growth and Income Portfolio, the Board noted that the Portfolio’s actual management fees and total expenses (exclusive of 12b-1 fees) were below the median of the Expense Group, the Expense Universe median and the Sub-advised Expense Universe median. The Board further noted that the Portfolio’s contractual management fees were below the normalized median of the Expense Group at the Portfolio’s current size. The Board also noted that the Portfolio’s contractual sub-advisory fees were below the average of the Sub-advised Expense Group at the Portfolio’s current size. The Board noted that the Adviser is waiving fees and/or reimbursing expenses so that the Portfolio’s total annual operating expenses are capped. After consideration of all relevant factors, the Board concluded that the advisory and sub-advisory fees are consistent with industry norms and are fair and reasonable in light of the services to be provided.

Profitability. The Board examined the profitability of the Adviser on an aggregate basis with respect to all Portfolios, as well as on a Portfolio-by-Portfolio basis. With respect to the Asset Allocation Portfolios and Met/Franklin Templeton Founding Strategy Portfolio, the Board noted that the advisory fee is in addition to the fees received by the Adviser and its affiliates with regard to the other Portfolios of the Trust or of Metropolitan Series Fund, Inc., in which the Asset Allocation Portfolios and Met/Franklin Templeton Founding Strategy Portfolio may invest. With respect to the other Portfolios, the Board noted that a major component of profitability of the Adviser was the margin between the sub-advisory fees that the Adviser receives from the Trust and the portion of those fees paid to the Sub-Advisers. In this regard, the Board took into account certain comparative information in the Lipper report. The Board also reviewed the Adviser’s unaudited income statements and balance sheet information supplied by the Adviser regarding costs borne by the Adviser’s affiliates which support the operations of the Adviser but are not reflected on the unaudited income statements of the Adviser, as well as considered the profitability of the insurance products, the function of which is supported in part by the Adviser’s revenues under the Advisory Agreement, and other information and analysis prepared by the Adviser. With respect to the American Funds Bond Portfolio, American Funds Growth Portfolio, American Funds Growth-Income Portfolio, American Funds Global Small Capitalization Portfolio and American Funds International Portfolio, the Board noted that the Adviser currently does not receive an advisory fee. The Board also considered that the Distributor, MetLife Investors Distribution Company, receives 12b-1 payments to support the distribution of the products. The Board concluded after extensive discussions with management that the profitability of the Adviser and its affiliates from their relationship with each Portfolio was reasonable in light of all relevant factors.

In considering the profitability to the Sub-Advisers and their affiliates of their relationships with the Portfolios, the Board noted that the fees under the Sub-Advisory Agreements were paid by the Adviser out of the advisory fees that it receives under the Advisory Agreement. The Board also relied on the ability of the Adviser to negotiate the Sub-Advisory Agreements and the fees thereunder at arm’s length. The Board reviewed portfolio specific data with regard to the profitability of the Portfolios to each Sub-Adviser, as available, and analyzed the reasonableness of such profitability finding no indication of excessive profitability. However, the Board placed more reliance on the fact that the Sub-Advisory Agreement was negotiated at arm’s length and that the advisory fee was paid by the Adviser than on Sub-Adviser profitability.

Economies of scale. The Board also considered the effect of the Portfolios’ growth in size on their performances and fees. The Board noted that the fee schedules for all but eleven of the Portfolios contain breakpoints that reduce the fee rate above specified asset levels. The Board noted those Portfolios that did not contain breakpoints in the advisory fee and took into account management’s discussion of the same. The Board noted that those Portfolios with advisory fee schedules containing breakpoints generally reflect the inclusion of breakpoints in the sub-advisory fee schedule for such Portfolios. The Board considered the effective fees under the Advisory Agreement for each Portfolio as a percentage of assets at different asset levels and possible economies of scale that may be realized if the assets of the Portfolio grow. Among other data, the Board examined the effect of each Portfolio’s growth in size on various fee schedules and reviewed the Lipper and Bobroff Reports, which compared fee schedules among peers. The Board also took into account that the Sub-Adviser fees are paid by the Adviser out of the advisory fee. The Board also noted that if the Portfolios’ assets increase over time, the Portfolios may realize other economies of scale if assets increase proportionally more than certain other fixed expenses.

With respect to the Batterymarch Growth and Income Portfolio, the Board noted that the Portfolio’s advisory fee and sub-advisory fee each contains breakpoints that reduce the advisory fee rate on assets above certain specified asset levels. The Board considered the fact that the Portfolio’s fee levels decline as portfolio assets increase. The Board noted that the Portfolio had not yet reached the specified asset level at which a

25

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Batterymarch Growth and Income Portfolio

Board of Trustees’ Consideration of Advisory and Sub-Advisory Agreements—(Continued)

breakpoint to its contractual advisory fee would be triggered. The Board noted that the Portfolio’s management fees are above the asset-weighted average of comparable funds at lower asset levels but decreased below the asset-weighted average at higher asset levels. The Board concluded that the advisory fee structure for the Portfolio, including breakpoints, was reasonable and appropriately reflects potential economies of scale.

Other factors. As part of its evaluation of the Adviser’s compensation, the Board considered other benefits that may be realized by the Adviser and its affiliates from their relationship with the Trust. Among them, the Board recognized that an affiliate of the Adviser, MetLife Investors Distribution Company, serves as the Distributor for the Trust, and, as such, receives payments pursuant to Rule 12b-1 from the Portfolios to compensate it for providing shareholder services and selling activities, which could lead to growth in the Trust’s assets and corresponding benefits from such growth, including economies of scale. The Board also considered that affiliates of the Adviser may benefit from certain indirect tax benefits relating to dividend received deductions and foreign tax credits. The Board concluded that ancillary benefits accruing to the Adviser and its affiliates by virtue of the Adviser’s relationship with the Portfolios are fair and reasonable in light of the costs of providing investment management and other services to the Portfolios and the ongoing commitment of the Adviser to the Portfolios.

The Board considered other benefits that may be realized by each Subadviser and its affiliates from their relationship with the Trust, including the opportunity to provide advisory services to additional portfolios of the Trust and reputational benefits. The Board concluded that the benefits accruing to the Subadvisers and their affiliates by virtue of the Subadvisers’ relationships to the Portfolios are fair and reasonable in light of the costs of providing investment advisory services to the Portfolios and the ongoing commitment of the Subadvisers to the Portfolios.

The Board considered any possible conflicts of interest in the form of material benefits or detriments to the Trust resulting from the nature of the Trust’s and the Adviser’s or the Subadvisers’ affiliations. Here, the Board considered possible conflicts of interest that may arise between the Trust and the Adviser or a Subadviser in connection with the services provided to the Trust and the various relationships that they and their affiliates may have with the Trust. The Board considered the procedures for monitoring and managing such potential conflicts.

Conclusion. In considering the renewal of each of the Agreements, the Board, including the Independent Trustees, did not identify any single factor as controlling, and each Trustee may have attributed different weights to various factors. The Board evaluated all information available to them on a Portfolio-by-Portfolio basis, and their determinations were made separately with respect to each Portfolio. Based on all of the above-mentioned considerations, and the recommendations of management, the Board, including a majority of the Independent Trustees, determined that approval of the Advisory Agreement and the Sub-Advisory Agreements was in the best interests of each Portfolio. After full consideration of these and other factors, the Board, including a majority of the Independent Trustees, with the assistance of independent counsel, approved the Advisory Agreement and the Sub-Advisory Agreement with respect to each Portfolio.

26

Simplify your life…

with MetLife eDelivery^® while helping MetLife preserve the planet’s natural resources.

(see details on inside cover)

Met Investors Series Trust BlackRock High Yield Portfolio Annual Report December 31, 2009

• get rid of all that paper?

• access important documents whenever you want?

• conveniently receive valuable information online?

Get it all with MetLife eDelivery!

MetLife’s eDelivery service is your resource for electronic delivery of your variable annuity or variable life prospectuses, semiannual and annual reports, and other information. Available to variable product clients of Metropolitan Life Insurance Company, First MetLife Investors Insurance Company, General American Life Insurance Company, MetLife Investors Insurance Company, MetLife Investors USA Insurance Company, MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut and New England Life Insurance Company.*

Why sign up for MetLife eDelivery?

It’s Free** – No cost to enroll or use the service.

It’s Paperless – We’ll email you when your documents are available.

It’s Easy – Enrollment takes just a few minutes.

How do you sign up?

Just type in www.metlife.esourcelink.net to get to MetLife’s online registration form. You will need your policy/account numbers, which can be found on your statements. The form takes only a few minutes to complete. Please note, for jointly owned contracts, both owners will need to register in order to eliminate paper delivery.

  * Not all MetLife products offer eDelivery at this time. ** Your internet provider may impose fees for this service. L0210086208[0911]

Letter from the President

Letter to Policy Holders

February 1, 2010

2009 can best be described as a year of recovery. The year began with the stock market in a broad decline and the economy mired in a deep recession. However, investors’ sentiment improved dramatically during the year as fiscal and monetary authorities took measures to jump start the economy which helped spark a strong market rally in equities and corporate bonds.

The Barclays Capital U.S. Aggregate Bond Index returned 5.9% during 2009. While this was similar to the 5.2% return experienced in 2008, the two years could not have been more different. In 2008, fear drove investors toward the safety of U.S. Treasury securities and away from the risk of corporate bonds, especially those rated below investment grade. In contrast, investors were more willing to embrace risk in 2009. This produced an enormous recovery in below investment grade bonds; the Barclays Capital U.S. Corporate High Yield Index returned over 58% in 2009 after falling 26% in 2008. The Barclays Capital U.S. Treasury Index returned 13.7% in 2008, but declined 3.6% in 2009.

Stock investors also became less pessimistic in 2009. While the stock market indices are still far from the record levels reached in 2007, investors were rewarded in 2009 as stocks returned 26.5% as measured by the Standard & Poor’s 500 Index, its best return since 2003. Foreign stocks, as measured by the MSCI EAFE Index, returned 31.8% during 2009.

On the following pages, you will find a complete review of your Portfolio and its investment performance.

MetLife is committed to building your financial freedom. We appreciate your trust and will continue to focus our efforts on meeting your investment needs.

Sincerely,

Elizabeth M. Forget

President

Met Investors Series Trust

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

BlackRock High Yield Portfolio

Managed by BlackRock Financial Management, Inc.

Portfolio Manager Commentary*

Performance

During the 12-month period ended December 31, 2009, the Portfolio had a return of 47.20% and 46.65% for Class A and B Shares, respectively, versus 58.76% for its benchmark, the Barclays Capital U.S. Corporate High Yield 2% Issuer Capped Index¹.

Market Environment / Conditions

In 2009, the high yield market shattered records, posting its best calendar year return of all time and outperforming every other asset class, including the leveraged loan market, which also smashed its own historical record for the year. Despite a positive return in January 2009, the speculative-grade bond market struggled in the early parts of the year as a number of weak economic indicators and accelerating corporate default activity prompted fears of a deep and prolonged recession. After falling in February with other risky assets, high yield began its steep ascent in March, paving the way for 10 consecutive months of positive returns.

Evidence that negative economic trends were abating, and a multitude of lucrative actions by the US government to bolster the financial system, encouraged a significant shift in investor sentiment from one of risk-aversion to risk-seeking. Large flows began to pour into the leveraged credit space, as investors reached for yield. As a consequence, the high yield primary market opened up substantially, allowing various lower-grade companies to access capital and financing. Though the total volume of defaults rose sharply throughout the year to reach record levels ($94.6 billion in aggregate), the actual pace of defaults began to reverse and decelerate.

Robust new issuance, improving economic conditions (i.e., housing, manufacturing activity, consumer confidence), and declining defaults also spurred a tremendous beta rally in the non-investment-grade universe. Cyclical and consumer-driven sectors outperformed their more defensive peers, while bonds at the bottom end of the below-investment-grade credit quality spectrum ferociously outperformed their higher-rated counterparts. Additionally, the entrance of previously downgraded nontraditional financial services securities into the high yield index also contributed to the fervent rally. Upon entering the high yield index at historical lows earlier in the year, these financial company bonds subsequently saw their prices pop, as the economic environment stabilized. At year-end, the spread over US Treasuries for the average high yield bond had compressed by more than 1,000 basis points to finish at 671 basis points (reflecting a yield of 9.2%), signifying diminished high yield market volatility and benign conditions. Nevertheless, this valuation is still above the historical average, indicating that spreads may have more room to consolidate, while bond prices may have further room to appreciate. At year-end, the average HY bond traded at a dollar price of 95, with an average credit rating of B2/B+.

Portfolio Review / Current Positioning

For the 12-month period ended December 31, 2009, the Portfolio underperformed its benchmark, the Barclays Capital U.S. Corporate High Yield 2% Issuer Capped Index. A large portion of this underperformance can be attributed to “fallen angel” financial bonds that entered the index earlier in the year. A fallen angel security is a bond that was once rated investment grade but has since been downgraded to high yield status. A meaningful number of financial issues, primarily hybrid or trust preferreds, were downgraded to below-investment-grade status in the first quarter of the year. These securities were very under-owned by many high yield fund managers, as the financial sector historically had never been a major component of the high yield benchmark. Many of these issues thus recovered sharply in the following few months, providing potent returns that helped to further fuel the performance of the benchmark. The lack of exposure to these well-performing bonds therefore caused considerable dispersion in our Portfolio versus the benchmark.

An underweight in bonds rated CCC and below was a large detractor for the period, as bottom-tier credits bested higher-quality high yield bonds. In addition to the negative effects of our underweight in financials, an overweight in wireless and negative security selection within independent energy and media non-cable depressed returns as well. Small holdings of cash were also negative, as exposure to cash in any up market is typically a drag on performance. Regarding leveraged loans, the effects were mixed. While loans posted outstanding returns for the year, the asset class was not quite able to keep pace with conventional high yield bonds. Nevertheless, our security selection within bank loans added to performance, as we held loans that traded up on positive event risk (covenant amendments and paydowns).

In terms of contributors, a Portfolio underweight in healthcare and good security selection within the aerospace/defense, media-cable, and electric sectors lifted returns. The purchase of strong-performing new-issue bonds in the paper and home construction sectors also bolstered Portfolio performance during the period. Furthermore, Portfolio allocations to equity securities acquired through company bankruptcy and debt restructurings jolted returns, as these new securities performed strongly in the latter portion of the year. Additionally, exposure to new-issue investment-grade bonds in the early-to-mid portion of the year boosted Portfolio results as the prices of these securities soared.

At period-end, the Portfolio held a large underweight in BB-rated issues, a moderate overweight in B-rated issues, and an underweight in issues rated CCC and below. In addition, we maintained equity positions that were allocated to the Portfolio as a result of successful debt restructurings. As of December 31, 2009, the Portfolio held overweights in sectors such as automobiles, wireless, and metals, with underweights in information technology, gaming, and healthcare. We also maintained a 9% allocation to bank loans and a 4% allocation to convertible bonds.

During the year, the Portfolio participated in both the secondary high yield market and the robust new-issue calendar, purchasing attractive credits illustrating sound fundamentals, as well as solid cash flows and earnings. Over the year, the Portfolio also noticeably increased its exposure to new senior-secured bond deals coming via the primary market. Additionally, we bought a number of investment-grade new

1

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

BlackRock High Yield Portfolio

Managed by BlackRock Financial Management, Inc.

Portfolio Manager Commentary* (continued)

issues. These bonds were purchased earlier in the year, when many investment-grade firms were issuing debt at rates mimicking those of high yield bonds. As the majority of this paper appreciated nicely, the Portfolio sold down most of its exposure to take profits as the relative value of these bonds diminished.

James Keenan

Mitchell Garfin

Derek Schoenhofen

Portfolio Managers

BlackRock Financial Management, Inc.

*This commentary may include statements that constitute “forward-looking statements” under the U.S. securities laws. Forward-looking statements include, among other things, projections, estimates, and information about possible or future results related to the Portfolio, market or regulatory developments. The views expressed above are not guarantees of future performance or economic results and involve certain risks, uncertainties and assumptions that could cause actual outcomes and results to differ materially from the views expressed herein. The views expressed above are subject to change at any time based upon economic, market, or other conditions and the subadvisory firm undertakes no obligation to update the views expressed herein. Any discussions of specific securities should not be considered a recommendation to buy or sell those securities. The views expressed above (including any forward-looking statement) may not be relied upon as investment advice or as an indication of the Portfolio’s trading intent. Information about the Portfolio’s holdings, asset allocation or country diversification is historical and is not an indication of future Portfolio composition, which may vary. Direct investment in any index is not possible. The performance of any index mentioned in this commentary has not been adjusted for ongoing management, distribution and operating expenses, and sales charges applicable to mutual fund investments. In addition, the returns do not reflect additional fees charged by separate accounts or variable insurance contracts that an investor in the Portfolio may pay. If these additional fees were reflected, performance would have been lower.

Portfolio Composition as of December 31, 2009

Top Holdings

	Percent of Net Assets
Delphi - Class B	2.1%
NewPage Corp. 11.375%, due 12/31/14	1.9%
Energy Future Holdings Corp. 11.250%, due 11/01/17	1.5%
Clear Channel Worldwide Holdings, Inc., Series B 9.250%, due 12/15/17	1.4%
Qwest Communications International, Inc. 7.500%, due 02/15/14	1.3%
NRG Energy, Inc. 7.375%, due 02/01/16	1.2%
Nextel Communications, Inc. 6.875%, due 10/31/13	1.0%
TL Acquisitions, Inc. 10.500%, due 01/15/15	1.0%
Wind Acquisition Holdings Finance 6.250%, due 06/17/15	1.0%
Icahn Enterprises LP/Icahn Enterprises Finance Corp. 7.125%, due 02/15/13	0.9%

Top Sectors

	Percent of Portfolio Market Value
Domestic Bonds & Debt Securities	79.4%
Loan Participation	8.7%
Convertible Bonds	3.9%
Short-Term Investments	3.9%
Preferred Stocks	2.1%
Common Stocks	1.7%
Convertible Preferred Stocks	0.2%
Warrants	0.1%

2

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

BlackRock High Yield Portfolio

BlackRock High Yield Portfolio managed by

BlackRock Financial Management, Inc. vs.

Barclays Capital U.S. Corporate High Yield 2% Issuer Capped Index¹

	Average Annual Return2 (for the year ended 12/31/09)
	1 Year	3 Year	5 Year	10 Year	Since Inception3
BlackRock High Yield Portfolio—Class A	47.20%	4.64%	5.23%	5.41%	—
Class B	46.65%	—	—	—	6.43%
Barclays Capital U.S. Corporate High Yield 2% Issuer Capped Index1	58.76%	6.37%	6.49%	6.87%	—

The performance of Class A shares will differ from that of the other class of shares because of the difference in expenses paid by policyholders investing in the different share classes.

¹The Barclays Capital U.S. Corporate High Yield 2% Issuer Capped Index is composed of fixed rate non-investment grade debt with at least one year remaining to maturity that are dollar-denominated, nonconvertible and have an outstanding par value of at least $100 million. There is a 2% limit on issuers held in the Index.

²“Average Annual Return” is calculated including reinvestment of all income dividends and capital gains distributions.

³Inception of Class A shares is 8/30/1996. Inception of Class B shares is 4/28/08.

Past performance does not guarantee future results. The investment return and principal value of an investment in the Portfolio will fluctuate, so that shares, on any given day or when redeemed, may be worth more or less than their original cost. Performance numbers are net of all Portfolio expenses but do not include any insurance, sales, or administration charges of variable annuity or life insurance contracts. If these charges were included, the returns would be lower. The Index does not include fees or expenses and is not available for direct investment.

3

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

BlackRock High Yield Portfolio

Understanding Your Portfolio’s Expenses

Shareholder Expense Example

As a shareholder of the Portfolio, you incur ongoing costs, including management fees; distribution and service (12b-1) fees; and other Portfolio expenses. This example is intended to help you understand your ongoing costs (in dollars) (referred to as “expenses”) of investing in the Portfolio and compare these costs with the ongoing costs of investing in other mutual funds. The example is based on an investment of $1,000 invested at the beginning of the period and held for the entire period, July 1, 2009 through December 31, 2009.

Actual Expenses

The first line for each share class of the Portfolio in the table below provides information about actual account values and actual expenses. You may use the information in this line, together with the amount you invested in the particular share class of the Portfolio, to estimate the expenses that you paid over the period. Simply divide your account value by $1,000 (for example, an $8,600 account value divided by $1,000 = 8.6), then multiply the result by the number in the first line under the heading entitled “Expenses Paid During Period” to estimate the expenses you paid on your account during this period.

Hypothetical Example for Comparison Purposes

The second line for each share class of the Portfolio in the table below provides information about hypothetical account values and hypothetical expenses based on the Portfolio’s actual expense ratio and an assumed rate of return of 5% per year before expenses, which is not the Portfolio’s actual return. The hypothetical account values and expenses may not be used to estimate the actual ending account balance or expenses you paid for the period. You may use this information to compare the ongoing costs of investing in the Portfolio and other funds. To do so, compare this 5% hypothetical example with the 5% hypothetical examples that appear in the shareholder reports of the other funds.

Please note that the expenses shown in the table are meant to highlight your ongoing costs only and do not reflect any fees or charges of your variable insurance product or any additional expenses that participants in certain eligible qualified plans may bear relating to the operations of their plan. Therefore, the second line for each share class in the table is useful in comparing ongoing costs only, and will not help you determine the relative total costs of owning different funds. In addition, if these other costs were included, your costs would have been higher.

	Annualized Expense Ratio	Beginning Account Value 7/1/09		Ending Account Value 12/31/09		Expenses Paid During Period* 7/1/09-12/31/09
Class A
Actual	0.67%	$	1,000.00	$	1,204.20	$	3.67
Hypothetical	0.67%		1,000.00		1,021.88		3.36
Class B*
Actual	0.92%	$	1,000.00	$	1,201.80	$	5.11
Hypothetical	0.92%		1,000.00		1,020.57		4.69

* Expenses paid are equal to the Portfolio’s annualized expense ratio for the most recent six month period, as shown above, multiplied by the average account value over the period, multiplied by the number of days (184 days) in the most recent fiscal half-year, divided by 365 (to reflect the one-half year period).

4

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

BlackRock High Yield Portfolio

PORTFOLIO OF INVESTMENTS

December 31, 2009

(Percentage of Net Assets)

Security Description	Par Amount		Value
Domestic Bonds & Debt Securities - 80.6%
Aerospace & Defense - 1.9%
L-3 Communications Corp. 6.375%, due 10/15/15	$	1,055,000	$	1,064,231
5.875%, due 01/15/15		3,610,000		3,623,538
Sequa Corp. 11.750%, due 12/01/15(144A)(a)		2,710,000		2,533,850
13.500%, due 12/01/15(144A)(a)(b)		6,005,573		5,585,183
				12,806,802
Airlines - 0.8%
American Airlines Pass Through Trust, Series 2001-02 7.858%, due 10/01/11		1,520,000		1,526,080
Continental Airlines, Inc. 7.875%, due 07/02/18		455,721		393,059
Delta Air Lines, Inc. 9.500%, due 09/15/14(144A)(a)		280,000		292,600
Series B 9.750%, due 12/17/16		1,590,000		1,617,825
United Air Lines, Inc. 12.750%, due 07/15/12		1,700,000		1,759,500
				5,589,064
Auto Components - 0.6%
Allison Transmission, Inc. 11.000%, due 11/01/15(144A)(a)		289,000		304,895
Delphi International Holding Corp. 12.000%, due 10/06/14		165,937		165,937
Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. (The) 7.857%, due 08/15/11		915,000		950,456
8.625%, due 12/01/11		2,094,000		2,182,995
Lear Corp. 5.750%, due 08/01/14		1,395,000		36,619
8.750%, due 12/01/16		920,000		24,150
Series B 8.500%, 12/01/13		1,530,000		40,163
Stanadyne Corp., Series 1 10.000%, due 08/15/14		250,000		228,750
Stanadyne Holdings, Inc. 0.000%/12.000%, due 02/15/15(c)		125,000		86,875
				4,020,840
Automobiles - 0.1%
Ford Capital B.V. 9.500%, due 06/01/10		430,000		440,750
Biotechnology - 0.3%
QHP Royalty Sub LLC 10.250%, due 03/15/15(144A)(a)		1,910,000		1,920,071

Security Description	Par Amount		Value
Building Products - 0.6%
Ainsworth Lumber Co., Ltd. 11.000%, due 07/29/15(144A)(a)(b)	$	83,856	$	52,515
Associated Materials LLC/Associated Materials Finance, Inc. 9.875%, due 11/15/16(144A)(a)		1,190,000		1,267,350
Goodman Global Group, Inc. 8.974%, due 12/15/14(144A)(a)(d)		1,225,000		698,250
Nortek, Inc. 11.000%, due 12/01/13		1,677,422		1,761,293
				3,779,408
Chemicals - 2.1%
American Pacific Corp. 9.000%, due 02/01/15		150,000		141,563
CPG International I, Inc. 10.500%, due 07/01/13		755,000		717,250
Huntsman International LLC 6.875%, due 11/15/13(144A)(a)		750,000		1,007,859
5.500%, due 06/30/16(144A)(a)		1,460,000		1,303,050
Innophos, Inc. 8.875%, due 08/15/14		2,060,000		2,101,200
Koppers, Inc. 7.875%, due 12/01/19(144A)(a)		1,115,000		1,131,725
Lyondell Chemical Worldwide, Inc. 10.250%, due 11/01/10(e)		320,000		227,200
9.800%, due 02/01/20(e)		235,000		168,025
MacDermid, Inc. 9.500%, due 04/15/17(144A)(a)		2,010,000		2,020,050
Nalco Co. 8.250%, due 05/15/17(144A)(a)		1,300,000		1,387,750
Nova Chemicals Corp. 8.625%, due 11/01/19(144A)(a)		1,950,000		1,993,875
Terra Capital, Inc. 7.750%, due 11/01/19(144A)(a)		2,015,000		2,171,162
				14,370,709
Commercial & Professional Services - 2.0%
ACCO Brands Corp. 10.625%, due 03/15/15(144A)(a)		645,000		712,725
Aleris International, Inc. 10.000%, due 12/15/16(e)		1,350,000		10,125
9.000%, due 12/15/14(b)(e)		1,665,000		12,854
Altegrity, Inc. 10.500%, due 11/01/15(144A)(a)		900,000		807,750
ARAMARK Corp. 3.781%, due 02/01/15(f)		950,000		874,000
Corrections Corp. of America 7.750%, due 06/01/17		2,300,000		2,380,500
DI Finance/DynCorp International, Series B 9.500%, due 02/15/13		1,110,000		1,129,425

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

5

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

BlackRock High Yield Portfolio

PORTFOLIO OF INVESTMENTS - continued

December 31, 2009

(Percentage of Net Assets)

Security Description	Par Amount		Value
Commercial & Professional Services - continued
iPayment, Inc. 9.750%, due 05/15/14	$	310,000	$	259,238
Iron Mountain, Inc. 8.375%, due 08/15/21		1,515,000		1,571,812
RSC Equipment Rental, Inc. 10.000%, due 07/15/17(144A)(a)		1,945,000		2,110,325
Sunstate Equipment Co. LLC 10.500%, due 04/01/13(144A)(a)		2,670,000		2,162,700
Tropicana Entertainment LLC 9.625%, due 12/15/14(e)		70,000		394
United Rentals North America, Inc. 9.250%, due 12/15/19		1,505,000		1,561,437
				13,593,285
Commercial Banks - 0.7%
ATF Capital B.V. 9.250%, due 02/21/14(144A)(a)		100,000		98,000
Glitnir Banki HF 4.375%, due 02/05/10(e)		135,000		40,637
3.000%, due 06/30/10(e)		1,060,000		319,075
6.375%, due 09/25/12(144A)(a)(e)		1,835,000		394,525
Series 3 4.763%, 04/20/10(144A)(a)(e)		304,000		65,360
Series EMTN 5.071%, 01/27/10(e)		1,000,000		309,973
HBOS Plc, Series EMTN 1.018%, due 09/01/16(f)		430,000		493,109
0.912%, due 03/21/17(f)		410,000		430,505
National Westminster Bank Plc, Series EMTN 2.904%, due 04/05/10(f)		460,000		420,345
Royal Bank of Scotland Group Plc, Series EMTN 6.200%, due 03/22/22(f)		1,123,000		1,163,972
5.625%, due 09/16/26-06/07/32(f)		675,000		689,276
				4,424,777
Communications Equipment - 0.6%
Verso Paper Holdings LLC 11.500%, due 07/01/14(144A)(a)(g)		1,210,000		1,337,050
4.031%, due 08/01/14(f)		950,000		755,250
9.125%, due 08/01/14(g)		960,000		921,600
11.375%, due 08/01/16		930,000		753,300
Viant Holdings, Inc. 10.125%, due 07/15/17(144A)(a)		236,000		236,000
				4,003,200
Construction & Engineering - 0.3%
ESCO Corp. 8.625%, due 12/15/13(144A)(a)		2,180,000		2,180,000
Construction Materials - 0.1%
Texas Industries, Inc. 7.250%, due 07/15/13		450,000		444,375

Security Description	Par Amount		Value
Consumer Finance - 4.4%
FCE Bank Plc 7.875%, due 02/15/11	$	1,400,000	$	2,262,890
7.125%, due 01/16/12-01/15/13		6,650,000		9,356,876
Ford Motor Credit Co. LLC
5.504%, due 06/15/11(f)(g)		676,000		670,085
3.034%, due 01/13/12(f)		1,030,000		959,188
7.800%, due 06/01/12		3,000,000		3,033,897
GMAC LLC 7.250%, due 03/02/11(144A)(a)		281,000		281,000
6.875%, due 08/28/12(144A)(a)(g)		795,000		787,050
2.456%, due 12/01/14(144A)(a)(f)		4,337,000		3,496,706
6.750%, due 12/01/14		3,760,000		3,575,064
6.750%, due 12/01/14(144A)(a)		1,500,000		1,440,000
8.000%, due 11/01/31(144A)(a)		2,910,000		2,648,100
Series EMTN 5.375%, due 06/06/11		822,000		1,134,070
				29,644,926
Containers & Packaging - 3.6%
Ball Corp. 6.625%, due 03/15/18		175,000		173,688
7.125%, due 09/01/16		1,100,000		1,133,000
7.375%, due 09/01/19		1,100,000		1,135,750
Berry Plastics Escrow LLC/Berry Plastics Escrow Corp. 8.875%, due 09/15/14(144A)(a)		1,270,000		1,241,425
8.250%, due 11/15/15(144A)(a)		1,815,000		1,851,300
Cascades, Inc. 7.750%, due 12/15/17(144A)(a)		1,370,000		1,397,400
Crown Americas LLC/Crown Americas Capital Corp. II 7.625%, due 05/15/17(144A)(a)		4,355,000		4,540,087
Crown European Holdings S.A. 6.250%, due 09/01/11		227,000		338,397
Graphic Packaging International, Inc. 9.500%, due 08/15/13-06/15/17		3,795,000		4,012,575
Greif, Inc. 7.750%, due 08/01/19		690,000		707,250
Owens-Brockway Glass Container, Inc. 8.250%, due 05/15/13		400,000		413,000
6.750%, due 12/01/14		395,000		557,700
7.375%, due 05/15/16		2,145,000		2,225,437
Pregis Corp. 12.375%, due 10/15/13		1,020,000		993,225
Rock-Tenn Co. 5.625%, due 03/15/13		770,000		770,963
Sealed Air Corp. 7.875%, due 06/15/17(144A)(a)		1,785,000		1,903,999
Solo Cup Co. 10.500%, due 11/01/13(144A)(a)		1,025,000		1,096,750
				24,491,946

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

6

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

BlackRock High Yield Portfolio

PORTFOLIO OF INVESTMENTS - continued

December 31, 2009

(Percentage of Net Assets)

Security Description	Par Amount		Value
Distributors - 0.3%
NSG Holdings LLC 7.750%, due 12/15/25(144A)(a)	$	2,465,000	$	2,218,500
Diversified Consumer Services - 0.0%
American Achievement Group Holding Corp. 12.750%, due 10/01/12(b)		4,491		3,166
Service Corp. International 7.875%, due 02/01/13		60,000		58,800
7.625%, due 10/01/18		115,000		114,425
				176,391
Diversified Financial Services - 5.3%
CIT Group Funding Co. of Delaware LLC 10.250%, due 05/01/13-05/01/17		7,131,160		7,224,221
CIT Group, Inc. 7.000%, due 05/01/16-05/01/17		8,438,424		7,407,116
Icahn Enterprises LP/Icahn Enterprises Finance Corp. 7.125%, due 02/15/13		6,115,000		6,267,875
International Lease Finance Corp., Series R 5.625%, due 09/20/13		360,000		282,610
5.650%, due 06/01/14		2,050,000		1,550,716
Leucadia National Corp. 8.125%, due 09/15/15		1,800,000		1,845,000
Residential Capital LLC 8.375%, due 06/30/10(g)		2,900,000		2,479,500
Reynolds Group Issuer, Inc./Reynolds Group Issuer LLC 7.750%, due 10/15/16(144A)(a)		3,250,000		3,776,858
8.000%, due 12/15/16		2,464,000		3,346,473
Saturns Investments Europe Plc 6.190%, due 06/09/14		770,000		539,000
Snoqualmie Entertainment Authority 4.680%, due 02/01/14(144A)(a)(f)		165,000		81,675
Vanguard Health Holding Co. I LLC 0.000%/11.250% , due 10/01/15(c)		540,000		571,050
				35,372,094
Diversified Telecommunication Services - 4.3%
Broadview Networks Holdings, Inc. 11.375%, due 09/01/12		1,835,000		1,766,188
Digicel Group, Ltd. 8.875%, due 01/15/15(144A)(a)		1,995,000		1,945,125
9.125%, due 01/15/15(144A)(a)(b)(g)		2,707,665		2,680,588
Nordic Telephone Holdings Co. 8.875%, due 05/01/16(144A)(a)		185,000		196,563
Qwest Communications International, Inc. 7.500%, due 02/15/14		8,430,000		8,503,762
8.000%, due 10/01/15(144A)(a)		1,500,000		1,548,750
Qwest Corp. 7.500%, due 10/01/14-06/15/23		730,000		696,313

Security Description	Par Amount		Value
Diversified Telecommunication Services - continued
8.375%, due 05/01/16	$	1,400,000	$	1,508,500
Sprint Capital Corp. 6.875%, due 11/15/28		3,610,000		3,018,862
West Corp. 9.500%, due 10/15/14		2,870,000		2,927,400
11.000%, due 10/15/16		1,905,000		2,000,250
Wind Acquisition Finance S.A. 10.750%, due 12/01/15(144A)(a)		75,000		80,625
Windstream Corp. 8.625%, due 08/01/16		2,335,000		2,387,537
				29,260,463
Electric Utilities - 2.2%
AES Eastern Energy LP, Series 99-B 9.670%, due 01/02/29		1,660,000		1,747,150
AES Ironwood LLC 8.857%, due 11/30/25		1,221,004		1,214,899
AES Red Oak LLC 8.540%, due 11/30/19		764,339		766,250
Series B 9.200%, due 11/30/29		650,000		612,625
Calpine Construction Finance Co. LP/CCFC Finance Corp. 8.000%, due 06/01/16(144A)(a)		4,285,000		4,434,975
Edison Mission Energy 7.750%, due 06/15/16		1,084,000		926,820
7.200%, due 05/15/19		140,000		106,750
Elwood Energy LLC 8.159%, due 07/05/26		1,275,622		1,179,375
FPL Energy National Wind 6.125%, due 03/25/19(144A)(a)		84,056		79,853
Infinis Plc 9.125%, due 12/15/14(144A)(a)		740,000		1,220,021
Ipalco Enterprises, Inc. 8.625%, due 11/14/11		525,000		551,250
7.250%, due 04/01/16(144A)(a)		545,000		549,087
Tenaska Alabama Partners LP 7.000%, due 06/30/21(144A)(a)		1,262,947		1,169,216
Texas Competitive Electric Holdings Co. LLC 10.500%, due 11/01/16(b)		94		67
				14,558,338
Electrical Equipment - 1.3%
North American Energy Alliance LLC/North American Energy Alliance Finance Corp. 10.875%, due 06/01/16(144A)(a)		1,450,000		1,547,875
Orascom Telecom Finance SCA 7.875%, due 02/08/14(144A)(a)		305,000		277,550
TL Acquisitions, Inc. 10.500%, due 01/15/15(144A)(a)		6,875,000		6,608,594
				8,434,019

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

7

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

BlackRock High Yield Portfolio

PORTFOLIO OF INVESTMENTS - continued

December 31, 2009

(Percentage of Net Assets)

Security Description	Par Amount		Value
Electronic Equipment, Instruments & Components - 0.0%
Mobile Services Group, Inc./Mobile Storage Group, Inc. 9.750%, due 08/01/14	$	75,000	$	78,375
Energy Equipment & Services - 1.5%
Compagnie Generale de Geophysique-Veritas 7.500%, due 05/15/15		130,000		129,675
9.500%, due 05/15/16(144A)(a)		590,000		634,250
7.750%, due 05/15/17		2,615,000		2,608,462
Drummond Co., Inc. 9.000%, due 10/15/14 (144A)(a)(g)		2,100,000		2,212,875
7.375%, due 02/15/16 (144A)(a)		1,900,000		1,866,750
Hornbeck Offshore Services, Inc. 6.125%, due 12/01/14		180,000		168,975
Murray Energy Corp. 10.250%, due 10/15/15(144A)(a)		1,545,000		1,545,000
North American Energy Partners, Inc. 8.750%, due 12/01/11		435,000		437,175
Southern Star Central Corp. 6.750%, due 03/01/16		50,000		48,500
6.750%, due 03/01/16(144A)(a)		690,000		669,300
				10,320,962
Entertainment & Leisure - 0.0%
Shingle Springs Tribal Gaming Authority 9.375%, due 06/15/15(144A)(a)		60,000		45,900
Food & Staples Retailing - 0.4%
Duane Reade, Inc. 11.750%, due 08/01/15		460,000		501,400
Rite Aid Corp. 9.750%, due 06/12/16		1,605,000		1,749,450
10.250%, due 10/15/19(144A)(a)		655,000		684,475
				2,935,325
Food Products - 0.4%
Smithfield Foods, Inc. 10.000%, due 07/15/14(144A)(a)		2,520,000		2,746,800
Gas Utilities - 1.5%
Energy Future Holdings Corp. 11.250%, due 11/01/17(b)		13,863,060		9,877,430
Health Care Equipment & Supplies - 0.8%
DJO Finance LLC/DJO Finance Corp. 10.875%, due 11/15/14		4,625,000		4,902,500
Elan Finance Plc/Elan Finance Corp. 8.875%, due 12/01/13		175,000		175,000
				5,077,500
Health Care Providers & Services - 2.5%
AMR HoldCo, Inc./EmCare HoldCo, Inc. 10.000%, due 02/15/15		1,470,000		1,550,850

Security Description	Par Amount		Value
Health Care Providers & Services - continued
Community Health Systems, Inc. 8.875%, due 07/15/15	$	3,785,000	$	3,926,938
Novasep Holding SAS 9.625%, due 12/15/16(144A)(a)		2,567,000		3,611,098
Tenet Healthcare Corp. 9.000%, due 05/01/15 (144A)(a)		2,818,000		3,057,530
10.000%, due 05/01/18 (144A)(a)		4,398,000		4,947,750
				17,094,166
Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure - 0.4%
Fontainebleau Las Vegas Holdings LLC/Fontainebleau Las Vegas Capital Corp. 10.250%, due 06/15/15(144A)(a)(e)		1,425,000		21,375
Mashantucket Pequot Tribe 8.500%, due 11/15/15(144A)(a)		600,000		150,000
MGM MIRAGE, Inc. 13.000%, due 11/15/13		1,000,000		1,155,000
11.125%, due 11/15/17(144A)(a)		795,000		884,437
River Rock Entertainment Authority 9.750%, due 11/01/11		45,000		42,638
Scientific Games International, Inc. 9.250%, due 06/15/19		55,000		58,025
Virgin River Casino Corp. 9.000%, due 01/15/12(e)		1,800,000		189,000
Waterford Gaming LLC 8.625%, due 09/15/14(144A)(a)		846,000		486,450
				2,986,925
Household Durables - 1.8%
Beazer Homes USA, Inc. 12.000%, due 10/15/17(144A)(a)(g)		3,400,000		3,723,000
Catalina Marketing Corp. 10.500%, due 10/01/15(144A)(a)(b)		1,285,000		1,362,100
Jarden Corp. 8.000%, due 05/01/16		728,000		755,300
7.500%, due 05/01/17		1,265,000		1,268,162
KB Home 6.375%, due 08/15/11		67,000		67,335
9.100%, due 09/15/17		595,000		627,725
Pulte Homes, Inc. 6.375%, due 05/15/33		180,000		146,250
Standard Pacific Corp. 7.000%, due 08/15/15		385,000		336,875
6.250%, due 04/01/14		270,000		236,250
Standard Pacific Escrow LLC 10.750%, due 09/15/16(144A)(a)		3,340,000		3,423,500
				11,946,497

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

8

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

BlackRock High Yield Portfolio

PORTFOLIO OF INVESTMENTS - continued

December 31, 2009

(Percentage of Net Assets)

Security Description	Par Amount		Value
Independent Power Producers & Energy Traders - 2.1%
AES Corp. 8.750%, due 05/15/13(144A)(a)	$	1,870,000	$	1,926,100
NRG Energy, Inc. 7.250%, due 02/01/14		245,000		248,675
7.375%, due 02/01/16-01/15/17		7,965,000		7,995,187
8.500%, due 06/15/19		3,560,000		3,666,800
				13,836,762
Industrial - Diversified - 0.3%
Harland Clarke Holdings Corp. 6.000%, due 05/15/15(f)		50,000		41,125
9.500%, due 05/15/15(g)		60,000		56,025
Ply Gem Industries, Inc. 11.750%, due 06/15/13		1,685,000		1,693,425
				1,790,575
Insurance - 0.0%
USI Holdings Corp. 4.148%, due 11/15/14(144A)(a)(f)		80,000		66,100
Internet Software & Services - 0.3%
Impress Holdings B.V. 3.409%, due 09/15/13(144A)(a)(f)		2,160,000		2,049,300
Leisure Equipment & Products - 0.3%
Brunswick Corp. 11.250%, due 11/01/16(144A)(a)		1,050,000		1,139,250
Easton-Bell Sports, Inc. 9.750%, due 12/01/16(144A)(a)		740,000		762,200
				1,901,450
Life Sciences Tools & Services - 0.1%
Bio-Rad Laboratories, Inc. 6.125%, due 12/15/14		225,000		226,125
8.000%, due 09/15/16(144A)(a)		650,000		687,375
				913,500
Machinery - 0.7%
Navistar International Corp. 8.250%, due 11/01/21		2,500,000		2,575,000
Stanley-Martin Communities LLC 9.750%, due 08/15/15(e)		450,000		136,125
Titan International, Inc. 8.000%, due 01/15/12		1,790,000		1,763,150
				4,474,275
Manufacturing - 0.0%
RBS Global, Inc./Rexnord Corp. 8.875%, due 09/01/16		105,000		91,875
Marine - 0.3%
Navios Maritime Holdings, Inc./Navios Maritime Finance US, Inc. 8.875%, due 11/01/17(144A)(a)		1,350,000		1,397,916

Security Description	Par Amount		Value
Marine - continued
Trico Shipping AS 11.875%, due 11/01/14(144A)(a)	$	895,000	$	936,394
				2,334,310
Media - 9.2%
Affinion Group, Inc. 10.125%, due 10/15/13		4,662,000		4,813,515
Cablevision Systems Corp., Series B 8.000%, due 04/15/12		5,710,000		6,066,875
CCH II LLC/CCH II Capital Corp. 13.500%, due 11/30/16		2,229,537		2,636,427
CCH LLC/CCH Capital Corp. 10.375%, due 04/30/14(144A)(a)		1,410,000		1,455,825
CCO Holdings LLC/CCO Holdings Capital Corp. 8.750%, due 11/15/13		1,990,000		2,052,187
CCO Operating LLC/CCO Operating Capital Corp. 8.000%, due 04/30/12(144A)(a)		1,220,000		1,259,650
Clear Channel Communications, Inc. 11.000%, due 08/01/16(b)(g)		205,331		153,228
Clear Channel Worldwide Holdings, Inc. Series A 9.250%, due 12/15/17(144A)(a)		2,224,000		2,279,600
Series B 9.250%, due 12/15/17(144A)(a)		8,898,000		9,209,430
CMP Susquehanna Corp. 9.875%, due 05/15/14		122,000		2,440
CSC Holdings, Inc., Series B 7.625%, due 04/01/11		1,450,000		1,504,375
EchoStar DBS Corp. 6.625%, due 10/01/14		1,175,000		1,188,219
7.000%, due 10/01/13		3,585,000		3,705,994
Lighthouse International Co. S.A. 8.000%, due 04/30/14		1,048,000		1,006,476
8.000%, due 04/30/14(144A)(a)		470,000		451,378
Local Insight Regatta Holdings, Inc. 11.000%, due 12/01/17		524,000		340,600
Newsday, Inc. 9.750%, due 08/01/13		1,965,000		2,101,322
Nielsen Finance LLC/Nielsen Finance Co. 11.625%, due 02/01/14(g)		2,200,000		2,483,250
10.000%, due 08/01/14		870,000		911,325
0.000%/12.500%, due 08/01/16(c)		150,000		137,625
Rainbow National Services LLC 10.375%, due 09/01/14(144A)(a)		1,978,000		2,096,680
8.750%, due 09/01/12(144A)(a)		1,610,000		1,648,238
Spansion, Inc. 3.473%, due 06/01/13(144A)(a)(e)(f)		2,790,000		2,831,850
UnityMedia Hessen GmbH & Co. KG 3.597%, due 04/15/13(f)		720,000		1,026,888

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

9

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

BlackRock High Yield Portfolio

PORTFOLIO OF INVESTMENTS - continued

December 31, 2009

(Percentage of Net Assets)

Security Description	Par Amount		Value
Media - continued
UPC Germany GmbH 8.125%, due 12/01/17(144A)(a)	$	1,845,000	$	2,710,738
8.125%, due 12/01/17(144A)(a)		2,000,000		2,014,591
9.625%, due 12/01/19(144A)(a)		2,650,000		3,854,956
UPC Holding B.V. 9.875%, due 04/15/18(144A)(a)		1,900,000		1,945,166
Virgin Media Finance Plc 8.750%, due 04/15/14		33,000		34,238
				61,923,086
Metals & Mining - 4.1%
Arch Coal, Inc. 8.750%, due 08/01/16(144A)(a)		1,235,000		1,312,188
Atlas Energy Operating Co. LLC/Atlas Energy Finance Corp. 12.125%, due 08/01/17		1,245,000		1,419,300
10.750%, due 02/01/18		410,000		455,100
Evraz Group S.A. 8.875%, due 04/24/13(144A)(a)		1,030,000		1,035,150
9.500%, due 04/24/18(144A)(a)		690,000		690,000
FMG Finance Property, Ltd. 4.256%, due 09/01/11(144A)(a)(f)		700,000		682,500
10.000%, due 09/01/13(144A)(a)		270,000		282,150
10.625%, due 09/01/16(144A)(a)		3,430,000		3,811,587
Foundation Pennsylvania Coal Co. 7.250%, due 08/01/14		950,000		966,625
New World Resources NV 7.375%, due 05/15/15		1,071,000		1,416,196
Novelis, Inc. 7.250%, due 02/15/15		355,000		339,913
11.500%, due 02/15/15(144A)(a)		1,850,000		1,991,062
Ryerson, Inc. 7.656%, due 11/01/14(f)		660,000		611,325
12.000%, due 11/01/15		670,000		703,500
Steel Dynamics, Inc. 7.375%, due 11/01/12		4,680,000		4,843,800
Teck Resources, Ltd. 10.250%, due 05/15/16		785,000		918,450
10.750%, due 05/15/19		3,820,000		4,584,000
Vedanta Resources Plc 9.500%, due 07/18/18(144A)(a)		1,210,000		1,234,200
				27,297,046
Multiline Retail - 0.3%
Dollar General Corp. 10.625%, due 07/15/15		230,000		255,875
11.875%, due 07/15/17(b)		828,000		960,480
Saks, Inc. 9.875%, due 10/01/11		785,000		825,231
				2,041,586

Security Description	Par Amount		Value
Oil, Gas & Consumable Fuels - 8.6%
Aquilex Holdings LLC/Aquilex Finance Corp. 11.125%, due 12/15/16(144A)(a)	$	435,000	$	436,088
Arch Western Financial LLC 6.750%, due 07/01/13		4,520,000		4,508,700
Berry Petroleum Co. 8.250%, due 11/01/16		205,000		202,950
Bill Barrett Corp. 9.875%, due 07/15/16		1,245,000		1,332,150
Chesapeake Energy Corp. 6.250%, due 01/15/18		655,000		632,075
6.375%, due 06/15/15		1,000,000		985,000
6.875%, due 11/15/20		400,000		388,000
Cimarex Energy Co. 7.125%, due 05/01/17		1,610,000		1,634,150
Concho Resources, Inc. 8.625%, due 10/01/17		820,000		865,100
Connacher Oil and Gas, Ltd. 11.750%, due 07/15/14(144A)(a)		465,000		514,988
10.250%, due 12/15/15(144A)(a)		1,965,000		1,807,800
Denbury Resources, Inc. 7.500%, due 04/01/13-12/15/15		745,000		748,363
9.750%, due 03/01/16		3,550,000		3,807,375
Dynegy Holdings, Inc. 6.875%, due 04/01/11		4,227		4,417
8.375%, due 05/01/16		645,000		615,975
Dynegy Roseton/Danskammer Pass Through Trust, Series B 7.670%, due 11/08/16		2,075,000		2,002,375
El Paso Corp. 7.000%, due 06/15/17		3,100,000		3,090,055
8.250%, due 02/15/16		2,460,000		2,638,350
6.700%, due 02/15/27		62,930		50,374
Encore Acquisition Co. 6.000%, due 07/15/15		1,125,000		1,130,625
Expro Finance Luxembourg SCA 8.500%, due 12/15/16(144A)(a)		4,590,000		4,578,525
Forest Oil Corp. 8.500%, due 02/15/14(144A)(a)		1,780,000		1,869,000
7.250%, due 06/15/19		1,025,000		1,017,312
Massey Energy Co. 6.875%, due 12/15/13		535,000		537,006
Newfield Exploration Co. 6.625%, due 09/01/14-04/15/16		680,000		686,037
OPTI Canada, Inc. 9.000%, due 12/15/12(144A)(a)		3,565,000		3,663,037
7.875%, due 12/15/14		660,000		544,500
Peabody Energy Corp. 7.375%, due 11/01/16(g)		1,650,000		1,709,812
Petrohawk Energy Corp. 10.500%, due 08/01/14		1,155,000		1,267,612

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

10

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

BlackRock High Yield Portfolio

PORTFOLIO OF INVESTMENTS - continued

December 31, 2009

(Percentage of Net Assets)

Security Description	Par Amount		Value
Oil, Gas & Consumable Fuels - continued
7.875%, due 06/01/15	$	3,120,000	$	3,166,800
Range Resources Corp. 7.375%, due 07/15/13(g)		950,000		971,375
6.375%, due 03/15/15		200,000		199,500
7.500%, due 05/15/16		75,000		77,438
8.000%, due 05/15/19		2,470,000		2,655,250
Sabine Pass LNG LP 7.500%, due 11/30/16(g)		300,000		251,250
SandRidge Energy, Inc. 8.625%, due 04/01/15(b)		100,000		100,500
9.875%, due 05/15/16(144A)(a)		1,400,000		1,480,500
8.000%, due 06/01/18(144A)(a)		1,510,000		1,491,125
Southwestern Energy Co. 7.500%, due 02/01/18		2,440,000		2,598,600
Swift Energy Co. 7.125%, due 06/01/17		825,000		783,750
Whiting Petroleum Corp. 7.250%, due 05/01/12- 05/01/13		730,000		738,238
				57,782,077
Paper & Forest Products - 3.4%
Boise Cascade LLC 7.125%, due 10/15/14		463,000		419,594
Boise Paper Holdings LLC/Boise Finance Co. 9.000%, due 11/01/17(144A)(a)		1,025,000		1,067,281
Clearwater Paper Corp. 10.625%, due 06/15/16(144A)(a)		1,040,000		1,170,000
Georgia-Pacific LLC 8.125%, due 05/15/11		1,750,000		1,846,250
7.700%, due 06/15/15		380,000		400,900
8.250%, due 05/01/16(144A)(a)		3,485,000		3,711,525
NewPage Corp. 10.000%, due 05/01/12		1,555,000		1,119,600
11.375%, due 12/31/14(144A)(a)		12,750,000		12,941,250
				22,676,400
Pharmaceuticals - 1.1%
Angiotech Pharmaceuticals, Inc. 4.006%, due 12/01/13(f)		3,705,000		3,167,775
Axcan Intermediate Holdings, Inc. 12.750%, due 03/01/16		1,130,000		1,268,425
Elan Corp. Plc 8.750%, due 10/15/16(144A)(a)(g)		1,375,000		1,320,000
Valeant Pharmaceuticals International 8.375%, due 06/15/16(144A)(a)		1,355,000		1,402,425
				7,158,625
Professional Services - 0.1%
FTI Consulting, Inc. 7.750%, due 10/01/16		610,000		620,675

Security Description	Par Amount		Value
Real Estate - 0.2%
Ashton Woods USA LLC/Ashton Woods Finance Co. 0.000%/11.000% , due 06/30/15(144A)(a)(c)	$	119,600	$	23,920
Realogy Corp. 10.500%, due 04/15/14		875,000		761,250
12.375%, due 04/15/15		997,000		780,153
				1,565,323
Real Estate Investment Trusts (REITs) - 0.0%
BMS Holdings, Inc. 8.351%, due 02/15/12(144A)(a)(f)		692,338		17,308
Road & Rail - 0.2%
Marsico Parent Co. LLC 10.625%, due 01/15/16(144A)(a)		1,432,000		866,360
Marsico Parent Holdco LLC 12.500%, due 07/15/16(144A)(a)(b)		615,369		126,151
Marsico Parent Superholdco LLC 14.500%, due 01/15/18(144A)(a)(b)		424,621		53,077
				1,045,588
Semiconductors & Semiconductor Equipment - 0.4%
Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. 8.125%, due 12/15/17(144A)(a)		2,470,000		2,460,738
Software - 0.3%
First Data Corp. 9.875%, due 09/24/15		315,000		295,313
11.250%, due 03/31/16		1,810,000		1,556,600
JDA Software Group, Inc. 8.000%, due 12/15/14(144A)(a)		450,000		464,625
				2,316,538
Specialty Retail - 0.3%
Asbury Automotive Group, Inc. 7.625%, due 03/15/17(g)		880,000		833,800
Group 1 Automotive, Inc. 8.250%, due 08/15/13		300,000		300,000
United Auto Group, Inc. 7.750%, due 12/15/16		1,260,000		1,225,350
				2,359,150
Textiles, Apparel & Luxury Goods - 0.9%
Collective Brands, Inc. 8.250%, due 08/01/13		1,475,000		1,504,500
Hanesbrands, Inc. 8.000%, due 12/15/16		1,290,000		1,320,638
Levi Strauss & Co. 8.625%, due 04/01/13		2,100,000		3,040,241
				5,865,379
Tobacco - 0.2%
Vector Group, Ltd. 11.000%, due 08/15/15		1,330,000		1,349,950

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

11

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

BlackRock High Yield Portfolio

PORTFOLIO OF INVESTMENTS - continued

December 31, 2009

(Percentage of Net Assets)

Security Description	Par Amount		Value
Trading Companies & Distributors - 0.3%
McJunkin Red Man Corp. 9.500%, due 12/15/16(144A)(a)	$	2,005,000	$	1,969,913
Russel Metals, Inc. 6.375%, due 03/01/14		230,000		219,650
				2,189,563
Transportation - 0.1%
Travelport LLC 9.875%, due 09/01/14		560,000		581,000
11.875%, due 09/01/16(g)		100,000		106,500
				687,500
Wireless Telecommunication Services - 6.0%
Cricket Communications, Inc. 9.375%, due 11/01/14(g)		2,450,000		2,474,500
10.000%, due 07/15/15(g)		3,500,000		3,565,625
7.750%, due 05/15/16(g)		4,370,000		4,380,925
Crown Castle International Corp. 9.000%, due 01/15/15		390,000		417,300
FiberTower Corp. 9.000%, due 01/01/16		324,380		259,504
9.000%, due 01/01/16 (144A)(a)		80,502		64,402
Intelsat Corp. 9.250%, due 08/15/14-06/15/16		3,860,000		3,996,650
Intelsat Subsidiary Holding Co., Ltd. 8.500%, due 01/15/13		750,000		768,750
8.875%, due 01/15/15(144A)(a)		540,000		558,900
8.875%, due 01/15/15		400,000		416,000
iPCS, Inc. 2.406%, due 05/01/13(f)		4,881,000		4,588,140
MetroPCS Wireless, Inc. 9.250%, due 11/01/14(g)		5,880,000		5,982,900
9.250%, due 11/01/14		1,250,000		1,271,875
Nextel Communications, Inc. 6.875%, due 10/31/13		7,180,000		7,000,500
7.375%, due 08/01/15		2,510,000		2,453,525
Series F 5.950%, 03/15/14		660,000		619,575
SBA Telecommunications, Inc. 8.000%, due 08/15/16(144A)(a)		1,200,000		1,260,000
				40,079,071
Total Domestic Bonds & Debt Securities (Cost $525,665,370)				541,733,588
Convertible Bonds - 4.0%
Biotechnology - 0.2%
Gilead Sciences, Inc. 0.625%, due 05/01/13		1,110,000		1,375,013

Security Description	Par Amount		Value
Capital Markets - 0.0%
E*Trade Financial Corp., Series A 0.000%, due 08/31/19(144A)(a)(d)	$	76,000	$	128,535
0.000%, due 08/31/19(d)		11,000		18,751
				147,286
Diversified Telecommunication Services - 0.4%
NTL Cable Plc 8.750%, due 04/15/14		36,780		55,093
Qwest Communications International, Inc. 3.500%, due 11/15/25		2,510,000		2,616,675
				2,671,768
Health Care Equipment & Supplies - 0.5%
Hologic, Inc. 2.000%/0.000% , due 12/15/37(h)		3,935,000		3,379,181
Health Care Providers & Services - 0.0%
LifePoint Hospitals, Inc. 3.500%, due 05/15/14		290,000		271,513
Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure - 0.1%
Scientific Games Corp. - Class A 0.750%/0.500% , due 12/01/24(h)		640,000		614,400
Household Durables - 0.1%
Beazer Homes USA, Inc. 4.625%, due 06/15/24		990,000		927,588
IT Services - 0.4%
Alliance Data Systems Corp. 1.750%, due 08/01/13		2,730,000		2,794,838
Machinery - 0.3%
Navistar International Corp. 3.000%, due 10/15/14		1,370,000		1,432,883
Titan International, Inc. 5.625%, due 01/15/17(144A)(a)		650,000		685,295
				2,118,178
Marine - 0.6%
Horizon Lines, Inc. 4.250%, due 08/15/12		5,035,000		4,116,112
Media - 0.3%
Liberty Global, Inc. 4.500%, due 11/15/16(144A)(a)		1,580,000		1,721,647
Metals & Mining - 0.1%
Goldcorp, Inc. 2.000%, due 08/01/14(144A)(a)		510,000		588,112
Oil, Gas & Consumable Fuels - 0.6%
Chesapeake Energy Corp. 2.250%, due 12/15/38		1,250,000		951,562
Massey Energy Co. 3.250%, due 08/01/15		3,100,000		2,724,125
				3,675,687

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

12

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

BlackRock High Yield Portfolio

PORTFOLIO OF INVESTMENTS - continued

December 31, 2009

(Percentage of Net Assets)

Security Description	Par Amount		Value
Wireless Telecommunication Services - 0.4%
NII Holdings, Inc. 2.750%, due 08/15/25	$	2,480,000	$	2,483,100
Total Convertible Bonds (Cost $24,808,308)				26,884,423
Loan Participation - 8.9%
Abbot Turbo Mezzanine Bridge 14.500%, due 03/15/18(f)		3,210,282		2,407,711
Accuride Corp. 3.250%, due 10/07/10(f)		236,000		236,000
1.000%, due 01/31/12(f)		1,672,045		1,669,846
Ainsworth Lumber Co., Ltd. 5.250%, due 06/26/14(f)		1,000,000		803,750
Allison Transmission, Inc. 2.990%-3.040%, due 08/07/14(f)		4,603,149		4,249,282
Chrysler Financial 4.240%, due 08/03/12		3,715,498		3,631,899
Claires Stores, Inc. 3.001%, due 05/24/14		766,071		622,728
Dana Exit 6.500%-7.250%, due 01/31/15(f)		4,074,651		3,909,118
Delphi Holdings LLP 1.000%, due 10/06/14(f)		1,576,405		1,361,420
Dynegy Holdings, Inc. 3.990%, due 04/02/13(f)		699,611		674,775
Education Media, Inc. 17.500%, due 11/14/14(f)		3,330,949		2,015,453
First Data Corp. 2.990%-3.010%, due 09/24/14(f)		446,574		398,009
Ford Motor Co. 1.000%, due 12/15/13(f)		1,950,000		1,722,503
Freescale Semiconductor, Inc. 1.985%, due 12/02/13(f)		299,223		262,597
Hawaiian Telecom 4.750%, due 05/30/14		1,070,473		784,121
HCA, Inc. 1.751%, due 11/19/12(f)		1,786,439		1,714,982
Hema Holding BV 1.000%, due 01/29/17(f)		1,512,945		1,452,999
Marsico Parent 5.063%-7.000%, due 11/14/14(f)		454,654		298,935
Neiman Marcus Group, Inc. 2.255%-4.750%, due 04/05/13		344,267		311,863
New Look 1.000%, due 07/31/14(f)		504,038		769,214
Nielsen Finance LLC 2.235%, due 08/09/13(f)		225,753		212,546
3.985%, due 08/09/13(f)		479,470		453,339
PQ Corp. 3.490%-6.740%, due 07/30/14-07/30/15(f)		3,138,750		2,751,625

Security Description	Shares/Par Amount		Value
Loan Participation - continued
Quebecor World, Inc. 9.000%, due 06/30/12	$	898,375	$	904,551
Realogy 13.500%, due 10/15/17(f)		3,850,000		4,090,625
Rite Aid Corp. 9.500%, due 06/05/15(f)		2,250,000		2,334,611
Solutia Exit 7.250%, due 02/28/14(f)		663,636		675,419
Texas Competitive Electric Holdings Co. LLC 3.735%-3.751%, due 10/10/14(f)		4,735,226		3,839,588
3.751%-3.775%, due 10/10/14(f)		324,196		263,526
Travelport Holdings, Ltd. 8.281%, due 03/26/12(f)		586,873		534,055
Verso Paper Holdings LLC 6.531%-7.281%, due 02/01/13(f)		2,523,110		1,261,555
Virgin Media 1.000%, due 09/03/12(f)		1,500,000		2,368,833
4.191%, due 03/04/13		2,715,000		4,088,685
Wind Acquisition Holdings Finance 7.732%, due 06/17/15(f)		4,428,449		6,397,314
Total Loan Participation (Cost $58,238,696)				59,473,477
Common Stocks - 1.7%
Auto Components - 0.4%
Lear Corp.*		38,236		2,586,283
Building Products - 0.3%
Ainsworth Lumber Co., Ltd.*		9,494		24,041
Ainsworth Lumber Co., Ltd.(144A)*(a)		10,657		—
Masonite Worldwide Holdings*		58,362		2,115,623
Nortek, Inc.*		1,670		58,450
				2,198,114
Capital Markets - 0.2%
E*TRADE Financial Corp.*(g)		762,000		1,333,500
Chemicals - 0.1%
Solutia, Inc.*(g)		38,000		482,600
Zemex Minerals Group, Inc.		87		—
				482,600
Diversified Financial Services - 0.0%
CIT Group, Inc.*		6,553		180,928
Diversified Telecommunication Services - 0.2%
Qwest Communications International, Inc.(g)		307,900		1,296,259
Viatel Holding Bermuda, Ltd.*		4		40
				1,296,299
Food Products - 0.0%
Pilgrim’s Pride Corp.*		17,121		152,377
Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure - 0.0%
Buffets Restaurants Holdings, Inc.*		114		1

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

13

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

BlackRock High Yield Portfolio

PORTFOLIO OF INVESTMENTS - continued

December 31, 2009

(Percentage of Net Assets)

Security Description	Shares	Value
Household Durables - 0.1%
Beazer Homes USA, Inc.*(g)	88,000	$	425,920
Standard Pacific Corp.*(g)	50,000		187,000
			612,920
Media - 0.2%
Cebridge Connections Holdings*	7,460		67,140
Sirius XM Radio, Inc.*(g)	2,200,000		1,320,000
			1,387,140
Software - 0.1%
TiVo, Inc.*(g)	86,000		875,480
Wireless Telecommunication Services - 0.1%
FiberTower Corp.*	109,071		455,917
Total Common Stocks (Cost $11,461,380)			11,561,559
Preferred Stocks - 2.1%
Diversified Financial Services - 2.1%
Delphi - Class B	1,558		14,180,703
Media - 0.0%
CMP Susquehanna Radio Holdings Corp. (144A)*(a)(f)	28,451		—
Road & Rail - 0.0%
Marsico Parent Superholdco LLC (144A)(a)	96		19,200
Marsico Parent Superholdco LLC (144A)*(a)	25		5,000
			24,200
Total Preferred Stocks (Cost $9,910,738)			14,204,903
Convertible Preferred Stock - 0.2%
Diversified Financial Services - 0.2%
Citigroup, Inc. 7.500%, due 12/15/12* (Cost - $1,200,000)	12,000		1,252,080
Warrants - 0.1%
Auto Components - 0.1%
Lear Corp. expires 11/09/14*	14,915		942,628
Communications Equipment - 0.0%
Turbo Cayman, Ltd., expires 12/31/09*	1		—
Viasystems Group, Inc., expires 04/30/11*	9,411		—
			—
Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure - 0.0%
Buffets Restaurant Holdings, expires 04/28/14*	50		—
Media - 0.0%
Advanstar Holdings Corp., expires 10/15/11*	75		675

Security Description	Shares/Par Amount		Value
Media - continued
Charter Communications, Inc., expires 11/30/14*		281	$	1,756
MDP Acquisitions Plc, expires 10/01/13(144A)*(a)		100		4,654
Sirius XM Radio, Inc., expires 03/15/10*		125		31
				7,116
Paper & Forest Products - 0.0%
Neenah Enterprises, Inc., expires 10/07/13*		6,130		—
Thrifts & Mortgage Finance - 0.0%
CNB Capital Trust I, expires 03/23/19*		32,513		—
Total Warrants (Cost $808,985)				949,744
Short-Term Investments - 3.9%
Mutual Funds - 2.8%
State Street Navigator Securities Lending Prime Portfolio 0.000%(i)		19,008,829		19,008,829
Repurchase Agreement - 1.1%
Fixed Income Clearing Corp., Repurchase Agreement, dated 12/31/09 at 0.005% to be repurchased at $7,288,004 on 01/04/10 collateralized by $6,855,000 Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp. at 4.375% due 07/17/15 with a value of $7,437,675.	$	7,288,000		7,288,000
Total Short-Term Investments (Cost $26,296,829)				26,296,829
Total Investments - 101.5% (Cost $658,390,306)				682,356,603
Other Assets and Liabilities (net) - (1.5)%				(9,841,628	)
Net Assets - 100.0%			$	672,514,975

* Non-income producing security.

(a) Securities that may be resold to “qualified institutional buyers” under Rule 144A or securities offered pursuant to Section 4(2) of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended.

(b) Payment-in-kind security for which part of the income earned may be paid as additional principal.

(c) Security is a “step-up” bond where coupon increases or steps up at a predetermined date. Rates shown are current coupon and next coupon rate when security steps up.

(d) Zero coupon bond - Interest rate represents current yield to maturity.

(e) Security is in default and/or issuer is in bankruptcy.

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

14

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

BlackRock High Yield Portfolio

PORTFOLIO OF INVESTMENTS - continued

December 31, 2009

(Percentage of Net Assets)

(f) Variable or floating rate security. The stated rate represents the rate at December 31, 2009.

(g) All or a portion of security is on loan.

(h) Security is a “step-down” bond where the coupon decreases or steps down at a predetermined date. Rates shown are current coupon and next coupon rate when a security steps down.

(i) Represents investment of collateral received from securities lending transactions.

Credit Composition as of December 31, 2009 (Unaudited)

Portfolio Composition by Credit Quality	Percent of Portfolio
BBB	2.4	%
BB	30.4
B	35.0
Below B	13.2
Equities/Other	19.0

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

15

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

BlackRock High Yield Portfolio

Various inputs are used in determining the value of the Portfolio’s investments, which are as follows:

Level 1—unadjusted quoted prices in active markets for identical investments

Level 2—other significant observable inputs (including, but not limited to: quoted prices for similar investments in markets that are both active or inactive; inputs other than quoted prices that are observable such as interest rates, yield curves, credit risks, default rates, etc.)

Level 3—significant unobservable inputs based on the best information available in the circumstances, to the extent observable inputs are unavailable (including the Portfolio’s own assumptions in determining the fair value of investments)

The inputs or methodology used for valuing investments are not necessarily an indication of the risk associated with investing in them. For information about the Portfolio’s policy regarding valuation of investments and other significant accounting policies, please refer to Note 2 of the Notes to Financial Statements.

The following table summarizes the inputs used in determining the value the Portfolio’s investments as of December 31, 2009:

ASSETS VALUATION INPUTS

Description		Level 1		Level 2		Level 3		Total
Domestic Bonds & Debt Securities
Aerospace & Defense	$	—	$	12,806,802	$	—	$	12,806,802
Airlines		—		5,589,064		—		5,589,064
Auto Components		—		3,854,903		165,937		4,020,840
Automobiles		—		440,750		—		440,750
Biotechnology		—		1,920,071		—		1,920,071
Building Products		—		3,779,408		—		3,779,408
Chemicals		—		14,370,709		—		14,370,709
Commercial & Professional Services		—		13,593,285		—		13,593,285
Commercial Banks		—		4,424,777		—		4,424,777
Communications Equipment		—		4,003,200		—		4,003,200
Construction & Engineering		—		2,180,000		—		2,180,000
Construction Materials		—		444,375		—		444,375
Consumer Finance		—		29,644,926		—		29,644,926
Containers & Packaging		—		24,491,946		—		24,491,946
Distributors		—		2,218,500		—		2,218,500
Diversified Consumer Services		—		176,391		—		176,391
Diversified Financial Services		—		34,833,094		539,000		35,372,094
Diversified Telecommunication Services		—		29,260,463		—		29,260,463
Electric Utilities		—		14,558,338		—		14,558,338
Electrical Equipment		—		8,434,019		—		8,434,019
Electronic Equipment, Instruments & Components		—		78,375		—		78,375
Energy Equipment & Services		—		10,320,962		—		10,320,962
Entertainment & Leisure		—		45,900		—		45,900
Food & Staples Retailing		—		2,935,325		—		2,935,325
Food Products		—		2,746,800		—		2,746,800
Gas Utilities		—		9,877,430		—		9,877,430
Health Care Equipment & Supplies		—		5,077,500		—		5,077,500
Health Care Providers & Services		—		17,094,166		—		17,094,166
Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure		—		2,986,925		—		2,986,925
Household Durables		—		11,946,497		—		11,946,497
Independent Power Producers & Energy Traders		—		13,836,762		—		13,836,762
Industrial—Diversified		—		1,790,575		—		1,790,575

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

16

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

BlackRock High Yield Portfolio

Description		Level 1		Level 2		Level 3		Total
Insurance	$	—	$	66,100	$	—	$	66,100
Internet Software & Services		—		2,049,300		—		2,049,300
Leisure Equipment & Products		—		1,901,450		—		1,901,450
Life Sciences Tools & Services		—		913,500		—		913,500
Machinery		—		4,474,275		—		4,474,275
Manufacturing		—		91,875		—		91,875
Marine		—		2,334,310		—		2,334,310
Media		—		61,920,646		2,440		61,923,086
Metals & Mining		—		27,297,046		—		27,297,046
Multiline Retail		—		2,041,586		—		2,041,586
Oil, Gas & Consumable Fuels		—		57,782,077		—		57,782,077
Paper & Forest Products		—		22,676,400		—		22,676,400
Pharmaceuticals		—		7,158,625		—		7,158,625
Professional Services		—		620,675		—		620,675
Real Estate		—		1,541,403		23,920		1,565,323
Real Estate Investment Trusts (REITs)		—		17,308		—		17,308
Road & Rail		—		1,045,588		—		1,045,588
Semiconductors & Semiconductor Equipment		—		2,460,738		—		2,460,738
Software		—		2,316,538		—		2,316,538
Specialty Retail		—		2,359,150		—		2,359,150
Textiles, Apparel & Luxury Goods		—		5,865,379		—		5,865,379
Tobacco		—		1,349,950		—		1,349,950
Trading Companies & Distributors		—		2,189,563		—		2,189,563
Transportation		—		687,500		—		687,500
Wireless Telecommunication Services		—		39,755,165		323,906		40,079,071
Total Domestic Bonds & Debt Securities		—		540,678,385		1,055,203		541,733,588
Total Convertible Bonds*		—		26,884,423		—		26,884,423
Loan Participation		—		55,376,767		4,096,710		59,473,477
Common Stocks
Auto Components		2,586,283		—		—		2,586,283
Building Products		2,198,114		—		—		2,198,114
Capital Markets		1,333,500		—		—		1,333,500
Chemicals		482,600		—		—		482,600
Diversified Financial Services		180,928		—		—		180,928
Diversified Telecommunication Services		1,296,299		—		—		1,296,299
Food Products		152,377		—		—		152,377
Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure		—		—		1		1
Household Durables		612,920		—		—		612,920
Media		1,320,000		—		67,140		1,387,140
Software		875,480		—		—		875,480
Wireless Telecommunication Services		455,917		—		—		455,917
Total Common Stocks		11,494,418		—		67,141		11,561,559

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

17

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

BlackRock High Yield Portfolio

Description		Level 1		Level 2		Level 3		Total
Preferred Stocks
Diversified Financial Services	$	14,180,703	$	—	$	—	$	14,180,703
Media		—		—		—		—
Road & Rail		—		24,200		—		24,200
Total Preferred Stocks		14,180,703		24,200		—		14,204,903
Convertible Preferred Stock
Diversified Financial Services		1,252,080		—		—		1,252,080
Warrants
Auto Components		942,628		—		—		942,628
Communications Equipment		—		—		—		—
Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure		—		—		—		—
Media		1,787		5,329		—		7,116
Paper & Forest Products		—		—		—		—
Thrifts & Mortgage Finance		—		—		—		—
Total Warrants		944,415		5,329		—		949,744
Short-Term Investments
Mutual Funds		19,008,829		—		—		19,008,829
Repurchase Agreement		—		7,288,000		—		7,288,000
Total Short-Term Investments		19,008,829		7,288,000		—		26,296,829
TOTAL INVESTMENTS	$	46,880,445	$	630,257,104	$	5,219,054	$	682,356,603

	Level 1				Level 2					Level 3				Total
	Asset		Liability		Asset		Liability			Asset		Liability
Forward Contracts**	$	—	$	—	$	1,662,938	$	(2,248	)	$	—	$	—	$	1,660,690

* See Portfolio of Investments for additional detailed categorizations.

** Derivative instruments such as forwards, futures and swap contracts are valued based on the unrealized appreciation/depreciation on the instrument.

Level 3 Reconciliation Disclosure

Following is a reconciliation of Level 3 assets for which significant unobservable inputs were used to determine fair value:

Investments in Securities	Balance as of December 31, 2008		Accrued Discounts/ (Premiums)		Realized Gain/(Loss)			Change in Unrealized Appreciation/ (Depreciation)			Net Purchases		Net Sales			Balance as of December 31, 2009
Domestic Bonds & Debt
Auto Components	$	—	$	—	$	—		$	8,214		$	157,723	$	—		$	165,937
Containers & Packaging		—		—		(94,351	)		96,202			—		(1,851	)		—
Diversified Financial Services		—		9,599		—			(9,599	)		539,000		—			539,000
Marine		—		—		(100,000	)		100,000			—		—			—
Media		—		6,171		—			(65,990	)		62,259		—			2,440
Real Estate		—		9,179		—			(28,959	)		43,700		—			23,920
Wireless Telecommunication Services		—		—		(26,276	)		350,182			—		—			323,906
Loan Participation		3,067,823		—		—			(764,720	)		1,793,607					4,096,710
Common Stock
Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure		—		—		—			(62,687	)		62,688		—			1
Media		67,140		—		—			—			—		—			67,140
Warrants
Gas Utilities		—		—		(85,468	)		85,468			—		—			—
Total	$	3,134,963	$	24,949	$	(306,095	)	$	(291,889	)	$	2,658,977	$	(1,851	)	$	5,219,054

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

18

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

BlackRock High Yield Portfolio

Statement of Assets and Liabilities

December 31, 2009

Assets
Investments at value (a)(b)	$	675,068,603
Repurchase Agreement		7,288,000
Cash		833,481
Cash denominated in foreign currencies (c)		1,892,531
Receivable for investments sold		9,162,781
Receivable for shares sold		815,063
Dividends receivable		8,591
Interest receivable		11,263,102
Unrealized appreciation on forward foreign currency exchange contracts		1,662,938
Total assets		707,995,090
Liabilities
Payables for:
Investments purchased		15,898,555
Shares redeemed		159,995
Unrealized depreciation on forward foreign currency exchange contracts		2,248
Collateral for securities loaned		19,008,829
Accrued Expenses:
Management fees		333,872
Distribution and service fees - Class B		21,980
Administration fees		3,839
Custodian and accounting fees		5,340
Deferred trustees’ fees		7,518
Other expenses		37,939
Total liabilities		35,480,115
Net Assets	$	672,514,975
Net Assets Represented by
Paid in surplus	$	646,194,730
Accumulated net realized loss		(45,524,480	)
Unrealized appreciation on investments and foreign currency transactions		25,656,161
Undistributed net investment income		46,188,564
Net Assets	$	672,514,975
Net Assets
Class A	$	563,437,341
Class B		109,077,634
Capital Shares Outstanding
Class A		70,269,579
Class B		13,668,146
Net Asset Value, Offering Price and Redemption Price Per Share
Class A	$	8.02
Class B		7.98

(a) Identified cost of investments, excluding repurchase agreement, was $651,102,306.

(b) Includes securities loaned at value of $18,363,937.

(c) Identified cost of cash denominated in foreign currencies was $1,961,775.

Statement of Operations

For the Year Ended December 31, 2009

Investment Income
Dividends	$	19,626
Interest (a)		59,709,340
Total investment income		59,728,966
Expenses
Management fees		3,011,922
Administration fees		39,202
Custodian and accounting fees		135,174
Distribution and service fees - Class B		152,663
Audit and tax services		44,987
Legal		33,682
Trustees’ fees and expenses		22,763
Shareholder reporting		64,473
Insurance		8,223
Miscellaneous		7,719
Total expenses		3,520,808
Net investment income		56,208,158
Net Realized and Unrealized Gain (Loss) on Investments and Foreign Currency transactions
Net realized loss on:
Investments		(11,271,259	)
Foreign currency transactions		(2,462,237	)
Net realized loss on investments and foreign currency transactions		(13,733,496	)
Net change in unrealized appreciation on:
Investments		146,790,784
Foreign currency transactions		2,597,043
Net change in unrealized appreciation on investments and foreign currency transactions		149,387,827
Net realized and unrealized gain on investments and foreign currency transactions		135,654,331
Net Increase in Net Assets from Operations	$	191,862,489

(a) Includes net income on securities loaned of $141,070.

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

19

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

BlackRock High Yield Portfolio

Statements of Changes in Net Assets

	Year Ended December 31, 2009			Year Ended December 31, 2008
Increase (Decrease) in Net Assets:
Operations
Net investment income	$	56,208,158		$	33,011,396
Net realized loss on investments and foreign currency transactions		(13,733,496	)		(31,403,713	)
Net change in unrealized appreciation (depreciation) on investments and foreign currency transactions		149,387,827			(105,934,818	)
Net increase (decrease) in net assets resulting from operations		191,862,489			(104,327,135	)
Distributions to Shareholders
From net investment income
Class A		(21,252,736	)		(29,255,292	)
Class B		(2,134,251	)		—
From net realized gains
Class A		—			—
Class B		—			—
Net decrease in net assets resulting from distributions		(23,386,987	)		(29,255,292	)
Capital Share Transactions
Proceeds from shares sold
Class A		163,668,553			83,090,043
Class B		96,127,346			32,338,687
Net asset value of shares issued through dividend reinvestment
Class A		21,252,736			29,255,292
Class B		2,134,251			—
Cost of shares repurchased
Class A		(64,827,281	)		(92,246,282	)
Class B		(23,118,385	)		(14,171,793	)
Net increase in net assets from capital share transactions		195,237,220			38,265,947
Net Increase (Decrease) in Net Assets		363,712,722			(95,316,480	)
Net assets at beginning of period		308,802,253			404,118,733
Net assets at end of period	$	672,514,975		$	308,802,253
Undistributed net investment income at end of period	$	46,188,564		$	24,319,364

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

20

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

BlackRock High Yield Portfolio

Financial Highlights

Selected Per Share Data for the Years or Period Ended:
	Class A
	For the Years Ended December 31,
	2009			2008			2007			2006			2005
Net Asset Value, Beginning of Period	$	5.80		$	8.24		$	8.92		$	8.84		$	8.62
Income (Loss) from Investment Operations:
Net investment income(a)		0.77			0.61			0.60			0.63			0.63
Net realized/unrealized gain (loss) on investments		1.85			(2.48	)		(0.34	)		0.19			(0.41	)
Total from investment operations		2.62			(1.87	)		0.26			0.82			0.22
Less Distributions
Dividends from net investment income		(0.40	)		(0.57	)		(0.94	)		(0.74	)		—
Distributions from net realized capital gains		—			—			—			—			—
Total distributions		(0.40	)		(0.57	)		(0.94	)		(0.74	)		—
Net Asset Value, End of Period	$	8.02		$	5.80		$	8.24		$	8.92		$	8.84
Total Return		47.20	%		(24.20	)%		2.70	%		9.81	%		2.55	%
Ratio of expenses to average net assets after reimbursement		0.67	%		0.67	%		0.72	%		0.93	%		0.87	%
Ratio of expenses to average net assets before reimbursement and rebates		0.67	%		0.67	%		0.73	%(b)		0.96	%		0.87	%
Ratio of net investment income to average net assets		11.24	%		8.40	%		7.21	%		7.34	%		7.28	%
Portfolio turnover rate		91.7	%		57.8	%		60.2	%		88.9	%		36.0	%
Net assets, end of period (in millions)	$	563.4		$	295.7		$	404.1		$	77.5		$	84.0

	Class B
	For the Years Ended December 31,
	2009			2008(c)
Net Asset Value, Beginning of Period	$	5.78		$	7.66
Income (Loss) from Investment Operations:
Net investment income(a)		0.77			0.41
Net realized /unrealized gain (loss) on investments		1.83			(2.29	)
Total from investment operations		2.60			(1.88	)
Less Distributions
Dividends from net investment income		(0.40	)		—
Distributions from net realized capital gains		—			—
Total distributions		(0.40	)		—
Net Asset Value, End of Period	$	7.98		$	5.78
Total Return		46.65	%		(24.54	)%
Ratio of expenses to average net assets after reimbursement		0.92	%		0.94	%*
Ratio of expenses to average net assets before reimbursement and rebates		0.92	%		0.94	%*
Ratio of net investment loss to average net assets		10.88	%		8.70	%*
Portfolio turnover rate		91.7	%		57.8	%
Net assets, end of period (in millions)	$	109.1		$	13.2

* Annualized

(a) Per share amounts based on average shares outstanding during the period.

(b) Excludes effect of deferred expense reimbursement.

(c) Commencement of operations 4/28/08.

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

21

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

BlackRock High Yield Portfolio

Notes to Financial Statements—December 31, 2009

1. Organization

Met Investors Series Trust (the “Trust”) is registered as an open-end management investment company under the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended (the “1940 Act”). The Trust currently offers forty-eight Portfolios (the “Portfolios”), each of which operates as a distinct investment vehicle of the Trust. The portfolio included in this report is BlackRock High Yield Portfolio (the “Portfolio”), which is diversified. Shares in the Trust are not offered directly to the general public and are currently available only to separate accounts established by certain affiliated life insurance companies.

The Trust is managed by MetLife Advisers, LLC (the “Manager”), an affiliate of MetLife, Inc.

The Trust has registered four classes of shares: Class A, B, C and E Shares. Class A and B Shares are currently offered by the Portfolio. Shares of each Class of the Portfolio represent an equal pro rata interest in the Portfolio and generally give the shareholder the same voting, dividend, liquidation, and other rights. Investment income, realized and unrealized capital gains and losses, the common expenses of the Portfolio and certain Portfolio-level expense reductions, if any, are allocated on a pro rata basis to each Class based on the relative net assets of each Class to the net assets of the Portfolio. Each Class of shares differs in its respective distribution expenses.

2. Significant Accounting Policies

The financial statements have been prepared in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (“GAAP”) which require management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of income and expenses during the reporting period. Actual results could differ from these estimates.

The following is a summary of significant accounting policies consistently followed by the Trust in the preparation of its financial statements.

Valuation - Equity securities for which the primary market is on a domestic exchange (except the NASDAQ) will be valued at the last sale price on the day of valuation or, if there was no sale that day, at the last reported bid price, using prices as of the close of trading. Equity securities traded over-the-counter and quoted on NASDAQ are valued at the NASDAQ Official Closing Price. Equity securities not quoted on NASDAQ that are actively traded in the over-the-counter market, including listed securities for which the primary market is believed to be over-the-counter, will be valued at the most recently quoted bid price provided by the principal market makers. Short positions traded in the OTC market are valued at the last available ask price.

Debt securities (other than short term obligations with a remaining maturity of sixty days or less) are generally valued on the basis of evaluated or composite bid quotations obtained by independent pricing services and/or brokers and dealers selected by the relevant adviser pursuant to authorization of the Board of Trustees (the “Board”). Such quotations take into account appropriate factors such as trading in similar groups of securities, yield, quality, coupon rate, maturity, type of issue, trading characteristics and other data. Short term obligations with a remaining maturity of sixty days or less are valued at amortized cost which approximates fair market value.

Financial futures contracts and options thereon, which are traded on exchanges, are valued at their closing prices as of the close of such exchanges. Exchange traded options are valued at the mean price. Swap agreements and options traded in the over the counter (“OTC”) market are valued based upon quoted fair valuations received daily by the Portfolio from a pricing service or counterparty. Forward currency exchange contracts are valued daily at forward foreign currency exchange rates. Investments in mutual funds are valued at the daily net asset value (“NAV”) of the mutual fund.

The Portfolio has retained a third party pricing service to fair value its equity investments that are traded principally on a foreign exchange or market which closes prior to the Portfolio’s time of valuation. The fair value of each security that is traded principally on an exchange or market outside of the United States generally is calculated by applying a valuation factor provided by the third party pricing service to the last sales price for that security, or, if there is no reported sale during the day, the last reported bid price for that security.

If market values are not readily available, or if available market quotations are not reliable, securities are priced at their fair value as determined by the Manager using procedures approved by the Board. The Portfolio may use fair value pricing if the value of a security has been materially affected by events occurring before the Portfolio’s calculation of NAV but after the close of the primary markets on which the security is traded. The Portfolio may also use fair value pricing if reliable market quotations are unavailable due to infrequent trading or if trading in a particular security was halted during the day and did not resume prior to the Portfolio’s calculation of NAV.

Security Transactions - Security transactions are recorded on a trade date basis. Realized gains and losses on investments and unrealized appreciation and depreciation are determined on the identified cost basis, which is the same basis used for federal income tax purposes. The Portfolio may purchase and sell securities on a “when-issued” or “delayed delivery” basis, with settlement to occur at a later date. The value of the security so purchased is subject to market fluctuations during this period. The Portfolio segregates assets having an aggregate value at least equal to the amount of the when-issued or delayed delivery purchase commitments until payment is made.

22

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

BlackRock High Yield Portfolio

Notes to Financial Statements—December 31, 2009—(Continued)

2. Significant Accounting Policies - continued

Investment Income and Expenses - Interest income is recorded on an accrual basis. Discounts and premiums on securities purchased are amortized over the lives of the respective securities. Dividend income is recorded on the ex-dividend date. Foreign dividend income is recorded on the ex-dividend date or as soon as practicable after the Portfolio has determined the existence of a dividend declaration after exercising reasonable due diligence. Foreign income and foreign capital gains on some foreign securities may be subject to foreign withholding taxes, which are accrued as applicable.

Income Taxes - It is the Portfolio’s policy to comply with the requirements of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”), and regulations thereunder, applicable to regulated investment companies and to distribute, with respect to each taxable year, all of its taxable income to shareholders. Therefore, no federal income tax provision is required. The Portfolio files U.S. Federal and various state tax returns. No income tax returns are currently under examination. The Portfolio’s federal tax returns for the prior three fiscal years remain subject to examination by the Internal Revenue Service.

Dividends and Distributions to Shareholders - The Portfolio records dividends and distributions on the ex-dividend date. Net realized gains from security transactions (if any) are generally distributed annually to shareholders. The timing and characterization of certain income and capital gains distributions are determined in accordance with federal tax regulations that may differ from GAAP. Permanent book and tax basis differences relating to shareholder distributions will result in reclassification between under/over distributed net investment income, accumulated net realized gains/losses and paid in surplus. Book-tax differences are primarily due to futures transactions, foreign currency transactions, certain foreign withholding taxes, passive foreign investment companies (PFIC), partnerships, deferred trustees compensation, capital loss carryforwards and losses deferred due to wash sales, as applicable. These adjustments have no impact on net assets or the results of operations.

Foreign Currency Translation - The books and records of the Portfolio are maintained in U.S. dollars. Foreign currencies, investments and other assets and liabilities are translated into U.S. dollars on a daily basis using prevailing exchange rates. Purchases and sales of securities are translated at the rates of exchange prevailing when such securities were acquired or sold. Income is translated at rates of exchange prevailing when interest is accrued or dividends are recorded.

The Portfolio does not isolate that portion of operations resulting from changes in foreign exchange rates on investments from the fluctuations arising from changes in market prices of securities held. Such fluctuations are included with the net realized and unrealized gain or loss from investments.

Reported net realized foreign exchange gains or losses arise from activity in forward foreign currency exchange contracts; sales of foreign currencies; currency gains or losses realized between the trade and settlement dates on securities transactions; and the difference between the amounts of dividends, interest, and foreign withholding taxes recorded on the Portfolio’s books and the U.S. dollar equivalent of the amounts actually received or paid. Net unrealized foreign exchange gains or losses arise from changes in the value of assets and liabilities other than investments in securities at fiscal year end; from changes in the exchange rates of foreign currency held; and from changes in the contract value of forward foreign currency exchange contracts.

Repurchase Agreements - The Portfolio may enter into repurchase agreements with selected commercial banks and broker-dealers, under which the Portfolio acquires securities as collateral and agrees to resell the securities at an agreed upon time and at an agreed upon price. The Portfolio accrues interest for the difference between the amount it pays for the securities and the amount it receives upon resale. At the time the Portfolio enters into a repurchase agreement, the value of the collateral securities, including accrued interest, will be equal to or exceed the value of the repurchase agreement and, for repurchase agreements that mature in more than one day, the seller will agree that the value of the collateral securities, including accrued interest, will continue to be at least equal to the value of the repurchase agreement.

Securities Lending - The Portfolio may lend its securities to certain qualified brokers who borrow securities in order to complete certain transactions. By lending its investment securities, the Portfolio attempts to increase its net investment income through the receipt of income on the loan. Any gain or loss in the market price of the securities loaned that might occur and any interest earned or dividends declared during the term of the loan would accrue to the account of the Portfolio.

Upon entering into a securities lending transaction, the Portfolio receives cash or other securities as collateral in an amount equal to or exceeding 102% of the current market value of the loaned securities (105% for foreign equity securities). Any cash received as collateral is generally invested by State Street Bank and Trust Company, acting in its capacity as securities lending agent (the “Agent”), in the State Street Navigator Securities Lending Prime Portfolio, which is a money market fund registered under the 1940 Act. A portion of net income (income after the deduction of expenses and fees of the Navigator Securities Lending Prime Portfolio) on the collateral is rebated to the borrower of the securities and the remainder is split between the Agent and the Portfolio. On loans collateralized by U.S. Treasuries, a fee is received from the borrower and is allocated between the Portfolio and the Agent. Risks of delay in recovery of the securities or even loss of rights in the collateral may occur should the borrower of the securities fail financially. Risks may also arise to the extent that the value of collateral decreases below the value of the securities loaned.

Loan Participations - The Portfolio may invest in loans arranged through private negotiation between one or more financial institutions. The Portfolio’s investment in any such loan may be in the form of a participation in or an assignment of the loan. In connection with purchasing participations, the Portfolio generally will have no right to enforce compliance by the borrower with the terms of the loan agreement relating to the loan, nor any rights of set-off against the borrower and the Portfolio may not benefit directly from any collateral supporting the loan in which it has purchased the participation.

23

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

BlackRock High Yield Portfolio

Notes to Financial Statements—December 31, 2009—(Continued)

2. Significant Accounting Policies - continued

Mortgage Related and Other Asset Backed Securities - The Portfolio may invest in mortgage related or other asset-backed securities. These securities may include mortgage pass-through securities, collateralized mortgaged obligations (“CMOs”), commercial mortgage-backed securities, mortgage dollar rolls, CMO residuals, stripped mortgage backed securities (“SMBS”) and other securities that directly or indirectly represent a participation in, or are secured by a payable from, mortgage loans on real property or other receivables. The value of some mortgage or asset-backed securities may be particularly sensitive to changes in prevailing interest rates. Early repayment of principal on some mortgage-related securities may expose the Portfolio to a lower rate of return upon reinvestment of principal. The value of these securities may fluctuate in response to the market’s perception of the creditworthiness of the issuers. Additionally, although mortgages and mortgage-related securities are generally supported by some form of government or private guarantee and/or insurance, there is no assurance that private guarantors or insurers will meet their obligations.

In one type of SMBS, one class receives all of the interest from the mortgage assets (the interest-only or “IO” class), while the other class will receive all of the principal (the principal-only or “PO” class). Payments received for the IOs are included in interest income on the Statement of Operations of the Portfolio. Because principal will not be received at the maturity of an IO, adjustments are made to the book value on the security on a daily basis until maturity. These adjustments are included in interest income on the Statement of Operations of the Portfolio. Payments received for POs are treated as reductions to the cost and par value of the securities. Details of mortgage related and other asset-backed securities held at year end are included in the Portfolio’s Portfolio of Investments.

The Portfolio may invest a significant portion of its assets in securities of issuers that hold mortgage and asset backed securities and direct investments in securities backed by commercial and residential mortgage loans and other financial assets. The value and related income of these securities are sensitive to changes in economic conditions, including delinquencies and/or defaults, and may be negatively impacted by increased volatility of market prices and periods of illiquidity.

3. Investment Management Agreement and Other Transactions with Affiliates

Investment Management Agreement - The Trust has entered into a management agreement with the Manager (the “Management Agreement”) for investment management services in connection with the investment management of the Portfolio. The Manager is subject to the supervision and direction of the Board and has overall responsibility for the general management and administration of the Trust. The Manager has entered into an advisory agreement with BlackRock Financial Management, Inc. (the “Adviser”) for investment advisory services in connection with the investment management of the Portfolio.

Subject to the supervision and direction of the Board, the Manager supervises the Adviser and has full discretion with respect to the retention or renewal of the advisory agreement. The Manager pays the Adviser a fee based on the Portfolio’s average daily net assets.

Under the terms of the Portfolio’s Management Agreement, the Portfolio pays the Manager a monthly fee based upon annual rates applied to the Portfolio’s average daily net assets as follows:

Management Fees earned by the Manager for the period ended December 31, 2009	% per annum		Average Daily Net Assets
$3,011,922	0.60	%	ALL

Transfer Agency Agreement - Metropolitan Life Insurance Company (“MLIC”) serves as the transfer agent for the Trust. MLIC is an affiliate of the Manager. MLIC receives no fees for its services to the Trust under the transfer agency agreement.

Distribution Agreements and Plans - The Trust has distribution agreements with MetLife Investors Distribution Company (“MIDC” or the “Distributor”) in which MIDC serves as the Distributor for the Trust’s Class A and Class B Shares. MIDC is a wholly-owned subsidiary of MetLife Investors Group, Inc., an affiliate of the Manager. The Class B distribution plan provides that the Trust, on behalf of the Portfolio, may pay annually up to 0.50% of the average net assets of the Portfolio attributable to its Class B Shares in respect to activities primarily intended to result in the sale of Class B Shares. However, under the Class B distribution agreement, payments to the Distributor for activities pursuant to the Class B distribution plan are currently limited to payments at an annual rate equal to 0.25% of average daily net assets of the Portfolio attributable to its Class B Shares.

Under the terms of the Class B distribution plan and distribution agreement, the Portfolio is authorized to make payments monthly to the Distributor that may be used to pay or reimburse entities providing distribution and shareholder servicing with respect to the Class B Shares for such entities’ fees or expenses incurred.

Deferred Trustee Compensation - Each Trustee of the Trust who is not currently an employee of the Manager or any of its affiliates receives compensation from the Trust for his or her service to the Portfolio. A deferred compensation plan (the “Plan”) is available to the Trustees on a

24

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

BlackRock High Yield Portfolio

Notes to Financial Statements—December 31, 2009—(Continued)

3. Investment Management Agreement and Other Transactions with Affiliates - continued

voluntary basis. Deferred amounts remain in the Trust until distributed in accordance with the provisions of the Plan. The value of a participating Trustee’s deferral account is based on theoretical investments of deferred amounts, on the normal payment dates, in certain portfolios of the Trust or Metropolitan Series Fund, Inc. as designated by the participating Trustee. Changes in the value of participants’ deferral accounts are reflected as Trustees’ fees and expenses in the Statement of Operations. The portion of the accrued obligations allocated to the Portfolio, if any, under the Plan are reflected as Deferred Trustees’ fees in the Statement of Assets and Liabilities.

4. Shares of Beneficial Interest

Transactions in shares of beneficial interest for the periods ended noted below were as follows:

	Beginning Shares	Sales	Reinvestments	Redemptions		Net Increase in Shares Outstanding	Ending Shares
Class A
12/31/2009	50,979,654	25,145,635	3,518,665	(9,374,375	)	19,289,925	70,269,579
12/31/2008	49,029,687	11,138,707	3,849,381	(13,038,121	)	1,949,967	50,979,654
Class B
12/31/2009	2,274,114	14,398,697	354,527	(3,359,192	)	11,394,032	13,668,146
04/28/2008-12/31/2008	—	4,455,438	—	(2,181,324	)	2,274,114	2,274,114

The Portfolio is authorized to issue an unlimited number of shares.

5. Investment Transactions

Aggregate cost of purchases and proceeds of sales of investment securities, excluding short-term securities, for the period ended December 31, 2009 were as follows:

Purchases			Sales
U.S. Government	Non-Government		U.S. Government		Non-Government
$19,071,077	$	670,215,373	$	18,629,923	$	415,522,242

At December 31, 2009, the cost of securities for federal income tax purposes and the unrealized appreciation (depreciation) of investments for federal income tax purposes for the Portfolio were as follows:

Federal Income Tax Cost	Gross Unrealized Appreciation		Gross Unrealized Depreciation			Net Unrealized Appreciation
$658,714,104	$	45,115,445	$	(21,472,946	)	$	23,642,499

As of December 31, 2009, the Portfolio had loaned securities which were collateralized by short-term investments. The value of securities loaned and the value of the related collateral were as follows:

6. Investments in Derivative Instruments

Forward Foreign Currency Exchange Contracts - The Portfolio may enter into forward foreign currency exchange contracts to hedge its portfolio holdings against future movements in certain foreign currency exchange rates. A forward currency contract is a commitment to purchase or sell a foreign currency at a future date at a set price. Forward currency contracts are valued at the forward rate and are marked-to-market daily. The change in market value is recorded by the Portfolio as an unrealized gain or loss. When the contract is closed, the Portfolio recognizes a realized gain or loss equal to the difference between the value of the contract at the time it was opened and the value at the time it was closed.

The use of forward foreign currency exchange contracts does not eliminate fluctuations in the underlying prices of the securities of the Portfolio, but it does establish a rate of exchange that can be achieved in the future. Although forward foreign currency exchange contracts to sell limit the risk of loss due to a decline in the value of the currency holdings, they also limit any potential gain that might result should the value of the currency increase. In addition, the Portfolio could be exposed to risks if the counterparties to the contracts are unable to meet the terms of the contracts.

25

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

BlackRock High Yield Portfolio

Notes to Financial Statements—December 31, 2009—(Continued)

6. Investments in Derivative Instruments - continued

At December 31, 2009 the Portfolio had following derivatives, grouped into appropriate risk categories:

	Asset Derivatives & Liability Derivatives—Fair Value
Risk Exposure
Foreign Exchange	Unrealized appreciation on forward foreign currency exchange contracts	$	1,662,938	Unrealized depreciation on forward foreign currency exchange contracts	$	(2,248	)

Transactions in derivative instruments during the year ended December 31, 2009, were as follows:

Risk Exposure
Location Statement of Operations—Net Realized Gain (Loss)	Forward Exchange
Foreign currency transactions	$	(2,043,923	)
Location Statement of Operations—Net Change in Unrealized Gain (Loss)	Foreign Exchange
Foreign currency transactions	$	2,593,110

For the year ended December 31, 2009, the average per contract outstanding for each derivative type was as follows:

Average Notional Amounts or Contract Amount (a)	Foreign Exchange Contracts
Foreign currency transaction	$	28,381,950

(a) Amount Represents the average notional amount or contract amount.

7. Securities Lending

As of December 31, 2009, the Portfolio had loaned securities which were collateralized by short-term investments. The value of securities loaned and the value of the related collateral were as follows:

Value of Securities	Value of Cash Collateral		Value of Non-Cash Collateral*		Total Collateral
$18,363,937	$	19,008,829	$	—	$	19,008,829

* The Portfolio cannot repledge or resell this collateral. The non-cash collateral is typically comprised of government securities and/or bank letters of credit.

8. Forward Foreign Currency Exchange Contracts

Open forward foreign currency exchange contracts at December 31, 2009, were as follows:

Forward Foreign Currency Exchange Contracts to Sell:

Settlement Date	Counterparty	Contracts to Deliver		Value at December 31, 2009		In Exchange for U.S.$		Net Unrealized Appreciation/ (Depreciation)
1/20/2010	Citibank	1,122,000	EUR	$	1,608,248	$	1,667,642	$	59,394
1/20/2010	Citibank	22,222,000	EUR		31,852,476		33,033,003		1,180,527
1/20/2010	Citibank	4,345,000	EUR		6,228,018		6,460,437		232,419

26

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

BlackRock High Yield Portfolio

Notes to Financial Statements—December 31, 2009—(Continued)

8. Forward Foreign Currency Exchange Contracts - continued

Settlement Date	Counterparty	Contracts to Deliver		Value at December 31, 2009		In Exchange for U.S.$		Net Unrealized Appreciation/ (Depreciation)
1/20/2010	Deutsche Bank Securities, Inc.	9,000	EUR	$	12,900	$	13,365	$	465
1/20/2010	Citibank	333,500	EUR		478,031		503,114		25,083
1/20/2010	Citibank	732,000	EUR		1,049,231		1,104,034		54,803
1/20/2010	Citibank	902,500	EUR		1,293,622		1,294,474		852
1/20/2010	Citibank	460,000	EUR		659,353		657,105		(2,248	)
1/27/2010	Citibank	1,244,000	GBP		2,010,483		2,026,998		16,515
1/27/2010	Deutsche Bank Securities, Inc.	1,287,000	GBP		2,079,977		2,109,423		29,446
1/27/2010	Citibank	1,532,000	GBP		2,475,932		2,532,951		57,019
1/27/2010	Deutsche Bank Securities, Inc.	113,000	GBP		182,624		189,039		6,415
								$	1,660,690

GBP - Great Britain Pound

EUR - Euro Dollar

9. Contractual Obligations

The Trust has a variety of indemnification obligations under contracts with its service providers. The Trust’s maximum exposure under these arrangements is unknown. However, the Trust has not had prior claims or losses pursuant to these contracts and expects the risk of loss to be remote.

10. Market, Credit and Counterparty Risk

In the normal course of business, the Portfolio invests in securities and enters into transactions where risks exist due to fluctuations in the market (market risk) or failure of the other party to a transaction to perform (credit risk). The value of securities held by the Portfolio may decline in response to certain events, including those directly involving the companies whose securities are owned by the Portfolio; conditions affecting the general economy; overall market changes; local, regional or global political, social or economic instability; and currency and interest rate and price fluctuations. The Portfolio may be exposed to counterparty risk, or the risk that an entity with which the Portfolio has unsettled or open transactions may default. The potential loss could exceed the value of the financial assets recorded in the financial statements. Financial assets, which potentially expose the Portfolio to credit risk, consist principally of cash due from counterparties and investments. The Portfolio restricts its exposure to credit losses by entering into master agreements with counterparties (approved brokers) with whom it undertakes a significant volume of transactions to include certain safeguards for derivatives and non-standard settlement trades. The credit risk associated with favorable contracts is reduced by a master netting arrangement to the extent that if an event of default occurs, all amounts with the counterparty are terminated and settled on a net basis. The Portfolio’s overall exposure to credit risk on derivative instruments subject to master netting arrangements can change substantially within a short period, as it is affected by each transaction subject to the arrangement.

11. Income Tax Information

The tax character of distributions paid for the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2008 were as follows:

Ordinary Income			Long-Term Capital Gain				Total
2009	2008		2009		2008		2009		2008
$23,386,987	$	29,255,292	$	—	$	—	$	23,386,987	$	29,255,292

As of December 31, 2009, the components of distributable earnings (accumulated losses) on a federal income tax basis were as follows:

Undistributed Ordinary Income	Undistributed Long-Term Gain		Net Unrealized Appreciation		Loss Carryforwards			Total
$48,309,417	$	—	$	23,671,673	$	(45,653,327	)	$	26,327,763

27

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

BlackRock High Yield Portfolio

Notes to Financial Statements—December 31, 2009—(Continued)

11. Income Tax Information - continued

The Portfolio utilizes the provisions of the federal income tax laws that provide for the carryforward of capital losses for eight years, offsetting such losses against any future net realized capital gains. At December 31, 2009, the accumulated capital loss carryforwards and expiration dates by the Portfolio were as follows:

Expiring 12/31/2010	Expiring 12/31/2011			Expiring 12/31/2013		Expiring 12/31/2015		Expiring 12/31/2016		Expiring 12/31/2017		Total
$6,217,956*	$	1,599,086	*	$	825,797	$	705,137	$	32,375,160	$	3,930,191	$	45,653,327

* On May 1, 2006, the Federated High Yield Portfolio, a series of The Travelers Series Trust, was reorganized into the Portfolio. The Portfolio acquired capital losses which are subject to an annual limitation of $3,740,137.

12. Recent Accounting Pronouncement

On January 21, 2010, the Financial Accounting Standards Board issued Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) 2010-06, “Improving Disclosures About Fair Value Measurements.” The ASU amends Accounting Standards Codification 820 to add new requirements for disclosures about transfers into and out of Levels 1 and 2. It also clarifies existing fair value disclosures about the level of disaggregation and about inputs and valuation techniques used to measure fair value. Additionally, the ASU amends disclosures about providing purchases, sales, issuances, and settlements on a gross basis relating to Level 3 measurements. The ASU guidance is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2009, and for interim periods within those fiscal years, except for the requirement to provide the Level 3 activity of purchases, sales, issuances, and settlements on a gross basis, which will be effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2010, and for interim periods within those fiscal years. Management is currently evaluating the impact the adoption of ASU 2010-06 will have on the Portfolio’s financial statements.

13. Subsequent Events

Management’s evaluation of the impact of all subsequent events on the Portfolio’s financial statements was completed through February 26, 2010, the date the financial statements were issued, and management has determined that as of that date there were no subsequent events requiring adjustments or disclosure in the Portfolio’s financial statements.

28

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

BlackRock High Yield Portfolio

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

To the Shareholders and Board of Trustees of Met Investors Series Trust:

We have audited the accompanying statement of assets and liabilities, including the portfolio of investments, of BlackRock High Yield Portfolio, one of the portfolios constituting Met Investors Series Trust (the “Trust”) as of December 31, 2009, and the related statement of operations for the year then ended, the statements of changes in net assets each of the two years in the period then ended, and the financial highlights for each of the five years in the period then ended. These financial statements and financial highlights are the responsibility of the Trust’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements and financial highlights based on our audits.

We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements and financial highlights are free of material misstatement. The Trust is not required to have, nor were we engaged to perform, an audit of its internal control over financial reporting. Our audits included consideration of internal control over financial reporting as a basis for designing audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the Trust’s internal control over financial reporting. Accordingly, we express no such opinion. An audit also includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements, assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. Our procedures included confirmation of securities owned as of December 31, 2009, by correspondence with the custodian and brokers; where replies were not received from brokers, we performed other auditing procedures. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.

In our opinion, the financial statements and financial highlights referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of BlackRock High Yield Portfolio of Met Investors Series Trust as of December 31, 2009, the results of its operations for the year then ended, the changes in its net assets for each of the two years in the period then ended, and the financial highlights for each of the five years in the period then ended, in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.

Deloitte & Touche LLP

Boston, Massachusetts

February 26, 2010

29

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Trustees and Officers (Unaudited) December 31, 2009

The Trustees and executive officers of the Trust, their ages and their principal occupations during the past five years are set forth below. Unless otherwise indicated, the business address of each is 5 Park Plaza, Suite 1900 Irvine, California 92614. Each Trustee who is deemed an “interested person,” as such term is defined in the 1940 Act, is indicated by an asterisk. Those Trustees who are not “interested persons” as defined in the 1940 Act are referred to as “Independent Trustees.” Additional information about the Trustees is available in the Statement of Additional Information which is available without charge, upon request, by calling (800) 848-3854.

The Trustees
Name and Age	Position(s) Held with Registrant	Term of Office and Length of Time Served	Principal Occupation(s) During Past 5 Years	Number of Portfolios in Fund Complex+ overseen by Trustee	Other Directorships Held by Trustee
Interested Trustees
Elizabeth M. Forget* (43)	President and Trustee	Indefinite; From December 2000 to present	Since May 2007, Senior Vice President, MetLife, Inc.; since December 2000, President of MetLife Advisers, LLC and its predecessor; December 2003 to April 2007, Vice President, MetLife, Inc.	84	Director, Metropolitan Series Fund, Inc. since August 2006.
Independent Trustees
Stephen M. Alderman (50)	Trustee	Indefinite; From December 2000 to present	Since November 1991, Shareholder in the law firm of Garfield and Merel, Ltd.	48	None
Jack R. Borsting (80)	Trustee	Indefinite; From December 2000 to present	Since 2006, Professor and Dean Emeritus, Marshall School of Business, University of Southern California (USC); from 2001 to 2005, Professor of Business Administration and Dean Emeritus.	48	Director, Los Angeles Orthopedic Hospital, Trustee, The Rose Hills Foundation. Member, Army Science Board.
Robert Boulware (53)	Trustee	Indefinite; From March 2008 to present	From 2004 to 2009, Director of Norwood Promotional Products, Inc.; from 2007 to 2008, Director of Wealthpoint Advisors (a business development company); from 2007 to 2009, Director of Holladay Bank; from 1992-2006, President and Chief Executive Officer of ING Fund Distributor, LLC.	48	Since 2005, Director of Gainsco, Inc. (auto insurance).
Daniel A. Doyle (51)	Trustee	Indefinite; From February 2007 to present	From October 2000 to June 2009, Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of ATC Management, Inc. (public utility); since June 2009, independent business consultant.	48	Director, Wisconsin Sports Development Corporation
Susan C. Gause (57)	Trustee	Indefinite; From March 2008 to present	From 2000 to December 2002, Chief Executive Officer of Allianz Dresdner Asset Management; since 2003, private investor.	48	None

30

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Trustees and Officers (Unaudited)—(Continued) December 31, 2009

Name and Age	Position(s) Held with Registrant	Term of Office and Length of Time Served	Principal Occupation(s) During Past 5 Years	Number of Portfolios in Fund Complex+ overseen by Trustee	Other Directorships Held by Trustee
Independent Trustees - continued
Dawn M. Vroegop (43)	Trustee	Indefinite; From December 2000 to present	From September 1999 to September 2003, Managing Director, Dresdner RCM Global Investors.	84	Director, Metropolitan Series Fund, Inc. since May 2009; from 2003 to present, Director and Finance Committee Chair, City College of San Francisco Foundation

The Executive Officers
Name and Age	Position(s) Held with Registrant	Term of Office and Length of Time Served	Principal Occupation(s) During Past 5 Years
Jeffrey L. Bernier (38)	Vice President	From February 2009 to present	Since December 2007, Vice President, Metropolitan Life Insurance Company; since 2008 Senior Vice President of MetLife Advisers, LLC and its predecessor; from July 2004 to December 2007, Director and Senior Investment Analyst of Investment Management Services for John Hancock Financial Services.
Jeffrey A. Tupper (39)	Chief Financial Officer, Treasurer	From August 2002 to present	Since February 2009, Vice President, MetLife Advisers, LLC. Since October 2006, Assistant Vice President, MetLife Group, Inc. Since February 2001, Assistant Vice President of MetLife Investors Insurance Company.
Richard C. Pearson (66)	Vice President and Secretary	From December 2000 to present	Since June 2001, President or Executive Vice President of MetLife Investors Distribution Company; since January 2001, Executive Vice President, General Counsel and Secretary of MetLife Investors Group, Inc. and Vice President, Secretary and Associate General Counsel of its affiliated life insurance companies; since November 2000, Senior Vice President and General Counsel of MetLife Advisers, LLC and its predecessor.
Jeffrey P. Halperin (42)	Chief Compliance Officer	From November 2006 to present	Since March 2006, Vice President, Corporate Ethics and Compliance Department, MetLife, Inc.; from October 2002 to March 2006, Assistant Vice President; from November 2005 to August 2006, Interim Chief Compliance Officer, Met Investors Series Trust; since April 2007, Chief Compliance Officer, Metropolitan Series Funds; from August 2006 to April 2007, Interim Chief Compliance Officer, Metropolitan Series Funds; since August 2006, Chief Compliance Officer, MetLife Advisers, LLC and its predecessor; since November 2006, Chief Compliance Officer, MetLife Investment Advisors Company, LLC.

+ The Fund Complex includes the Trust (48 portfolios) and Metropolitan Series Fund, Inc. (36 portfolios).

* Ms. Forget is an “interested person” of the Trust as a result of her affiliation with the Manager and the Distributor.

Quarterly Portfolio Schedule

The Trust files Form N-Q for the first and third quarters of each fiscal year. The Trust’s Forms N-Q will be available on the Securities and Exchange Commission’s website at http://www.sec.gov. The Trust’s Forms N-Q may be reviewed and copied at the Securities and Exchange Commission’s

31

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Trustees and Officers (Unaudited)—(Continued) December 31, 2009

Public Reference Room in Washington, D.C. and information on the operation of the Public Reference Room may be obtained by calling 1-800-SEC-0330. Once filed, the most recent Form N-Q will be available without charge, upon request, by calling (800) 848-3854.

Proxy Voting Policies and Procedures

A description of the policies and procedures that the Trust uses to determine how to vote proxies relating to portfolio securities is available without charge, upon request, by calling (800) 848-3854 and on the Securities and Exchange Commission’s website at http://www.sec.gov.

Proxy Voting Record

The Trust, on behalf of each of its Portfolios, has filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission its proxy voting record for the 12-month period ending June 30 on Form N-PX. Form N-PX must be filed by the Trust each year by August 31. Once filed, the most recent Form N-PX will be available without charge, upon request, by calling (800) 848-3854 or on the Securities and Exchange Commission’s website at http://www.sec.gov.

32

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

BlackRock High Yield Portfolio

Board of Trustees’ Consideration of Advisory and Sub-Advisory Agreements

At an in-person meeting of the Board of Trustees (the “Board”) of the Met Investors Series Trust (the “Trust”) held on November 10-11, 2009, the Board, including a majority of the Trustees who are not considered to be “interested persons” of the Trust (the “Independent Trustees”) under the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended (the “1940 Act”), approved for an annual period the continuation of the Trust’s advisory agreement (the “Advisory Agreement”) with MetLife Advisers, LLC (the “Adviser”) and the applicable sub-advisory agreements (each a “Sub-Advisory Agreement”, and collectively with the Advisory Agreement, the “Agreements”) between the Adviser and the investment sub-advisers (each a “Sub-Adviser”, and collectively, the “Sub-Advisers”) for each of the series of the Trust, including the BlackRock High Yield Portfolio (each a “Portfolio,” and collectively, the “Portfolios”).¹

In considering the Agreements, the Board reviewed a variety of materials provided by the Adviser and the Sub-Advisers relating to each Portfolio, the Adviser and each Sub-Adviser, including comparative performance, fee and expense information for an appropriate peer group of similar mutual funds, performance information for relevant benchmark indices and other information regarding the nature, extent and quality of services provided by the Adviser and the Sub-Advisers under their respective Agreements. The Board also took into account information provided to the Board in its meetings throughout the year with respect to the services provided by the Adviser and the Sub-Advisers, including quarterly performance reports prepared by management containing reviews of investment results, and periodic presentations from the Sub-Advisers with respect to the Portfolios they manage. The Independent Trustees also assessed reports provided by independent consultants, who reviewed and provided analyses regarding investment performance, fees and expenses, profitability and other information provided by, or at the direction of, the Adviser and the Sub-Advisers, as more fully discussed below.

The Independent Trustees were separately advised by independent legal counsel throughout the process. Prior to voting, the Independent Trustees also received a memorandum from their independent counsel discussing the legal standards for their consideration of the proposed continuation of the Agreements. The Board met in person with personnel of the Adviser prior to the November meeting for the specific purpose of considering the proposed continuation of the Agreements. The Independent Trustees also discussed the proposed continuation of the Agreements in private sessions with their independent legal counsel at which no representatives of management were present.

In considering whether to approve the renewal of the Advisory Agreement with the Adviser and any applicable Sub-Advisory Agreements with respect to each Portfolio, the Board reviewed and analyzed the factors it deemed relevant, including: (1) the nature, extent and quality of the services to be provided to the Portfolios by the Adviser and the Sub-Advisers; (2) the performance of the Portfolios as compared to a peer group and an appropriate index; (3) the Adviser’s and each of the Sub-Adviser’s personnel and operations; (4) the financial condition of the Adviser and of the Sub-Advisers; (5) the level and method of computing each Portfolio’s advisory and sub-advisory fees; (6) the profitability of the Adviser under the Advisory Agreement and of the Sub-Advisers under the Sub-Advisory Agreements; (7) any “fall-out” benefits to the Adviser, the Sub-Advisers and their affiliates (i.e., ancillary benefits realized by the Adviser, the Sub-Advisers or their affiliates from the Adviser’s or Sub-Advisers’ relationship with the Trust); (8) the anticipated effect of growth in size on each Portfolio’s performance and expenses; (9) fees paid to the Sub-Advisers by comparable institutional and retail accounts; and (10) possible conflicts of interest. The Board also considered the nature, quality, and extent of the services to be provided to the Portfolios by the Adviser’s affiliates, including distribution services.

Nature, extent and quality of services. In considering the nature, extent and quality of the services to be provided by the Adviser to the Portfolios, the Board took into account the extensive responsibilities that the Adviser has as investment manager to the Portfolios, including the provision of investment advice to: (i) MetLife Aggressive Strategy Portfolio, MetLife Balanced Strategy Portfolio, MetLife Defensive Strategy Portfolio, MetLife Growth Strategy Portfolio, and MetLife Moderate Strategy Portfolio (together, the “Asset Allocation Portfolios”), (ii) American Funds Balanced Allocation Portfolio, American Funds Growth Allocation Portfolio, and American Funds Moderate Allocation Portfolio (together, the “American Funds of Funds”), and (iii) the Met/Franklin Templeton Founding Strategy Portfolio, the selection of the Sub-Advisers for the other Portfolios and oversight of the Sub-Advisers’ compliance with fund policies and objectives, review of brokerage matters including with respect to trade allocation and best execution, oversight of general fund compliance with federal and state laws, and the implementation of Board directives as they relate to the Portfolios. The Adviser’s role in coordinating the activities of the Portfolios’ other service providers was also considered. The Board also evaluated the expertise and performance of the investment personnel with respect to the Asset Allocation Portfolios, the American Funds of Funds and the Met/Franklin Templeton Founding Strategy Portfolio and of the personnel overseeing the Sub-Advisers of the other Portfolios, and compliance with each Portfolio’s investment restrictions, tax and other requirements. The Board considered information received from the Trust’s Chief Compliance Officer (“CCO”) regarding the Portfolios’ compliance policies and procedures established pursuant to Rule 38a-1 under the 1940 Act, including the policies and procedures in place relating to proxy voting. The Board also took into account its familiarity with management through Board meetings, discussions and reports during the preceding year.

The Board also recognized the Adviser^’s reputation and long-standing experience in serving as an investment adviser to the Trust, and considered the benefit to shareholders of investing in funds that are part of a family of variable annuity portfolios offering a variety of investments. In addition, the Board reviewed the financial condition of the Adviser and whether it had the financial wherewithal to provide a high level and quality of services to the Portfolios. In its review, the Board also received and took into account information regarding any services and/or payments provided to the Adviser by the Sub-Advisers in connection with marketing activities.

¹ The Met/Templeton International Bond Portfolio recently commenced operations and, therefore, the Agreements with respect to this Portfolio were not up for renewal.

33

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

BlackRock High Yield Portfolio

Board of Trustees’ Consideration of Advisory and Sub-Advisory Agreements—(Continued)

With respect to the services provided by each of the Sub-Advisers, the Board considered information provided to the Board by each Sub-Adviser, including each Sub-Adviser’s Form ADV, as well as information presented throughout the past year. The Board considered the Sub-Adviser’s current level of staffing and its overall resources, as well as its compensation program. The Board reviewed each Sub-Adviser’s history and investment experience, as well as information regarding the qualifications, background and responsibilities of the Sub-Adviser’s investment and compliance personnel who provide services to the Portfolios. The Board also considered, among other things, the Sub-Adviser’s compliance program and any disciplinary history. The Board noted each Sub-Adviser’s regulatory history, including whether it was currently involved in any regulatory actions or investigations as well as material litigation, and any settlements and ameliatory actions undertaken, as appropriate. The Board also noted that the CCO and his staff conduct regular, periodic compliance reviews with each of the Sub-Advisers and present reports to the Independent Trustees regarding the same, which includes evaluating the regulatory compliance systems of the Sub-Advisers and procedures reasonably designed by them to assure compliance with the federal securities laws, including issues related to late trading and market timing, best execution, fair value pricing, and proxy voting procedures, among others. The Board also took into account the financial condition of each Sub-Adviser.

The Board considered each Sub-Adviser’s investment process and philosophy. The Board took into account that each Sub-Adviser’s responsibilities include the development and maintenance of an investment program for the applicable Portfolio which is consistent with the Portfolio’s investment objectives, the selection of investment securities and the placement of orders for the purchase and sale of such securities, as well as the implementation of compliance controls related to performance of these services. The Board also reviewed each Sub-Adviser’s brokerage policies and practices, including with respect to best execution and soft dollars.

Based on its consideration and review of the foregoing information, the Board concluded that the nature, extent and quality of services provided by the Adviser and by each Sub-Adviser were satisfactory and that there was a reasonable basis on which to conclude that each would provide a high quality of investment services to the Portfolios.

Performance. The Board considered the performance of the Portfolios as described in the quarterly reports prepared by management, and as also analyzed in reports prepared by the Independent Trustees’ independent consultant. The Board noted that the Adviser reviews with the Board on a quarterly basis detailed information about the Portfolios’ performance results, portfolio composition and investment strategies. The Board also reviewed and considered a separate report prepared by Lipper Inc. (“Lipper”), an independent third party, which provided a statistical analysis comparing the Portfolios’ investment performance, expenses, and fees to comparable funds underlying variable insurance products (the “Performance Universe”). In addition, the Independent Trustees met separately with a representative of Bobroff Consulting, Inc., an independent consultant (“Bobroff”), at a special board meeting in September 2009, to review the separate reports prepared by such consultant (“Bobroff Report”), which analyzed the report prepared by Lipper, as well as certain of the other factors to be considered by the Board including supplemental alpha and information coefficient analysis. The Board also considered each Portfolio’s more recent performance subsequent to the performance period covered by the Lipper reports, and management’s discussion of the same, including the effect of current market conditions on each Portfolio’s more recent performance.

The Board closely reviewed the Portfolios’ performance records and the Adviser’s and Sub-Advisers’ management styles and long-term performance records with the Portfolios and comparable funds. The Board focused particular attention on Portfolios with less favorable performance records. The Board was mindful of the Adviser’s focus on each Sub-Adviser’s performance and noted that the Adviser has been active in monitoring and responding to any performance issues with respect to the Portfolios. The Board also took into account its discussions with management regarding factors that contributed to the performance of each Portfolio.

Among other data relating specifically to the BlackRock High Yield Portfolio’s performance, the Board considered that the Portfolio slightly underperformed the median of its Performance Universe for the one-, three- and five-year periods ended July 31, 2009, and outperformed its Lipper Index over the same periods. The Board further considered that the Portfolio underperformed its benchmark, the Barclays Capital U.S. Corporate High Yield 2% Issuer Capped Index, for the one-, three-year and five-year periods ended August 31, 2009. The Board took into account management’s discussion of the Portfolio’s performance. Based on its review, the Board concluded that the Portfolio’s performance was satisfactory.

Fees and Expenses. The Board gave substantial consideration to the advisory fees payable under the Advisory Agreement and the sub-advisory fees payable under each of the Sub-Advisory Agreements. In this regard, the Board reviewed the advisory fees payable in the aggregate as well as on a Portfolio-by-Portfolio basis based on information provided by the Adviser. The Independent Trustees, with the assistance of Bobroff, also examined the fees paid by each Portfolio in light of fees paid to other investment managers by comparable funds and the method of computing each Portfolio’s fee, as well as considered the fees charged by the Adviser to manage other comparable funds. The Lipper report included comparisons of the Adviser’s fee schedule with that of its peers based on an asset-based analysis of relative fee structures according to the size of each Portfolio. In addition, the Board considered the Portfolios’ advisory and sub-advisory fees and total expenses as compared to similarly situated investment companies underlying variable insurance products deemed to be comparable to the Portfolios as determined by Lipper. The Board considered each Portfolio’s ranking within a smaller group of peer funds chosen by Lipper (the “Expense Group”), as well as the Portfolio’s ranking within broader groups of funds (the “Expense Universe” and the “Sub-advised Expense Universe”). The Board also considered each Portfolio’s contractual sub-advisory fees, as applicable, as compared to the Sub-advised Expense Universe as well as a smaller group of funds

34

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

BlackRock High Yield Portfolio

Board of Trustees’ Consideration of Advisory and Sub-Advisory Agreements—(Continued)

(the “Sub-advised Expense Group”). In comparing each Portfolio’s actual and contractual management fee to that of comparable funds, the Board noted that such fee includes both advisory and administrative fees.

The Board noted that the sub-advisory fees for the Portfolios are paid by the Adviser, not the Portfolios, out of the advisory fee. It was further noted that the Adviser negotiates such fees at arm’s length. The Board also considered that the Adviser had entered into expense limitation agreements with certain of the Portfolios as noted below, pursuant to which the Adviser has agreed to waive a portion of its advisory fee and/or reimburse certain expenses as a means of limiting a Portfolio’s total annual operating expenses. In addition, the Board noted that the Adviser effected fee reductions in 2009 with respect to several Portfolios. The Board also noted that the Adviser had re-negotiated the securities lending arrangement with State Street Corporation to further maximize the income to the Portfolios from such program.

With respect to each sub-advised Portfolio, the Board also compared the sub-advisory fees paid by the Adviser to fees charged by the Portfolio’s Sub-Adviser to manage other sub-advised portfolios and portfolios not subject to regulation under the 1940 Act, such as separate accounts, as applicable. The Board considered the fee comparisons in light of the differences required to manage different types of accounts.

With respect to the BlackRock High Yield Portfolio, the Board considered that the Portfolio’s total expenses (exclusive of 12b-1 fees) were below the Expense Group median, the Expense Universe median, and the Sub-advised Expense Universe median, and that the actual management fee was below the Expense Group median and Sub-advised Expense Universe median and slightly above the Expense Universe median. The Board took into account management’s discussion of the Portfolio’s expenses. The Board further noted that the Portfolio’s contractual management fees were below the normalized median of the Expense Group at the Portfolio’s current size. The Board also noted that the Portfolio’s contractual sub-advisory fees were above the average of the Sub-advised Expense Group at the Portfolio’s current size. After consideration of all relevant factors, the Board concluded that the advisory and sub-advisory fees are consistent with industry norms and are fair and reasonable in light of the services to be provided.

Profitability. The Board examined the profitability of the Adviser on an aggregate basis with respect to all Portfolios, as well as on a Portfolio-by-Portfolio basis. With respect to the Asset Allocation Portfolios and Met/Franklin Templeton Founding Strategy Portfolio, the Board noted that the advisory fee is in addition to the fees received by the Adviser and its affiliates with regard to the other Portfolios of the Trust or of Metropolitan Series Fund, Inc., in which the Asset Allocation Portfolios and Met/Franklin Templeton Founding Strategy Portfolio may invest. With respect to the other Portfolios, the Board noted that a major component of profitability of the Adviser was the margin between the sub-advisory fees that the Adviser receives from the Trust and the portion of those fees paid to the Sub-Advisers. In this regard, the Board took into account certain comparative information in the Lipper report. The Board also reviewed the Adviser’s unaudited income statements and balance sheet information supplied by the Adviser regarding costs borne by the Adviser’s affiliates which support the operations of the Adviser but are not reflected on the unaudited income statements of the Adviser, as well as considered the profitability of the insurance products, the function of which is supported in part by the Adviser’s revenues under the Advisory Agreement, and other information and analysis prepared by the Adviser. With respect to the American Funds Bond Portfolio, American Funds Growth Portfolio, American Funds Growth-Income Portfolio, American Funds Global Small Capitalization Portfolio and American Funds International Portfolio, the Board noted that the Adviser currently does not receive an advisory fee. The Board also considered that the Distributor, MetLife Investors Distribution Company, receives 12b-1 payments to support the distribution of the products. The Board concluded after extensive discussions with management that the profitability of the Adviser and its affiliates from their relationship with each Portfolio was reasonable in light of all relevant factors.

In considering the profitability to the Sub-Advisers and their affiliates of their relationships with the Portfolios, the Board noted that the fees under the Sub-Advisory Agreements were paid by the Adviser out of the advisory fees that it receives under the Advisory Agreement. The Board also relied on the ability of the Adviser to negotiate the Sub-Advisory Agreements and the fees thereunder at arm’s length. The Board reviewed portfolio specific data with regard to the profitability of the Portfolios to each Sub-Adviser, as available, and analyzed the reasonableness of such profitability finding no indication of excessive profitability. However, the Board placed more reliance on the fact that the Sub-Advisory Agreement was negotiated at arm’s length and that the advisory fee was paid by the Adviser than on Sub-Adviser profitability.

Economies of scale. The Board also considered the effect of the Portfolios’ growth in size on their performances and fees. The Board noted that the fee schedules for all but eleven of the Portfolios contain breakpoints that reduce the fee rate above specified asset levels. The Board noted those Portfolios that did not contain breakpoints in the advisory fee and took into account management’s discussion of the same. The Board noted that those Portfolios with advisory fee schedules containing breakpoints generally reflect the inclusion of breakpoints in the sub-advisory fee schedule for such Portfolios. The Board considered the effective fees under the Advisory Agreement for each Portfolio as a percentage of assets at different asset levels and possible economies of scale that may be realized if the assets of the Portfolio grow. Among other data, the Board examined the effect of each Portfolio’s growth in size on various fee schedules and reviewed the Lipper and Bobroff Reports, which compared fee schedules among peers. The Board also took into account that the Sub-Adviser fees are paid by the Adviser out of the advisory fee. The Board also noted that if the Portfolios’ assets increase over time, the Portfolios may realize other economies of scale if assets increase proportionally more than certain other fixed expenses.

With respect to the BlackRock High Yield Portfolio, the Board noted that the Portfolio’s advisory and sub-advisory fees do not contain breakpoints. The Board noted that the Portfolio’s management fees were below the asset-weighted average of comparable funds until the Portfolio reaches $250 million in assets, at which point the management fees increase above the asset-weighted average for all higher asset levels. The Board noted

35

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

BlackRock High Yield Portfolio

Board of Trustees’ Consideration of Advisory and Sub-Advisory Agreements—(Continued)

management’s discussion of the Portfolio’s advisory fee structure. The Board also noted that if the Portfolio’s assets increased over time, the Portfolio might realize other economies of scale if assets increased proportionally more than certain other fixed expenses. The Board concluded that the advisory fee structure for the Portfolio was reasonable and appropriate.

Other factors. As part of its evaluation of the Adviser’s compensation, the Board considered other benefits that may be realized by the Adviser and its affiliates from their relationship with the Trust. Among them, the Board recognized that an affiliate of the Adviser, MetLife Investors Distribution Company, serves as the Distributor for the Trust, and, as such, receives payments pursuant to Rule 12b-1 from the Portfolios to compensate it for providing shareholder services and selling activities, which could lead to growth in the Trust’s assets and corresponding benefits from such growth, including economies of scale. The Board also considered that affiliates of the Adviser may benefit from certain indirect tax benefits relating to dividend received deductions and foreign tax credits. The Board concluded that ancillary benefits accruing to the Adviser and its affiliates by virtue of the Adviser’s relationship with the Portfolios are fair and reasonable in light of the costs of providing investment management and other services to the Portfolios and the ongoing commitment of the Adviser to the Portfolios.

The Board considered other benefits that may be realized by each Subadviser and its affiliates from their relationship with the Trust, including the opportunity to provide advisory services to additional portfolios of the Trust and reputational benefits. The Board concluded that the benefits accruing to the Subadvisers and their affiliates by virtue of the Subadvisers’ relationships to the Portfolios are fair and reasonable in light of the costs of providing investment advisory services to the Portfolios and the ongoing commitment of the Subadvisers to the Portfolios.

The Board considered any possible conflicts of interest in the form of material benefits or detriments to the Trust resulting from the nature of the Trust’s and the Adviser’s or the Subadvisers’ affiliations. Here, the Board considered possible conflicts of interest that may arise between the Trust and the Adviser or a Subadviser in connection with the services provided to the Trust and the various relationships that they and their affiliates may have with the Trust. The Board considered the procedures for monitoring and managing such potential conflicts.

Conclusion. In considering the renewal of each of the Agreements, the Board, including the Independent Trustees, did not identify any single factor as controlling, and each Trustee may have attributed different weights to various factors. The Board evaluated all information available to them on a Portfolio-by-Portfolio basis, and their determinations were made separately with respect to each Portfolio. Based on all of the above-mentioned considerations, and the recommendations of management, the Board, including a majority of the Independent Trustees, determined that approval of the Advisory Agreement and the Sub-Advisory Agreements was in the best interests of each Portfolio. After full consideration of these and other factors, the Board, including a majority of the Independent Trustees, with the assistance of independent counsel, approved the Advisory Agreement and the Sub-Advisory Agreement with respect to each Portfolio.

36

Simplify your life…

with MetLife eDelivery^® while helping MetLife preserve the planet’s natural resources.

(see details on inside cover)

Met Investors Series Trust BlackRock Large Cap Core Portfolio Annual Report December 31, 2009

• get rid of all that paper?

• access important documents whenever you want?

• conveniently receive valuable information online?

Get it all with MetLife eDelivery!

MetLife’s eDelivery service is your resource for electronic delivery of your variable annuity or variable life prospectuses, semiannual and annual reports, and other information. Available to variable product clients of Metropolitan Life Insurance Company, First MetLife Investors Insurance Company, General American Life Insurance Company, MetLife Investors Insurance Company, MetLife Investors USA Insurance Company, MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut and New England Life Insurance Company.*

Why sign up for MetLife eDelivery?

It’s Free** – No cost to enroll or use the service.

It’s Paperless – We’ll email you when your documents are available.

It’s Easy – Enrollment takes just a few minutes.

How do you sign up?

Just type in www.metlife.esourcelink.net to get to MetLife’s online registration form. You will need your policy/account numbers, which can be found on your statements. The form takes only a few minutes to complete. Please note, for jointly owned contracts, both owners will need to register in order to eliminate paper delivery.

  * Not all MetLife products offer eDelivery at this time. ** Your internet provider may impose fees for this service. L0210086208[0911]

Letter from the President

Letter to Policy Holders

February 1, 2010

2009 can best be described as a year of recovery. The year began with the stock market in a broad decline and the economy mired in a deep recession. However, investors’ sentiment improved dramatically during the year as fiscal and monetary authorities took measures to jump start the economy which helped spark a strong market rally in equities and corporate bonds.

The Barclays Capital U.S. Aggregate Bond Index returned 5.9% during 2009. While this was similar to the 5.2% return experienced in 2008, the two years could not have been more different. In 2008, fear drove investors toward the safety of U.S. Treasury securities and away from the risk of corporate bonds, especially those rated below investment grade. In contrast, investors were more willing to embrace risk in 2009. This produced an enormous recovery in below investment grade bonds; the Barclays Capital U.S. Corporate High Yield Index returned over 58% in 2009 after falling 26% in 2008. The Barclays Capital U.S. Treasury Index returned 13.7% in 2008, but declined 3.6% in 2009.

Stock investors also became less pessimistic in 2009. While the stock market indices are still far from the record levels reached in 2007, investors were rewarded in 2009 as stocks returned 26.5% as measured by the Standard & Poor’s 500 Index, its best return since 2003. Foreign stocks, as measured by the MSCI EAFE Index, returned 31.8% during 2009.

On the following pages, you will find a complete review of your Portfolio and its investment performance.

MetLife is committed to building your financial freedom. We appreciate your trust and will continue to focus our efforts on meeting your investment needs.

Sincerely,

Elizabeth M. Forget

President

Met Investors Series Trust

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

BlackRock Large Cap Core Portfolio

Managed by BlackRock Advisors, LLC

Portfolio Manager Commentary*

Performance

During the year ended December 31, 2009, the BlackRock Large Cap Core Portfolio had a return of 19.34%, 19.10% and 19.20% for Class A, B and E Shares, respectively, versus 28.43% for its benchmark, the Russell 1000 Index¹.

Market Environment / Conditions

Following a very difficult 2008, which saw a global financial and economic meltdown that was nearly unprecedented, stocks started in 2009 by falling another 35% in the United States as fears of depression and financial system nationalization gripped investors. From the March 2009 lows, stocks galloped higher as those fears dissipated and as investors witnessed the power of one of the most massive global monetary and fiscal stimuli imaginable begin to reflate economic activity. We have described it as a tug-of-war between the forces of debt-induced deflation and those of policy-induced reflation. While deleveraging and other deflationary forces have not left the scene, consistent and aggressive policy ignited the reflationary process. Calendar year 2009 produced negative real economic growth, weak nominal growth and significant earnings declines. Despite that backdrop, “risk” assets outperformed “safe” assets as sidelined cash (which was producing near-zero returns) moved back into the markets. Emerging markets handily beat developed markets. Inflation fell in most countries, but widespread deflation was avoided. US Treasury rates moved modestly higher as the yield curve steepened. Quality spreads narrowed, while equity markets remained volatile, but ended the year with sharp gains. Financial stocks and other low-quality securities led the way back and information technology (IT) was the standout sector performer. Government spending reached record proportions, and the year ended with cyclical stimulus leading the way and masking structural problems that remain.

Portfolio Review / Current Positioning

The Portfolio’s fundamental orientation, preference for growth visibility and valuation discipline kept it out of many of the high-beta cyclical stocks that outperformed during the year. The re-risking of the market that commenced in March and subsequent outperformance of lower-quality and cyclical industry groups continued into the fourth quarter. As a result, for the period, the Portfolio underperformed the benchmark Russell 1000 Index.

The majority of the Portfolio’s underperformance came from stock selection in consumer discretionary, financials and information technology (IT). Within consumer discretionary, our bias for higher-quality companies hurt during a period in which the market rewarded lower-quality, more cyclically leveraged companies. In financials, our near avoidance of banks was positive, but stock selection in consumer financials, specifically Capital One Financial Corp., detracted. We exited the position by the end of the year. At year-end, we retained our underweight in money center banks and diversified financial companies. Our outlook for financials remains unchanged: there is still too much uncertainty and/or lack of clarity around loan loss provisions and the future business model to justify anything more than an underweight position. With respect to energy, while we still maintain a positive long-term outlook, during the year there was concern about reduced demand caused by the economic slowdown. Our holdings in oil & gas refiners fared poorly as a result. Within consumer discretionary, our bias for higher-quality companies hurt during a period when the market rewarded lower-quality, more cyclically leveraged companies. Finally, many of our resource-based industrial companies fared poorly during this period of weak utility and refinery capital spending.

On the positive side, contributions to performance came from utilities and telecommunication services (telecom). Utilities have generally lagged in the cyclical rally and our underweight helped. Our holdings in telecom were additive, as large telecom firms offer attractive dividend yields supported by likely improving cash flow profiles due to stabilizing capital spending.

We maintain a bias for high quality, favoring companies with premier US and global franchises, balance sheet strength and good earnings visibility. At year-end, we maintain an overweight in healthcare and an underweight in financials. As always, we rely on a disciplined investment process and a belief in the importance of portfolio construction and risk management to strive to deliver consistent outperformance over the long term.

Bob Doll, CFA, CPA

Dan Hanson, CFA

Portfolio Managers

BlackRock Advisors, LLC

*This commentary may include statements that constitute “forward-looking statements” under the U.S. securities laws. Forward-looking statements include, among other things, projections, estimates, and information about possible or future results related to the Portfolio, market or regulatory developments. The views expressed above are not guarantees of future performance or economic results and involve certain risks, uncertainties and assumptions that could cause actual outcomes and results to differ materially from the views expressed herein. The views expressed above are subject to change at any time based upon economic, market, or other conditions and the subadvisory firm undertakes no obligation to update the views expressed herein. Any discussions of specific securities should not be considered a recommendation to buy or sell those securities. The views expressed above (including any forward-looking statement) may not be relied upon as investment advice or as an indication of the Portfolio’s trading intent. Information about the Portfolio’s holdings, asset allocation or country diversification is historical and is not an indication of future Portfolio composition, which may vary. Direct investment in any index is not possible. The performance of any index mentioned in this commentary has not been adjusted for ongoing management, distribution and operating expenses, and sales charges applicable to mutual fund investments. In addition, the returns do not reflect additional fees charged by separate accounts or variable insurance contracts that an investor in the Portfolio may pay. If these additional fees were reflected, performance would have been lower.

1

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

BlackRock Large Cap Core Portfolio

Managed by BlackRock Advisors, LLC

Portfolio Composition as of December 31, 2009

Top Holdings

	Percent of Net Assets
Microsoft Corp.	3.2%
Johnson & Johnson	2.6%
International Business Machines Corp.	2.5%
AT&T, Inc.	2.5%
Exxon Mobil Corp.	2.0%
Oracle Corp.	1.9%
Verizon Communications, Inc.	1.8%
Philip Morris International, Inc.	1.8%
Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. (The)	1.7%
ConocoPhillips Co.	1.7%

Top Sectors

	Percent of Portfolio Market Value
Non-Cyclical	22.0%
Technology	16.0%
Energy	15.7%
Industrials	12.8%
Cyclical	12.1%
Communications	6.3%
Financials	5.0%
Short-Term Investments	4.1%
Basic Materials	2.9%
Utilities	2.2%

2

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

BlackRock Large Cap Core Portfolio

BlackRock Large Cap Core Portfolio managed by

BlackRock Advisors, LLC vs. Russell 1000 Index¹

	Average Annual Return2 (for the year ended 12/31/09)
	1 Year	3 Year	5 Year	10 Year	Since Inception3
BlackRock Large Cap Core Portfolio—Class A	19.34%	-7.21%	0.45%	-2.37%	—
Class B	19.10%	—	—	—	-10.06%
Class E	19.20%	—	—	—	-9.97%
Russell 1000 Index1	28.43%	-5.36%	0.79%	-0.49%	—

The performance of Class A shares will differ from that of the other classes of shares because of the difference in expenses paid by policyholders investing in the different share classes.

¹The Russell 1000 Index is an unmanaged index which measures the performances of the 1,000 largest companies in the Russell 3000 Index, which represents approximately 90% of the investable U.S. equity market.

² “Average Annual Return” is calculated including reinvestment of all income dividends and capital gains distributions.

³Inception of Class A shares is 3/23/1998. Inception of Class B and Class E shares is 4/30/2007.

Past performance does not guarantee future results. The investment return and principal value of an investment in the Portfolio will fluctuate, so that shares, on any given day or when redeemed, may be worth more or less than their original cost. Performance numbers are net of all Portfolio expenses but do not include any insurance, sales, or administration charges of variable annuity or life insurance contracts. If these charges were included, the returns would be lower. The Index does not include fees or expenses and is not available for direct investment.

3

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

BlackRock Large Cap Core Portfolio

Understanding Your Portfolio’s Expenses

Shareholder Expense Example

As a shareholder of the Portfolio, you incur ongoing costs, including management fees; distribution and service (12b-1) fees; and other Portfolio expenses. This example is intended to help you understand your ongoing costs (in dollars) (referred to as “expenses”) of investing in the Portfolio and compare these costs with the ongoing costs of investing in other mutual funds. The example is based on an investment of $1,000 invested at the beginning of the period and held for the entire period, July 1, 2009 through December 31, 2009.

Actual Expenses

The first line for each share class of the Portfolio in the table below provides information about actual account values and actual expenses. You may use the information in this line, together with the amount you invested in the particular share class of the Portfolio, to estimate the expenses that you paid over the period. Simply divide your account value by $1,000 (for example, an $8,600 account value divided by $1,000 = 8.6), then multiply the result by the number in the first line under the heading entitled “Expenses Paid During Period” to estimate the expenses you paid on your account during this period.

Hypothetical Example for Comparison Purposes

The second line for each share class of the Portfolio in the table below provides information about hypothetical account values and hypothetical expenses based on the Portfolio’s actual expense ratio and an assumed rate of return of 5% per year before expenses, which is not the Portfolio’s actual return. The hypothetical account values and expenses may not be used to estimate the actual ending account balance or expenses you paid for the period. You may use this information to compare the ongoing costs of investing in the Portfolio and other funds. To do so, compare this 5% hypothetical example with the 5% hypothetical examples that appear in the shareholder reports of the other funds.

Please note that the expenses shown in the table are meant to highlight your ongoing costs only and do not reflect any fees or charges of your variable insurance product or any additional expenses that participants in certain eligible qualified plans may bear relating to the operations of their plan. Therefore, the second line for each share class in the table is useful in comparing ongoing costs only, and will not help you determine the relative total costs of owning different funds. In addition, if these other costs were included, your costs would have been higher.

	Annualized Expense Ratio	Beginning Account Value 7/1/09		Ending Account Value 12/31/09		Expenses Paid During Period* 7/1/09-12/31/09
Class A
Actual	0.65%	$	1,000.00	$	1,206.80	$	3.62
Hypothetical	0.65%		1,000.00		1,021.93		3.31
Class B
Actual	0.90%	$	1,000.00	$	1,206.30	$	5.00
Hypothetical	0.90%		1,000.00		1,020.67		4.58
Class E
Actual	0.80%	$	1,000.00	$	1,206.50	$	4.45
Hypothetical	0.80%		1,000.00		1,021.17		4.08

* Expenses paid are equal to the Portfolio’s annualized expense ratio for the most recent six month period, as shown above, multiplied by the average account value over the period, multiplied by the number of days (184 days) in the most recent fiscal half-year, divided by 365 (to reflect the one-half year period).

4

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

BlackRock Large Cap Core Portfolio

PORTFOLIO OF INVESTMENTS

December 31, 2009

(Percentage of Net Assets)

Security Description	Shares	Value
Common Stocks - 99.8%
Aerospace & Defense - 5.9%
Goodrich Corp.	180,000	$	11,565,000
ITT Corp.	160,000		7,958,400
L-3 Communications Holdings, Inc.	68,900		5,990,855
Lockheed Martin Corp.	180,000		13,563,000
Northrop Grumman Corp.	224,000		12,510,400
Raytheon Co.	240,000		12,364,800
			63,952,455
Beverages - 0.3%
Coca-Cola Co. (The)	50,000		2,850,000
Biotechnology - 1.5%
Amgen, Inc.*	290,000		16,405,300
Building Products - 0.3%
Lennox International, Inc.	74,000		2,888,960
Capital Markets - 1.7%
Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. (The)	110,000		18,572,400
Chemicals - 1.9%
Celanese Corp., Series A	370,000		11,877,000
CF Industries Holdings, Inc.	50,000		4,539,000
Eastman Chemical Co.(a)	40,000		2,409,600
Valspar Corp. (The)(a)	60,000		1,628,400
			20,454,000
Commercial & Professional Services - 0.4%
Avery Dennison Corp.	60,000		2,189,400
Pitney Bowes, Inc.(a)	98,000		2,230,480
			4,419,880
Commercial Banks - 0.2%
Wells Fargo & Co.	80,000		2,159,200
Communications Equipment - 0.3%
Cisco Systems, Inc.*	130,000		3,112,200
Computers & Peripherals - 4.6%
Apple, Inc.*	40,000		8,434,400
Hewlett-Packard Co.	30,000		1,545,300
International Business Machines Corp.	210,000		27,489,000
Western Digital Corp.*	270,000		11,920,500
			49,389,200
Consumer Finance - 0.3%
Discover Financial Services	190,000		2,794,900
Containers & Packaging - 1.7%
Crown Holdings, Inc.*	430,000		10,999,400
Owens-Illinois, Inc.*	210,000		6,902,700
			17,902,100
Diversified Financial Services - 0.7%
Bank of America Corp.	190,000		2,861,400
JPMorgan Chase & Co.	110,000		4,583,700
			7,445,100

Security Description	Shares	Value
Diversified Telecommunication Services - 4.3%
AT&T, Inc.	960,000	$	26,908,800
Verizon Communications, Inc.	600,000		19,878,000
			46,786,800
Electric Utilities - 0.5%
NV Energy, Inc.	420,000		5,199,600
Electrical Equipment - 0.4%
General Cable Corp.*(a)	140,000		4,118,800
Energy Equipment & Services - 6.2%
Atwood Oceanics, Inc.*	100,000		3,585,000
Diamond Offshore Drilling, Inc.(a)	120,000		11,810,400
ENSCO International Plc (ADR)	241,000		9,625,540
FMC Technologies, Inc.*	60,000		3,470,400
Nabors Industries, Ltd.*	500,000		10,945,000
National-Oilwell Varco, Inc.	290,000		12,786,100
Oceaneering International, Inc.*	150,000		8,778,000
Pride International, Inc.*(a)	99,000		3,159,090
Unit Corp.*	60,000		2,550,000
			66,709,530
Food & Staples Retailing - 0.1%
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.	30,000		1,603,500
Food Products - 1.1%
Archer-Daniels-Midland Co.	390,000		12,210,900
Gas Utilities - 0.6%
ONEOK, Inc.	100,000		4,457,000
UGI Corp.	82,000		1,983,580
			6,440,580
Health Care Providers & Services - 11.5%
Aetna, Inc.	370,000		11,729,000
Community Health Systems, Inc.*(a)	190,000		6,764,000
Coventry Health Care, Inc.*	239,000		5,805,310
Health Management Associates, Inc. - Class A*	1,110,000		8,069,700
Health Net, Inc.*	440,000		10,247,600
Humana, Inc.*	270,000		11,850,300
Lincare Holdings, Inc.*(a)	80,000		2,969,600
McKesson Corp.	180,000		11,250,000
Medco Health Solutions, Inc.*	220,000		14,060,200
Tenet Healthcare Corp.*	1,820,000		9,809,800
UnitedHealth Group, Inc.	470,000		14,325,600
Universal Health Services, Inc. - Class B	120,000		3,660,000
WellPoint, Inc.*	230,000		13,406,700
			123,947,810
Health Care Technology - 0.2%
IMS Health, Inc.	90,000		1,895,400
Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure - 0.9%
Brinker International, Inc.	650,000		9,698,000

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

5

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

BlackRock Large Cap Core Portfolio

PORTFOLIO OF INVESTMENTS - continued

December 31, 2009

(Percentage of Net Assets)

Security Description	Shares	Value
Household Durables - 0.7%
Garmin, Ltd.(a)	263,000	$	8,074,100
Household Products - 0.8%
Kimberly-Clark Corp.	30,000		1,911,300
Procter & Gamble Co. (The)	120,000		7,275,600
			9,186,900
Industrial Conglomerates - 2.1%
3M Co.	200,000		16,534,000
General Electric Co.	380,000		5,749,400
			22,283,400
Insurance - 2.3%
Chubb Corp. (The)	240,000		11,803,200
Travelers Cos., Inc. (The)	270,000		13,462,200
			25,265,400
Internet Software & Services - 1.9%
Google, Inc.-Class A*	10,000		6,199,800
IAC/InterActiveCorp. - Class B*(a)	170,000		3,481,600
VeriSign, Inc.*	470,000		11,392,800
			21,074,200
IT Services - 4.0%
Cognizant Technology Solutions Corp. - Class A*	270,000		12,231,000
Computer Sciences Corp.*	210,900		12,133,077
Fiserv, Inc.*	150,000		7,272,000
Western Union Co. (The)	605,000		11,404,250
			43,040,327
Machinery - 2.3%
Flowserve Corp.	110,000		10,398,300
Joy Global, Inc.	210,000		10,833,900
SPX Corp.	70,000		3,829,000
			25,061,200
Metals & Mining - 1.0%
Walter Energy, Inc.	140,000		10,543,400
Multi-Utilities - 1.2%
CMS Energy Corp.(a)	431,000		6,749,460
NiSource, Inc.	380,000		5,844,400
			12,593,860
Multiline Retail - 5.2%
Dollar Tree, Inc.*	120,000		5,796,000
Kohl’s Corp.*	230,000		12,403,900
Macy’s, Inc.	680,000		11,396,800
Nordstrom, Inc.	310,000		11,649,800
Target Corp.	300,000		14,511,000
			55,757,500
Oil, Gas & Consumable Fuels - 10.1%
Chevron Corp.	230,000		17,707,700
ConocoPhillips Co.	350,000		17,874,500

Security Description	Shares	Value
Oil, Gas & Consumable Fuels - continued
Exxon Mobil Corp.	320,000	$	21,820,800
Marathon Oil Corp.	410,000		12,800,200
Murphy Oil Corp.	10,000		542,000
Peabody Energy Corp.	260,000		11,754,600
Tesoro Corp.(a)	593,000		8,035,150
Williams Cos., Inc. (The)	270,000		5,691,600
XTO Energy, Inc.	290,000		13,493,700
			109,720,250
Paper & Forest Products - 1.1%
International Paper Co.	460,000		12,318,800
Personal Products - 1.0%
Estee Lauder Cos., Inc. (The) - Class A	230,000		11,122,800
Pharmaceuticals - 3.6%
Forest Laboratories, Inc.*	70,000		2,247,700
Johnson & Johnson	430,000		27,696,300
Mylan, Inc.*(a)	300,000		5,529,000
Pfizer, Inc.	220,000		4,001,800
			39,474,800
Semiconductors & Semiconductor Equipment - 1.2%
Texas Instruments, Inc.	520,000		13,551,200
Software - 7.5%
BMC Software, Inc.*	290,000		11,629,000
CA, Inc.	498,000		11,185,080
Microsoft Corp.	1,130,000		34,453,700
Oracle Corp.	840,000		20,613,600
Sybase, Inc.*(a)	72,000		3,124,800
			81,006,180
Specialty Retail - 6.4%
Advance Auto Parts, Inc.	270,000		10,929,600
AutoNation, Inc.*(a)	310,000		5,936,500
Best Buy Co., Inc.	120,000		4,735,200
Gap, Inc. (The)	580,000		12,151,000
Guess?, Inc.	30,000		1,269,000
Limited Brands, Inc.	610,000		11,736,400
Ross Stores, Inc.	240,000		10,250,400
TJX Cos., Inc. (The)	340,000		12,427,000
			69,435,100
Tobacco - 1.8%
Philip Morris International, Inc.	400,000		19,276,000
Total Common Stocks (Cost $959,405,878)			1,079,742,032
Short-Term Investments - 4.2%
Mutual Funds - 4.0%
State Street Navigator Securities Lending Prime Portfolio(b)	42,966,426		42,966,426

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

6

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

BlackRock Large Cap Core Portfolio

PORTFOLIO OF INVESTMENTS - continued

December 31, 2009

(Percentage of Net Assets)

Security Description	Par Amount		Value
Repurchase Agreement - 0.2%
Fixed Income Clearing Corp., Repurchase Agreement, dated 12/31/2009 at 0.005% to be repurchased at $2,658,001 on 01/04/10 collateralized by $2,665,000 Federal National Mortgage Association at 2.750% due 03/13/14 with a value of $2,711,638	$	2,658,000	$	2,658,000
Total Short-Term Investments (Cost $45,624,426)				45,624,426
Total Investments - 104.0% (Cost $1,005,030,304)				1,125,366,458
Other Assets and Liabilities (net) - (4.0)%				(43,472,695	)
Net Assets - 100.0%			$	1,081,893,763

* Non-income producing security.

(a) All or a portion of security is on loan.

(b) Represents investment of collateral received from securities lending transactions.

ADR - An American Depositary Receipt is a certificate issued by a custodian bank representing the right to receive securities of the foreign issuer described. Trading on exchanges not located in the United States or Canada significantly influences the value of ADRs.

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

7

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

BlackRock Large Cap Core Portfolio

Various inputs are used in determining the value of the Portfolio’s investments, which are as follows:

Level 1—adjusted quoted prices in active markets for identical investments

Level 2—other significant observable inputs (including, but not limited to: quoted prices for similar investments in markets that are both active or inactive; inputs other than quoted prices that are observable such as interest rates, yield curves, credit risks, default rates, etc.)

Level 3—significant unobservable inputs based on the best information available in the circumstances, to the extent observable inputs are unavailable (including the Portfolio’s own assumptions in determining the fair value of investments)

The inputs or methodology used for valuing investments are not necessarily an indication of the risk associated with investing in them. For information about the Portfolio’s policy regarding valuation of investments and other significant accounting policies, please refer to Note 2 of the Notes to Financial Statements.

The following table summarizes the inputs used in determining the value the Portfolio’s investments as of December 31, 2009:

ASSETS VALUATION INPUTS

Description	Level 1		Level 2		Level 3		Total
Total Common Stocks*	$	1,079,742,032	$	—	$	—	$	1,079,742,032
Short-Term Investments
Mutual Funds		42,966,426		—		—		42,966,426
Repurchase Agreement		—		2,658,000		—		2,658,000
Total Short-Term Investments		42,966,426		2,658,000		—		45,624,426
TOTAL INVESTMENTS	$	1,122,708,458	$	2,658,000	$	—	$	1,125,366,458

* See Portfolio of Investments for additional detailed categorizations.

Level 3 Reconciliation Disclosure

Following is a reconciliation of Level 3 assets for which significant unobservable inputs were used to determine fair value:

Investments in Securities	Balance as of December 31, 2008		Realized Gain		Change in Unrealized Depreciation			Net Purchases			Balance as of December 31, 2009
Escrowed Shares
Computers & Peripherals	$	27	$	2,776	$	(27	)	$	(2,776	)	$	—
Total	$	27	$	2,776	$	(27	)	$	(2,776	)	$	—

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

8

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

BlackRock Large Cap Core Portfolio

Statement of Assets and Liabilities

December 31, 2009

Assets
Investments at value (a)(b)	$	1,122,708,458
Repurchase Agreement		2,658,000
Cash		112
Receivable for shares sold		140,169
Dividends receivable		691,285
Total assets		1,126,198,024
Liabilities
Payables for:
Shares redeemed		659,036
Collateral for securities loaned		42,966,426
Accrued Expenses:
Management fees		540,767
Distribution and service fees - Class B		11,834
Distribution and service fees - Class E		12,926
Administration fees		6,056
Custodian and accounting fees		3,630
Deferred trustees’ fees		7,518
Other expenses		96,068
Total liabilities		44,304,261
Net Assets	$	1,081,893,763
Net Assets Represented by
Paid in surplus	$	1,619,687,068
Accumulated net realized loss		(672,108,304	)
Unrealized appreciation on investments		120,336,154
Undistributed net investment income		13,978,845
Net Assets	$	1,081,893,763
Net Assets
Class A	$	923,500,532
Class B		56,578,858
Class E		101,814,373
Capital Shares Outstanding
Class A		118,083,672
Class B		7,328,674
Class E		13,102,298
Net Asset Value, Offering Price and Redemption Price Per Share
Class A	$	7.82
Class B		7.72
Class E		7.77

(a) Identified cost of investments, excluding repurchase agreement, was $1,002,372,304.

(b) Includes securities loaned at value of $44,807,426.

Statement of Operations

For the Year Ended December 31, 2009

Investment Income
Dividends	$	20,608,213
Interest (a)		259,036
Total investment income		20,867,249
Expenses
Management fees		6,084,513
Administration fees		78,249
Custodian and accounting fees		81,593
Distribution and service fees - Class B		104,876
Distribution and service fees - Class E		139,774
Audit and tax services		30,681
Legal		35,796
Trustees’ fees and expenses		22,763
Shareholder reporting		274,527
Insurance		17,654
Miscellaneous		17,935
Total expenses		6,888,361
Net investment income		13,978,888
Net Realized and Unrealized Gain (Loss) on Investments
Net realized loss on investments		(194,294,038	)
Net change in unrealized appreciation on investments		349,327,119
Net realized and unrealized gain on investments		155,033,081
Net Increase in Net Assets from Operations	$	169,011,969

(a) Includes net income on securities loaned of $258,886.

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

9

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

BlackRock Large Cap Core Portfolio

Statements of Changes in Net Assets

	Year Ended December 31, 2009			Year Ended December 31, 2008
Increase (Decrease) in Net Assets:
Operations
Net investment income	$	13,978,888		$	18,488,315
Net realized loss on investments		(194,294,038	)		(264,666,275	)
Net change in unrealized appreciation (depreciation) on investments		349,327,119			(468,385,956	)
Net increase (decrease) in net assets resulting from operations		169,011,969			(714,563,916	)
Distributions to Shareholders
From net investment income
Class A		(16,652,014	)		(9,674,115	)
Class B		(520,566	)		(208,807	)
Class E		(1,315,679	)		(808,522	)
From net realized gains
Class A		—			(63,194,324	)
Class B		—			(1,856,247	)
Class E		—			(6,473,762	)
Net decrease in net assets resulting from distributions		(18,488,259	)		(82,215,777	)
Capital Share Transactions
Proceeds from shares sold
Class A		19,180,334			139,429,006
Class B		20,703,271			12,084,131
Class E		13,069,964			40,230,320
Net asset value of shares issued through dividend reinvestment
Class A		16,652,014			72,868,439
Class B		520,566			2,065,054
Class E		1,315,679			7,282,284
Cost of shares repurchased
Class A		(280,520,350	)		(179,486,847	)
Class B		(6,348,716	)		(7,229,511	)
Class E		(24,498,254	)		(61,726,745	)
Net increase (decrease) in net assets from capital share transactions		(239,925,492	)		25,516,131
Net Decrease in Net Assets		(89,401,782	)		(771,263,562	)
Net assets at beginning of period		1,171,295,545			1,942,559,107
Net assets at end of period	$	1,081,893,763		$	1,171,295,545
Undistributed net investment income at end of period	$	13,978,845		$	18,488,216

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

10

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

BlackRock Large Cap Core Portfolio

Financial Highlights

Selected Per Share Data for the Years or Period Ended:
	Class A
	For the Years Ended December 31,
	2009			2008			2007			2006			2005
Net Asset Value, Beginning of Period	$	6.67		$	11.14		$	11.20		$	10.14		$	9.05
Income Gain (Loss) from Investment Operations
Net investment income(a)		0.09			0.11			0.09			0.05			0.02
Net realized/unrealized gain (loss) on investments		1.17			(4.10	)		0.63			1.37			1.07
Total from investment operations		1.26			(3.99	)		0.72			1.42			1.09
Less Distributions
Dividends from net investment income		(0.11	)		(0.06	)		(0.08	)		(0.02	)		—
Distributions from net realized capital gains		—			(0.42	)		(0.70	)		(0.34	)		—
Total distributions		(0.11	)		(0.48	)		(0.78	)		(0.36	)		—
Net Asset Value, End of Period	$	7.82		$	6.67		$	11.14		$	11.20		$	10.14
Total Return		19.34	%		(37.17	)%		6.55	%		14.25	%		12.04	%
Ratio of expenses to average net assets after reimbursement		0.65	%		0.62	%		0.64	%		0.98	%		0.91	%
Ratio of expenses to average net assets before reimbursement and rebates		0.65	%		0.62	%		0.65	%(c)		1.04	%		0.91	%
Ratio of net investment income to average net assets		1.39	%		1.20	%		0.83	%		0.48	%		0.23	%
Portfolio turnover rate		130.4	%		102.8	%		87.3	%		72.2	%		79.0	%
Net assets, end of period (in millions)	$	923.5		$	1,041.2		$	1,716.0		$	131.0		$	131.0

	Class B
	For the Years Ended December 31,
	2009			2008			2007(b)
Net Asset Value, Beginning of Period	$	6.58		$	11.01		$	10.91
Income Gain (Loss) from Investment Operations
Net investment income(a)		0.07			0.08			0.04
Net realized/unrealized gain (loss) on investments		1.16			(4.04	)		0.06
Total from investment operations		1.23			(3.96	)		0.10
Less Distributions
Dividends from net investment income		(0.09	)		(0.05	)		—
Distributions from net realized capital gains		—			(0.42	)		—
Total distributions		(0.09	)		(0.47	)		—
Net Asset Value, End of Period	$	7.72		$	6.58		$	11.01
Total Return		19.10	%		(37.36	)%		0.92	%
Ratio of expenses to average net assets after reimbursement		0.90	%		0.87	%		0.89	%*
Ratio of expenses to average net assets before reimbursement and rebates		0.90	%		0.87	%		0.89	%*(c)
Ratio of net investment income to average net assets		1.11	%		0.96	%		0.58	%*
Portfolio turnover rate		130.4	%		102.8	%		87.3	%
Net assets, end of period (in millions)	$	56.6		$	33.5		$	47.0

Please see following page for Financial Highlights footnote legend.

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

11

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

BlackRock Large Cap Core Portfolio

Financial Highlights

Selected Per Share Data for the Years or Period Ended:
	Class E
	For the Years Ended December 31,
	2009			2008			2007(b)
Net Asset Value, Beginning of Period	$	6.62		$	11.07		$	10.96
Income Gain (Loss) from Investment Operations
Net investment income(a)		0.08			0.09			0.05
Net realized/unrealized gain (loss) on investments		1.16			(4.07	)		0.06
Total from investment operations		1.24			(3.98	)		0.11
Less Distributions
Dividends from net investment income		(0.09	)		(0.05	)		—
Distributions from net realized capital gains		—			(0.42	)		—
Total distributions		(0.09	)		(0.47	)		—
Net Asset Value, End of Period	$	7.77		$	6.62		$	11.07
Total Return		19.20	%		(37.30	)%		1.00	%
Ratio of expenses to average net assets after reimbursement		0.80	%		0.77	%		0.79	%*
Ratio of expenses to average net assets before reimbursement and rebates		0.80	%		0.77	%		0.79	%*(c)
Ratio of net investment income to average net assets		1.23	%		1.04	%		0.69	%*
Portfolio turnover rate		130.4	%		102.8	%		87.3	%
Net assets, end of period (in millions)	$	101.8		$	96.6		$	179.6

* Annualized

(a) Per share amounts based on average shares outstanding during the period.

(b) Commencement of operations—04/30/2007.

(c) Excludes effect of deferred expense reimbursement.

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

12

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

BlackRock Large Cap Core Portfolio

Notes to Financial Statements—December 31, 2009

1. Organization

Met Investors Series Trust (the “Trust”) is registered as an open-end management investment company under the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended (the “1940 Act”). The Trust currently offers forty-eight Portfolios (the “Portfolios”), each of which operates as a distinct investment vehicle of the Trust. The portfolio included in this report is BlackRock Large Cap Core Portfolio (the “Portfolio”), which is diversified. Shares in the Trust are not offered directly to the general public and are currently available only to separate accounts established by certain affiliated life insurance companies.

The Trust is managed by MetLife Advisers, LLC (the “Manager”), an affiliate of MetLife, Inc.

The Trust has registered four classes of shares: Class A, B, C and E Shares. Class A, B, and E Shares are currently offered by the Portfolio. Shares of each Class of the Portfolio represent an equal pro rata interest in the Portfolio and generally give the shareholder the same voting, dividend, liquidation, and other rights. Investment income, realized and unrealized capital gains and losses, the common expenses of the Portfolio and certain Portfolio-level expense reductions, if any, are allocated on a pro rata basis to each Class based on the relative net assets of each Class to the net assets of the Portfolio. Each Class of shares differs in its respective distribution expenses.

2. Significant Accounting Policies

The financial statements have been prepared in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (“GAAP”) which require management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of income and expenses during the reporting period. Actual results could differ from these estimates.

The following is a summary of significant accounting policies consistently followed by the Trust in the preparation of its financial statements.

Valuation - Equity securities for which the primary market is on a domestic exchange (except the NASDAQ) will be valued at the last sale price on the day of valuation or, if there was no sale that day, at the last reported bid price, using prices as of the close of trading. Equity securities traded over-the-counter and quoted on NASDAQ are valued at the NASDAQ Official Closing Price. Equity securities not quoted on NASDAQ that are actively traded in the over-the-counter market, including listed securities for which the primary market is believed to be over-the-counter, will be valued at the most recently quoted bid price provided by the principal market makers. Short positions traded in the OTC market are valued at the last available ask price.

Debt securities (other than short term obligations with a remaining maturity of sixty days or less) are generally valued on the basis of evaluated or composite bid quotations obtained by independent pricing services and/or brokers and dealers selected by the relevant adviser pursuant to authorization of the Board of Trustees (the “Board”). Such quotations take into account appropriate factors such as trading in similar groups of securities, yield, quality, coupon rate, maturity, type of issue, trading characteristics and other data. Short term obligations with a remaining maturity of sixty days or less are valued at amortized cost which approximates fair market value.

Financial futures contracts and options thereon, which are traded on exchanges, are valued at their closing prices as of the close of such exchanges. Exchange traded options are valued at the mean price. Swap agreements and options traded in the over the counter (“OTC”) market are valued based upon quoted fair valuations received daily by the Portfolio from a pricing service or counterparty. Forward currency exchange contracts are valued daily at forward foreign currency exchange rates. Investments in mutual funds are valued at the daily net asset value (“NAV”) of the mutual fund.

The Portfolio has retained a third party pricing service to fair value its equity investments that are traded principally on a foreign exchange or market which closes prior to the Portfolio’s time of valuation. The fair value of each security that is traded principally on an exchange or market outside of the United States generally is calculated by applying a valuation factor provided by the third party pricing service to the last sales price for that security, or, if there is no reported sale during the day, the last reported bid price for that security.

If market values are not readily available, or if available market quotations are not reliable, securities are priced at their fair value as determined by the Manager using procedures approved by the Board. The Portfolio may use fair value pricing if the value of a security has been materially affected by events occurring before the Portfolio’s calculation of NAV but after the close of the primary markets on which the security is traded. The Portfolio may also use fair value pricing if reliable market quotations are unavailable due to infrequent trading or if trading in a particular security was halted during the day and did not resume prior to the Portfolio’s calculation of NAV.

Security Transactions - Security transactions are recorded on a trade date basis. Realized gains and losses on investments and unrealized appreciation and depreciation are determined on the identified cost basis, which is the same basis used for federal income tax purposes. The Portfolio may purchase and sell securities on a “when-issued” or “delayed delivery” basis, with settlement to occur at a later date. The value of the security so purchased is subject to market fluctuations during this period. The Portfolio segregates assets having an aggregate value at least equal to the amount of the when-issued or delayed delivery purchase commitments until payment is made.

13

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

BlackRock Large Cap Core Portfolio

Notes to Financial Statements—December 31, 2009—(Continued)

2. Significant Accounting Policies - continued

Investment Income and Expenses - Interest income is recorded on an accrual basis. Discounts and premiums on securities purchased are amortized over the lives of the respective securities. Dividend income is recorded on the ex-dividend date. Foreign dividend income is recorded on the ex-dividend date or as soon as practicable after the Portfolio has determined the existence of a dividend declaration after exercising reasonable due diligence. Foreign income and foreign capital gains on some foreign securities may be subject to foreign withholding taxes, which are accrued as applicable.

Income Taxes - It is the Portfolio’s policy to comply with the requirements of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”), and regulations thereunder, applicable to regulated investment companies and to distribute, with respect to each taxable year, all of its taxable income to shareholders. Therefore, no federal income tax provision is required. The Portfolio files U.S. Federal and various state tax returns. No income tax returns are currently under examination. The Portfolio’s federal tax returns for the prior three fiscal years remain subject to examination by the Internal Revenue Service.

Dividends and Distributions to Shareholders - The Portfolio records dividends and distributions on the ex-dividend date. Net realized gains from security transactions (if any) are generally distributed annually to shareholders. The timing and characterization of certain income and capital gains distributions are determined in accordance with federal tax regulations that may differ from GAAP. Permanent book and tax basis differences relating to shareholder distributions will result in reclassification between under/over distributed net investment income, accumulated net realized gains/losses and paid in surplus. Book-tax differences are primarily due to futures transactions, foreign currency transactions, certain foreign withholding taxes, passive foreign investment companies (PFIC), partnerships, deferred trustees compensation, capital loss carryforwards and losses deferred due to wash sales, as applicable. These adjustments have no impact on net assets or the results of operations.

Securities Lending - The Portfolio may lend its securities to certain qualified brokers who borrow securities in order to complete certain transactions. By lending its investment securities, the Portfolio attempts to increase its net investment income through the receipt of income on the loan. Any gain or loss in the market price of the securities loaned that might occur and any interest earned or dividends declared during the term of the loan would accrue to the account of the Portfolio.

Upon entering into a securities lending transaction, the Portfolio receives cash or other securities as collateral in an amount equal to or exceeding 102% of the current market value of the loaned securities (105% for foreign equity securities). Any cash received as collateral is generally invested by State Street Bank and Trust Company, acting in its capacity as securities lending agent (the “Agent”), in the State Street Navigator Securities Lending Prime Portfolio, which is a money market fund registered under the 1940 Act. A portion of net income (income after the deduction of expenses and fees of the Navigator Securities Lending Prime Portfolio) on the collateral is rebated to the borrower of the securities and the remainder is split between the Agent and the Portfolio. On loans collateralized by U.S. Treasuries, a fee is received from the borrower and is allocated between the Portfolio and the Agent. Risks of delay in recovery of the securities or even loss of rights in the collateral may occur should the borrower of the securities fail financially. Risks may also arise to the extent that the value of the collateral decreases below the value of the securities loaned.

Repurchase Agreements - The Portfolio may enter into repurchase agreements with selected commercial banks and broker-dealers, under which the Portfolio acquires securities as collateral and agrees to resell the securities at an agreed upon time and at an agreed upon price. The Portfolio accrues interest for the difference between the amount it pays for the securities and the amount it receives upon resale. At the time the Portfolio enters into a repurchase agreement, the value of the collateral securities including accrued interest will be equal to or exceed the value of the repurchase agreement and, for repurchase agreements that mature in more than one day, the seller will agree that the value of the collateral securities including accrued interest will continue to be at least equal to the value of the repurchase agreement.

3. Investment Management Agreement and Other Transactions with Affiliates

Investment Management Agreement - The Trust has entered into a management agreement with the Manager (the “Management Agreement”) for investment management services in connection with the investment management of the Portfolio. The Manager is subject to the supervision and direction of the Board and has overall responsibility for the general management and administration of the Trust. The Manager has entered into an advisory agreement with BlackRock Advisors, LLC (the “Adviser”) for investment advisory services in connection with the investment management of the Portfolio.

Subject to the supervision and direction of the Board, the Manager supervises the Adviser and has full discretion with respect to the retention or renewal of the advisory agreement. The Manager pays the Adviser a fee based on the Portfolio’s average daily net assets.

14

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

BlackRock Large Cap Core Portfolio

Notes to Financial Statements—December 31, 2009—(Continued)

3. Investment Management Agreement and Other Transactions with Affiliates - continued

Under the terms of the Portfolio’s Management Agreement, the Portfolio pays the Manager a monthly fee based upon annual rates applied to the Portfolio’s average daily net assets as follows:

Management Fees earned by the Manager for the period ended December 31, 2009	% per annum		Average Daily Net Assets
$6,084,513	0.625	%	First $250 Million
	0.60	%	$250 Million to $500 Million
	0.575	%	$500 Million to $1 Billion
	0.55	%	$1 Billion to $2 Billion
	0.50	%	Over $2 Billion

Transfer Agency Agreement - Metropolitan Life Insurance Company (“MLIC”) serves as the transfer agent for the Trust. MLIC is an affiliate of the Manager. MLIC receives no fees for its services to the Trust under the transfer agency agreement.

Distribution Agreements and Plans - The Trust has distribution agreements with MetLife Investors Distribution Company (“MIDC” or the “Distributor”) in which MIDC serves as the Distributor for the Trust’s Class A, Class B and Class E Shares. MIDC is a wholly-owned subsidiary of MetLife Investors Group, Inc., an affiliate of the Manager. The Class B and Class E distribution plans provide that the Trust, on behalf of the Portfolio, may pay annually up to 0.50% and 0.25%, respectively, of the average net assets of the Portfolio attributable to its Class B and Class E Shares in respect to activities primarily intended to result in the sale of Class B and Class E Shares. However, under the Class B and Class E distribution agreements, payments to the Distributor for activities pursuant to the Class B and Class E distribution plans are currently limited to payments at an annual rate equal to 0.25% and 0.15% of average daily net assets of the Portfolio attributable to its Class B and Class E Shares, respectively.

Under the terms of the Class B and Class E distribution plans and distribution agreements, the Portfolio is authorized to make payments monthly to the Distributor that may be used to pay or reimburse entities providing distribution and shareholder servicing with respect to the Class B and Class E Shares for such entities’ fees or expenses incurred.

Deferred Trustee Compensation - Each Trustee of the Trust who is not currently an employee of the Manager or any of its affiliates receives compensation from the Trust for his or her service to the Portfolio. A deferred compensation plan (the “Plan”) is available to the Trustees on a voluntary basis. Deferred amounts remain in the Trust until distributed in accordance with the provisions of the Plan. The value of a participating Trustee’s deferral account is based on theoretical investments of deferred amounts, on the normal payment dates, in certain portfolios of the Trust or Metropolitan Series Fund, Inc. as designated by the participating Trustee. Changes in the value of participants’ deferral accounts are reflected as Trustees’ fees and expenses in the Statement of Operations. The portion of the accrued obligations allocated to the Portfolio, if any, under the Plan are reflected as Deferred Trustees’ fees in the Statement of Assets and Liabilities.

4. Shares of Beneficial Interest

Transactions in shares of beneficial interest for the periods ended noted below were as follows:

	Beginning Shares	Sales	Reinvestments	Redemptions		Net Increase (Decrease) in Shares Outstanding		Ending Shares
Class A
12/31/2009	156,190,742	3,037,097	2,720,917	(43,865,084	)	(38,107,070	)	118,083,672
12/31/2008	154,054,548	15,269,290	7,435,555	(20,568,651	)	2,136,194		156,190,742
Class B
12/31/2009	5,096,495	3,090,162	85,902	(943,885	)	2,232,179		7,328,674
12/31/2008	4,269,640	1,435,421	213,112	(821,678	)	826,855		5,096,495
Class E
12/31/2009	14,594,518	1,997,377	216,039	(3,705,636	)	(1,492,220	)	13,102,298
12/31/2008	16,227,601	4,287,279	747,667	(6,668,029	)	(1,633,083	)	14,594,518

The Portfolio is authorized to issue an unlimited number of shares.

15

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

BlackRock Large Cap Core Portfolio

Notes to Financial Statements—December 31, 2009—(Continued)

5. Investment Transactions

Aggregate cost of purchases and proceeds of sales of investment securities, excluding short-term securities, for the period ended December 31, 2009 were as follows:

Purchases			Sales
U.S. Government	Non-Government		U.S. Government		Non-Government
$—	$	1,326,836,370	$	—	$	1,495,477,594

At December 31, 2009, the cost of securities for federal income tax purposes and the unrealized appreciation (depreciation) of investments for federal income tax purposes for the Portfolio were as follows:

Federal Income Tax Cost	Gross Unrealized Appreciation	Gross Unrealized Depreciation	Net Unrealized Appreciation
$1,042,535,124	$138,734,902	$(55,903,568)	$	82,831,334

6. Securities Lending

As of December 31, 2009, the Portfolio had loaned securities which were collateralized by short-term investments. The value of securities loaned and the value of the related collateral were as follows:

Value of Securities	Value of Cash Collateral		Value of Non-Cash Collateral*		Total Collateral
$44,807,426	$	42,966,426	$	3,043,681	$	46,010,107

* The Portfolio cannot repledge or resell this collateral. The non-cash collateral is typically comprised of government securities and/or bank letters of credit.

7. Contractual Obligations

The Trust has a variety of indemnification obligations under contracts with its service providers. The Trust’s maximum exposure under these arrangements is unknown. However, the Trust has not had prior claims or losses pursuant to these contracts and expects the risk of loss to be remote.

8. Market, Credit and Counterparty Risk

In the normal course of business, the Portfolio invests in securities and enters into transactions where risks exist due to fluctuations in the market (market risk) or failure of the other party to a transaction to perform (credit risk). The value of securities held by the Portfolio may decline in response to certain events, including those directly involving the companies whose securities are owned by the Portfolio; conditions affecting the general economy; overall market changes; local, regional or global political, social or economic instability; and currency and interest rate and price fluctuations. The Portfolio may be exposed to counterparty risk, or the risk that an entity with which the Portfolio has unsettled or open transactions may default. The potential loss could exceed the value of the financial assets recorded in the financial statements. Financial assets, which potentially expose the Portfolio to credit risk, consist principally of cash due from counterparties and investments. The Portfolio restricts its exposure to credit losses by entering into master agreements with counterparties (approved brokers) with whom it undertakes a significant volume of transactions to include certain safeguards for derivatives and non-standard settlement trades. The credit risk associated with favorable contracts is reduced by a master netting arrangement to the extent that if an event of default occurs, all amounts with the counterparty are terminated and settled on a net basis. The Portfolio’s overall exposure to credit risk on derivative instruments subject to master netting arrangements can change substantially within a short period, as it is affected by each transaction subject to the arrangement.

9. Income Tax Information

The tax character of distributions paid for the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2008 were as follows:

Ordinary Income			Long-Term Capital Gain				Total
2009	2008		2009		2008		2009		2008
$18,488,259	$	10,691,484	$	—	$	71,524,293	$	18,488,259	$	82,215,777

16

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

BlackRock Large Cap Core Portfolio

Notes to Financial Statements—December 31, 2009—(Continued)

9. Income Tax Information - continued

As of December 31, 2009, the components of distributable earnings (accumulated losses) on a federal income tax basis were as follows:

Undistributed Ordinary Income	Undistributed Long-Term Gain	Net Unrealized Appreciation		Loss Carryforwards			Total
$13,986,363	$—	$	82,831,334	$	(634,603,484	)	$	(537,785,787	)

The Portfolio utilizes the provisions of the federal income tax laws that provide for the carryforward of capital losses for eight years, offsetting such losses against any future net realized capital gains. At December 31, 2009, the accumulated capital loss carryforwards and expiration dates by the Portfolio were as follows:

Expiring 12/31/2010	Expiring 12/31/2011			Expiring 12/31/2016		Expiring 12/31/2017		Total
$193,572,807*	$	14,588,867	*	$	219,324,203	$	207,117,607	$	634,603,484

* On May 1, 2006, the BlackRock Large Cap Core Portfolio, a series of The Travelers Series Trust, was reorganized into the BlackRock Large Cap Core Portfolio, a series of Met Investors Series Trust. The Portfolio acquired capital losses which are subject to an annual limitation of $5,495,892.

10. Recent Accounting Pronouncement

On January 21, 2010, the Financial Accounting Standards Board issued Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) 2010-06, “Improving Disclosures About Fair Value Measurements.” The ASU amends Accounting Standards Codification 820 to add new requirements for disclosures about transfers into and out of Levels 1 and 2. It also clarifies existing fair value disclosures about the level of disaggregation and about inputs and valuation techniques used to measure fair value. Additionally, the ASU amends disclosures about providing purchases, sales, issuances, and settlements on a gross basis relating to Level 3 measurements. The ASU guidance is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2009, and for interim periods within those fiscal years, except for the requirement to provide the Level 3 activity of purchases, sales, issuances, and settlements on a gross basis, which will be effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2010, and for interim periods within those fiscal years. Management is currently evaluating the impact the adoption of ASU 2010-06 will have on the Portfolio’s financial statements.

11. Subsequent Events

Management’s evaluation of the impact of all subsequent events on the Portfolio’s financial statements was completed through February 25, 2010, the date the financial statements were issued, and management has determined that as of that date there were no subsequent events requiring adjustments or disclosure in the Portfolio’s financial statements.

17

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

BlackRock Large Cap Core Portfolio

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

To the Shareholders and Board of Trustees of Met Investors Series Trust:

We have audited the accompanying statement of assets and liabilities, including the portfolio of investments, of the BlackRock Large Cap Core Portfolio, one of the portfolios constituting Met Investors Series Trust (the “Trust”), as of December 31, 2009, and the related statement of operations for the year then ended, the statements of changes in net assets for each of the two years in the period then ended, and the financial highlights for each of the five years in the period then ended. These financial statements and financial highlights are the responsibility of the Trust’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements and financial highlights based on our audits.

We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements and financial highlights are free of material misstatement. The Trust is not required to have, nor were we engaged to perform, an audit of its internal control over financial reporting. Our audits included consideration of internal control over financial reporting as a basis for designing audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the Trust’s internal control over financial reporting. Accordingly, we express no such opinion. An audit also includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements, assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. Our procedures included confirmation of securities owned as of December 31, 2009, by correspondence with the custodian. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.

In our opinion, the financial statements and financial highlights referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of the BlackRock Large Cap Core Portfolio of Met Investors Series Trust as of December 31, 2009, the results of its operations for the year then ended, the changes in its net assets for each of the two years in the period then ended, and the financial highlights for each of the five years in the period then ended, in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.

Deloitte & Touche LLP

Boston, Massachusetts

February 25, 2010

18

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Trustees and Officers (Unaudited) December 31, 2009

The Trustees and executive officers of the Trust, their ages and their principal occupations during the past five years are set forth below. Unless otherwise indicated, the business address of each is 5 Park Plaza, Suite 1900 Irvine, California 92614. Each Trustee who is deemed an “interested person,” as such term is defined in the 1940 Act, is indicated by an asterisk. Those Trustees who are not “interested persons” as defined in the 1940 Act are referred to as “Independent Trustees.” Additional information about the Trustees is available in the Statement of Additional Information which is available without charge, upon request, by calling (800) 848-3854.

The Trustees
Name and Age	Position(s) Held with Registrant	Term of Office and Length of Time Served	Principal Occupation(s) During Past 5 Years	Number of Portfolios in Fund Complex+ overseen by Trustee	Other Directorships Held by Trustee
Interested Trustees
Elizabeth M. Forget* (43)	President and Trustee	Indefinite; From December 2000 to present	Since May 2007, Senior Vice President, MetLife, Inc.; since December 2000, President of MetLife Advisers, LLC and its predecessor; December 2003 to April 2007, Vice President, MetLife, Inc.	84	Director, Metropolitan Series Fund, Inc. since August 2006.
Independent Trustees
Stephen M. Alderman (50)	Trustee	Indefinite; From December 2000 to present	Since November 1991, Shareholder in the law firm of Garfield and Merel, Ltd.	48	None
Jack R. Borsting (80)	Trustee	Indefinite; From December 2000 to present	Since 2006, Professor and Dean Emeritus, Marshall School of Business, University of Southern California (USC); from 2001 to 2005, Professor of Business Administration and Dean Emeritus.	48	Director, Los Angeles Orthopedic Hospital, Trustee, The Rose Hills Foundation. Member, Army Science Board.
Robert Boulware (53)	Trustee	Indefinite; From March 2008 to present	From 2004 to 2009, Director of Norwood Promotional Products, Inc.; from 2007 to 2008, Director of Wealthpoint Advisors (a business development company); from 2007 to 2009, Director of Holladay Bank; from 1992-2006, President and Chief Executive Officer of ING Fund Distributor, LLC.	48	Since 2005, Director of Gainsco, Inc. (auto insurance).
Daniel A. Doyle (51)	Trustee	Indefinite; From February 2007 to present	From October 2000 to June 2009, Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of ATC Management, Inc. (public utility); since June 2009, independent business consultant.	48	Director, Wisconsin Sports Development Corporation
Susan C. Gause (57)	Trustee	Indefinite; From March 2008 to present	From 2000 to December 2002, Chief Executive Officer of Allianz Dresdner Asset Management; since 2003, private investor.	48	None

19

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Trustees and Officers (Unaudited)—(Continued) December 31, 2009

Name and Age	Position(s) Held with Registrant	Term of Office and Length of Time Served	Principal Occupation(s) During Past 5 Years	Number of Portfolios in Fund Complex+ overseen by Trustee	Other Directorships Held by Trustee
Independent Trustees - continued
Dawn M. Vroegop (43)	Trustee	Indefinite; From December 2000 to present	From September 1999 to September 2003, Managing Director, Dresdner RCM Global Investors.	84	Director, Metropolitan Series Fund, Inc. since May 2009; from 2003 to present, Director and Finance Committee Chair, City College of San Francisco Foundation

The Executive Officers
Name and Age	Position(s) Held with Registrant	Term of Office and Length of Time Served	Principal Occupation(s) During Past 5 Years
Jeffrey L. Bernier (38)	Vice President	From February 2009 to present	Since December 2007, Vice President, Metropolitan Life Insurance Company; since 2008 Senior Vice President of MetLife Advisers, LLC and its predecessor; from July 2004 to December 2007, Director and Senior Investment Analyst of Investment Management Services for John Hancock Financial Services.
Jeffrey A. Tupper (39)	Chief Financial Officer, Treasurer	From August 2002 to present	Since February 2009, Vice President, MetLife Advisers, LLC. Since October 2006, Assistant Vice President, MetLife Group, Inc. Since February 2001, Assistant Vice President of MetLife Investors Insurance Company.
Richard C. Pearson (66)	Vice President and Secretary	From December 2000 to present	Since June 2001, President or Executive Vice President of MetLife Investors Distribution Company; since January 2001, Executive Vice President, General Counsel and Secretary of MetLife Investors Group, Inc. and Vice President, Secretary and Associate General Counsel of its affiliated life insurance companies; since November 2000, Senior Vice President and General Counsel of MetLife Advisers, LLC and its predecessor.
Jeffrey P. Halperin (42)	Chief Compliance Officer	From November 2006 to present	Since March 2006, Vice President, Corporate Ethics and Compliance Department, MetLife, Inc.; from October 2002 to March 2006, Assistant Vice President; from November 2005 to August 2006, Interim Chief Compliance Officer, Met Investors Series Trust; since April 2007, Chief Compliance Officer, Metropolitan Series Funds; from August 2006 to April 2007, Interim Chief Compliance Officer, Metropolitan Series Funds; since August 2006, Chief Compliance Officer, MetLife Advisers, LLC and its predecessor; since November 2006, Chief Compliance Officer, MetLife Investment Advisors Company, LLC.

+ The Fund Complex includes the Trust (48 portfolios) and Metropolitan Series Fund, Inc. (36 portfolios).

* Ms. Forget is an “interested person” of the Trust as a result of her affiliation with the Manager and the Distributor.

Quarterly Portfolio Schedule

The Trust files Form N-Q for the first and third quarters of each fiscal year. The Trust’s Forms N-Q will be available on the Securities and Exchange Commission’s website at http://www.sec.gov. The Trust’s Forms N-Q may be reviewed and copied at the Securities and Exchange Commission’s

20

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Trustees and Officers (Unaudited)—(Continued) December 31, 2009

Public Reference Room in Washington, D.C. and information on the operation of the Public Reference Room may be obtained by calling 1-800-SEC-0330. Once filed, the most recent Form N-Q will be available without charge, upon request, by calling (800) 848-3854.

Proxy Voting Policies and Procedures

A description of the policies and procedures that the Trust uses to determine how to vote proxies relating to portfolio securities is available without charge, upon request, by calling (800) 848-3854 and on the Securities and Exchange Commission’s website at http://www.sec.gov.

Proxy Voting Record

The Trust, on behalf of each of its Portfolios, has filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission its proxy voting record for the 12-month period ending June 30 on Form N-PX. Form N-PX must be filed by the Trust each year by August 31. Once filed, the most recent Form N-PX will be available without charge, upon request, by calling (800) 848-3854 or on the Securities and Exchange Commission’s website at http://www.sec.gov.

21

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

BlackRock Large Cap Core Portfolio

Board of Trustees’ Consideration of Advisory and Sub-Advisory Agreements

At an in-person meeting of the Board of Trustees (the “Board”) of the Met Investors Series Trust (the “Trust”) held on November 10-11, 2009, the Board, including a majority of the Trustees who are not considered to be “interested persons” of the Trust (the “Independent Trustees”) under the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended (the “1940 Act”), approved for an annual period the continuation of the Trust’s advisory agreement (the “Advisory Agreement”) with MetLife Advisers, LLC (the “Adviser”) and the applicable sub-advisory agreements (each a “Sub-Advisory Agreement”, and collectively with the Advisory Agreement, the “Agreements”) between the Adviser and the investment sub-advisers (each a “Sub-Adviser”, and collectively, the “Sub-Advisers”) for each of the series of the Trust, including the BlackRock Large Cap Core Portfolio (each a “Portfolio,” and collectively, the “Portfolios”).¹

In considering the Agreements, the Board reviewed a variety of materials provided by the Adviser and the Sub-Advisers relating to each Portfolio, the Adviser and each Sub-Adviser, including comparative performance, fee and expense information for an appropriate peer group of similar mutual funds, performance information for relevant benchmark indices and other information regarding the nature, extent and quality of services provided by the Adviser and the Sub-Advisers under their respective Agreements. The Board also took into account information provided to the Board in its meetings throughout the year with respect to the services provided by the Adviser and the Sub-Advisers, including quarterly performance reports prepared by management containing reviews of investment results, and periodic presentations from the Sub-Advisers with respect to the Portfolios they manage. The Independent Trustees also assessed reports provided by independent consultants, who reviewed and provided analyses regarding investment performance, fees and expenses, profitability and other information provided by, or at the direction of, the Adviser and the Sub-Advisers, as more fully discussed below.

The Independent Trustees were separately advised by independent legal counsel throughout the process. Prior to voting, the Independent Trustees also received a memorandum from their independent counsel discussing the legal standards for their consideration of the proposed continuation of the Agreements. The Board met in person with personnel of the Adviser prior to the November meeting for the specific purpose of considering the proposed continuation of the Agreements. The Independent Trustees also discussed the proposed continuation of the Agreements in private sessions with their independent legal counsel at which no representatives of management were present.

In considering whether to approve the renewal of the Advisory Agreement with the Adviser and any applicable Sub-Advisory Agreements with respect to each Portfolio, the Board reviewed and analyzed the factors it deemed relevant, including: (1) the nature, extent and quality of the services to be provided to the Portfolios by the Adviser and the Sub-Advisers; (2) the performance of the Portfolios as compared to a peer group and an appropriate index; (3) the Adviser’s and each of the Sub-Adviser’s personnel and operations; (4) the financial condition of the Adviser and of the Sub-Advisers; (5) the level and method of computing each Portfolio’s advisory and sub-advisory fees; (6) the profitability of the Adviser under the Advisory Agreement and of the Sub-Advisers under the Sub-Advisory Agreements; (7) any “fall-out” benefits to the Adviser, the Sub-Advisers and their affiliates (i.e., ancillary benefits realized by the Adviser, the Sub-Advisers or their affiliates from the Adviser’s or Sub-Advisers’ relationship with the Trust); (8) the anticipated effect of growth in size on each Portfolio’s performance and expenses; (9) fees paid to the Sub-Advisers by comparable institutional and retail accounts; and (10) possible conflicts of interest. The Board also considered the nature, quality, and extent of the services to be provided to the Portfolios by the Adviser’s affiliates, including distribution services.

Nature, extent and quality of services. In considering the nature, extent and quality of the services to be provided by the Adviser to the Portfolios, the Board took into account the extensive responsibilities that the Adviser has as investment manager to the Portfolios, including the provision of investment advice to: (i) MetLife Aggressive Strategy Portfolio, MetLife Balanced Strategy Portfolio, MetLife Defensive Strategy Portfolio, MetLife Growth Strategy Portfolio, and MetLife Moderate Strategy Portfolio (together, the “Asset Allocation Portfolios”), (ii) American Funds Balanced Allocation Portfolio, American Funds Growth Allocation Portfolio, and American Funds Moderate Allocation Portfolio (together, the “American Funds of Funds”), and (iii) the Met/Franklin Templeton Founding Strategy Portfolio, the selection of the Sub-Advisers for the other Portfolios and oversight of the Sub-Advisers’ compliance with fund policies and objectives, review of brokerage matters including with respect to trade allocation and best execution, oversight of general fund compliance with federal and state laws, and the implementation of Board directives as they relate to the Portfolios. The Adviser’s role in coordinating the activities of the Portfolios’ other service providers was also considered. The Board also evaluated the expertise and performance of the investment personnel with respect to the Asset Allocation Portfolios, the American Funds of Funds and the Met/Franklin Templeton Founding Strategy Portfolio and of the personnel overseeing the Sub-Advisers of the other Portfolios, and compliance with each Portfolio’s investment restrictions, tax and other requirements. The Board considered information received from the Trust’s Chief Compliance Officer (“CCO”) regarding the Portfolios’ compliance policies and procedures established pursuant to Rule 38a-1 under the 1940 Act, including the policies and procedures in place relating to proxy voting. The Board also took into account its familiarity with management through Board meetings, discussions and reports during the preceding year.

The Board also recognized the Adviser^’s reputation and long-standing experience in serving as an investment adviser to the Trust, and considered the benefit to shareholders of investing in funds that are part of a family of variable annuity portfolios offering a variety of investments. In addition, the Board reviewed the financial condition of the Adviser and whether it had the financial wherewithal to provide a high level and quality of services to the Portfolios. In its review, the Board also received and took into account information regarding any services and/or payments provided to the Adviser by the Sub-Advisers in connection with marketing activities.

¹ The Met/Templeton International Bond Portfolio recently commenced operations and, therefore, the Agreements with respect to this Portfolio were not up for renewal.

22

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

BlackRock Large Cap Core Portfolio

Board of Trustees’ Consideration of Advisory and Sub-Advisory Agreements—(Continued)

With respect to the services provided by each of the Sub-Advisers, the Board considered information provided to the Board by each Sub-Adviser, including each Sub-Adviser’s Form ADV, as well as information presented throughout the past year. The Board considered the Sub-Adviser’s current level of staffing and its overall resources, as well as its compensation program. The Board reviewed each Sub-Adviser’s history and investment experience, as well as information regarding the qualifications, background and responsibilities of the Sub-Adviser’s investment and compliance personnel who provide services to the Portfolios. The Board also considered, among other things, the Sub-Adviser’s compliance program and any disciplinary history. The Board noted each Sub-Adviser’s regulatory history, including whether it was currently involved in any regulatory actions or investigations as well as material litigation, and any settlements and ameliatory actions undertaken, as appropriate. The Board also noted that the CCO and his staff conduct regular, periodic compliance reviews with each of the Sub-Advisers and present reports to the Independent Trustees regarding the same, which includes evaluating the regulatory compliance systems of the Sub-Advisers and procedures reasonably designed by them to assure compliance with the federal securities laws, including issues related to late trading and market timing, best execution, fair value pricing, and proxy voting procedures, among others. The Board also took into account the financial condition of each Sub-Adviser.

The Board considered each Sub-Adviser’s investment process and philosophy. The Board took into account that each Sub-Adviser’s responsibilities include the development and maintenance of an investment program for the applicable Portfolio which is consistent with the Portfolio’s investment objectives, the selection of investment securities and the placement of orders for the purchase and sale of such securities, as well as the implementation of compliance controls related to performance of these services. The Board also reviewed each Sub-Adviser’s brokerage policies and practices, including with respect to best execution and soft dollars.

Based on its consideration and review of the foregoing information, the Board concluded that the nature, extent and quality of services provided by the Adviser and by each Sub-Adviser were satisfactory and that there was a reasonable basis on which to conclude that each would provide a high quality of investment services to the Portfolios.

Performance. The Board considered the performance of the Portfolios as described in the quarterly reports prepared by management, and as also analyzed in reports prepared by the Independent Trustees’ independent consultant. The Board noted that the Adviser reviews with the Board on a quarterly basis detailed information about the Portfolios’ performance results, portfolio composition and investment strategies. The Board also reviewed and considered a separate report prepared by Lipper Inc. (“Lipper”), an independent third party, which provided a statistical analysis comparing the Portfolios’ investment performance, expenses, and fees to comparable funds underlying variable insurance products (the “Performance Universe”). In addition, the Independent Trustees met separately with a representative of Bobroff Consulting, Inc., an independent consultant (“Bobroff”), at a special board meeting in September 2009, to review the separate reports prepared by such consultant (“Bobroff Report”), which analyzed the report prepared by Lipper, as well as certain of the other factors to be considered by the Board including supplemental alpha and information coefficient analysis. The Board also considered each Portfolio’s more recent performance subsequent to the performance period covered by the Lipper reports, and management’s discussion of the same, including the effect of current market conditions on each Portfolio’s more recent performance.

The Board closely reviewed the Portfolios’ performance records and the Adviser’s and Sub-Advisers’ management styles and long-term performance records with the Portfolios and comparable funds. The Board focused particular attention on Portfolios with less favorable performance records. The Board was mindful of the Adviser’s focus on each Sub-Adviser’s performance and noted that the Adviser has been active in monitoring and responding to any performance issues with respect to the Portfolios. The Board also took into account its discussions with management regarding factors that contributed to the performance of each Portfolio.

Among other data relating specifically to the BlackRock Large Cap Core Portfolio’s performance, the Board considered that the Portfolio underperformed the median of its Performance Universe one- and three- year periods, and outperformed the median of its Performance Universe for the five- year period ended July 31, 2009. The Board also noted that the Portfolio underperformed its Lipper Index for the one- and three-year periods, but outperformed the Lipper Index for the five-year period. The Board further considered that the Portfolio outperformed its benchmark, the Russell 1000 Index, for the five-year period, and underperformed the Russell 1000 Index for the one- and three-year periods ended August 31, 2009. The Board also took into account management’s discussion of the Portfolio’s recent performance, including the impact of recent market conditions on the Sub-Adviser’s investment style, and the Sub-Adviser’s strong performance over the longer term. Based on its review, the Board concluded that the Portfolio’s overall performance was satisfactory and its more recent performance was being addressed.

Fees and Expenses. The Board gave substantial consideration to the advisory fees payable under the Advisory Agreement and the sub-advisory fees payable under each of the Sub-Advisory Agreements. In this regard, the Board reviewed the advisory fees payable in the aggregate as well as on a Portfolio-by-Portfolio basis based on information provided by the Adviser. The Independent Trustees, with the assistance of Bobroff, also examined the fees paid by each Portfolio in light of fees paid to other investment managers by comparable funds and the method of computing each Portfolio’s fee, as well as considered the fees charged by the Adviser to manage other comparable funds. The Lipper report included comparisons of the Adviser’s fee schedule with that of its peers based on an asset-based analysis of relative fee structures according to the size of each Portfolio. In addition, the Board considered the Portfolios’ advisory and sub-advisory fees and total expenses as compared to similarly situated investment companies underlying variable insurance products deemed to be comparable to the Portfolios as determined by Lipper. The Board considered each Portfolio’s ranking within a smaller group of peer funds chosen by Lipper (the “Expense Group”), as well as the

23

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

BlackRock Large Cap Core Portfolio

Board of Trustees’ Consideration of Advisory and Sub-Advisory Agreements—(Continued)

Portfolio’s ranking within broader groups of funds (the “Expense Universe” and the “Sub-advised Expense Universe”). The Board also considered each Portfolio’s contractual sub-advisory fees, as applicable, as compared to the Sub-advised Expense Universe as well as a smaller group of funds (the “Sub-advised Expense Group”). In comparing each Portfolio’s actual and contractual management fee to that of comparable funds, the Board noted that such fee includes both advisory and administrative fees.

The Board noted that the sub-advisory fees for the Portfolios are paid by the Adviser, not the Portfolios, out of the advisory fee. It was further noted that the Adviser negotiates such fees at arm’s length. The Board also considered that the Adviser had entered into expense limitation agreements with certain of the Portfolios as noted below, pursuant to which the Adviser has agreed to waive a portion of its advisory fee and/or reimburse certain expenses as a means of limiting a Portfolio’s total annual operating expenses. In addition, the Board noted that the Adviser effected fee reductions in 2009 with respect to several Portfolios. The Board also noted that the Adviser had re-negotiated the securities lending arrangement with State Street Corporation to further maximize the income to the Portfolios from such program.

With respect to each sub-advised Portfolio, the Board also compared the sub-advisory fees paid by the Adviser to fees charged by the Portfolio’s Sub-Adviser to manage other sub-advised portfolios and portfolios not subject to regulation under the 1940 Act, such as separate accounts, as applicable. The Board considered the fee comparisons in light of the differences required to manage different types of accounts.

With respect to the BlackRock Large Cap Core Portfolio, the Board considered that the Portfolio’s actual management fees were equal to the Expense Group median, the Expense Universe median, and the Sub-advised Expense Universe median, and total expenses (exclusive of 12b-1 fees) were below the Expense Group median, the Expense Universe median, and the Sub-advised Expense Universe median. The Board further noted that the Portfolio’s contractual management fees were equal to the normalized median of the Expense Group at the Portfolio’s current size. The Board also noted that the Portfolio’s contractual sub-advisory fees were above the average of the Sub-advised Expense Group at the Portfolio’s current size. After consideration of all relevant factors, the Board concluded that the advisory and sub-advisory fees are consistent with industry norms and are fair and reasonable in light of the services to be provided.

Profitability. The Board examined the profitability of the Adviser on an aggregate basis with respect to all Portfolios, as well as on a Portfolio-by-Portfolio basis. With respect to the Asset Allocation Portfolios and Met/Franklin Templeton Founding Strategy Portfolio, the Board noted that the advisory fee is in addition to the fees received by the Adviser and its affiliates with regard to the other Portfolios of the Trust or of Metropolitan Series Fund, Inc., in which the Asset Allocation Portfolios and Met/Franklin Templeton Founding Strategy Portfolio may invest. With respect to the other Portfolios, the Board noted that a major component of profitability of the Adviser was the margin between the sub-advisory fees that the Adviser receives from the Trust and the portion of those fees paid to the Sub-Advisers. In this regard, the Board took into account certain comparative information in the Lipper report. The Board also reviewed the Adviser’s unaudited income statements and balance sheet information supplied by the Adviser regarding costs borne by the Adviser’s affiliates which support the operations of the Adviser but are not reflected on the unaudited income statements of the Adviser, as well as considered the profitability of the insurance products, the function of which is supported in part by the Adviser’s revenues under the Advisory Agreement, and other information and analysis prepared by the Adviser. With respect to the American Funds Bond Portfolio, American Funds Growth Portfolio, American Funds Growth-Income Portfolio, American Funds Global Small Capitalization Portfolio and American Funds International Portfolio, the Board noted that the Adviser currently does not receive an advisory fee. The Board also considered that the Distributor, MetLife Investors Distribution Company, receives 12b-1 payments to support the distribution of the products. The Board concluded after extensive discussions with management that the profitability of the Adviser and its affiliates from their relationship with each Portfolio was reasonable in light of all relevant factors.

In considering the profitability to the Sub-Advisers and their affiliates of their relationships with the Portfolios, the Board noted that the fees under the Sub-Advisory Agreements were paid by the Adviser out of the advisory fees that it receives under the Advisory Agreement. The Board also relied on the ability of the Adviser to negotiate the Sub-Advisory Agreements and the fees thereunder at arm’s length. The Board reviewed portfolio specific data with regard to the profitability of the Portfolios to each Sub-Adviser, as available, and analyzed the reasonableness of such profitability finding no indication of excessive profitability. However, the Board placed more reliance on the fact that the Sub-Advisory Agreement was negotiated at arm’s length and that the advisory fee was paid by the Adviser than on Sub-Adviser profitability.

Economies of scale. The Board also considered the effect of the Portfolios’ growth in size on their performances and fees. The Board noted that the fee schedules for all but eleven of the Portfolios contain breakpoints that reduce the fee rate above specified asset levels. The Board noted those Portfolios that did not contain breakpoints in the advisory fee and took into account management’s discussion of the same. The Board noted that those Portfolios with advisory fee schedules containing breakpoints generally reflect the inclusion of breakpoints in the sub-advisory fee schedule for such Portfolios. The Board considered the effective fees under the Advisory Agreement for each Portfolio as a percentage of assets at different asset levels and possible economies of scale that may be realized if the assets of the Portfolio grow. Among other data, the Board examined the effect of each Portfolio’s growth in size on various fee schedules and reviewed the Lipper and Bobroff Reports, which compared fee schedules among peers. The Board also took into account that the Sub-Adviser fees are paid by the Adviser out of the advisory fee. The Board also noted that if the Portfolios’ assets increase over time, the Portfolios may realize other economies of scale if assets increase proportionally more than certain other fixed expenses.

With respect to the BlackRock Large Cap Core Portfolio, the Board noted that the Portfolio’s advisory fee and sub-advisory fee each contains breakpoints that reduce the advisory fee rate on assets above certain specified asset levels. The Board considered the fact that the Portfolio’s fee

24

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

BlackRock Large Cap Core Portfolio

Board of Trustees’ Consideration of Advisory and Sub-Advisory Agreements—(Continued)

levels decline as portfolio assets increase. The Board noted that the Portfolio’s management fees were above the asset-weighted average of comparable funds until the Portfolio reaches $3 billion in assets, at which point the management fees decrease below the asset-weighted average for all higher asset levels. The Board concluded that the advisory fee structure for the Portfolio, including breakpoints, was reasonable and appropriately reflects potential economies of scale.

Other factors. As part of its evaluation of the Adviser’s compensation, the Board considered other benefits that may be realized by the Adviser and its affiliates from their relationship with the Trust. Among them, the Board recognized that an affiliate of the Adviser, MetLife Investors Distribution Company, serves as the Distributor for the Trust, and, as such, receives payments pursuant to Rule 12b-1 from the Portfolios to compensate it for providing shareholder services and selling activities, which could lead to growth in the Trust’s assets and corresponding benefits from such growth, including economies of scale. The Board also considered that affiliates of the Adviser may benefit from certain indirect tax benefits relating to dividend received deductions and foreign tax credits. The Board concluded that ancillary benefits accruing to the Adviser and its affiliates by virtue of the Adviser’s relationship with the Portfolios are fair and reasonable in light of the costs of providing investment management and other services to the Portfolios and the ongoing commitment of the Adviser to the Portfolios.

The Board considered other benefits that may be realized by each Subadviser and its affiliates from their relationship with the Trust, including the opportunity to provide advisory services to additional portfolios of the Trust and reputational benefits. The Board concluded that the benefits accruing to the Subadvisers and their affiliates by virtue of the Subadvisers’ relationships to the Portfolios are fair and reasonable in light of the costs of providing investment advisory services to the Portfolios and the ongoing commitment of the Subadvisers to the Portfolios.

The Board considered any possible conflicts of interest in the form of material benefits or detriments to the Trust resulting from the nature of the Trust’s and the Adviser’s or the Subadvisers’ affiliations. Here, the Board considered possible conflicts of interest that may arise between the Trust and the Adviser or a Subadviser in connection with the services provided to the Trust and the various relationships that they and their affiliates may have with the Trust. The Board considered the procedures for monitoring and managing such potential conflicts.

Conclusion. In considering the renewal of each of the Agreements, the Board, including the Independent Trustees, did not identify any single factor as controlling, and each Trustee may have attributed different weights to various factors. The Board evaluated all information available to them on a Portfolio-by-Portfolio basis, and their determinations were made separately with respect to each Portfolio. Based on all of the above-mentioned considerations, and the recommendations of management, the Board, including a majority of the Independent Trustees, determined that approval of the Advisory Agreement and the Sub-Advisory Agreements was in the best interests of each Portfolio. After full consideration of these and other factors, the Board, including a majority of the Independent Trustees, with the assistance of independent counsel, approved the Advisory Agreement and the Sub-Advisory Agreement with respect to each Portfolio.

25

Simplify your life…

with MetLife eDelivery^® while helping MetLife preserve the planet’s natural resources.

(see details on inside cover)

Met Investors Series Trust Clarion Global Real Estate Portfolio Annual Report December 31, 2009

• get rid of all that paper?

• access important documents whenever you want?

• conveniently receive valuable information online?

Get it all with MetLife eDelivery!

MetLife’s eDelivery service is your resource for electronic delivery of your variable annuity or variable life prospectuses, semiannual and annual reports, and other information. Available to variable product clients of Metropolitan Life Insurance Company, First MetLife Investors Insurance Company, General American Life Insurance Company, MetLife Investors Insurance Company, MetLife Investors USA Insurance Company, MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut and New England Life Insurance Company.*

Why sign up for MetLife eDelivery?

It’s Free** – No cost to enroll or use the service.

It’s Paperless – We’ll email you when your documents are available.

It’s Easy – Enrollment takes just a few minutes.

How do you sign up?

Just type in www.metlife.esourcelink.net to get to MetLife’s online registration form. You will need your policy/account numbers, which can be found on your statements. The form takes only a few minutes to complete. Please note, for jointly owned contracts, both owners will need to register in order to eliminate paper delivery.

  * Not all MetLife products offer eDelivery at this time. ** Your internet provider may impose fees for this service. L0210086208[0911]

Letter from the President

Letter to Policy Holders

February 1, 2010

2009 can best be described as a year of recovery. The year began with the stock market in a broad decline and the economy mired in a deep recession. However, investors’ sentiment improved dramatically during the year as fiscal and monetary authorities took measures to jump start the economy which helped spark a strong market rally in equities and corporate bonds.

The Barclays Capital U.S. Aggregate Bond Index returned 5.9% during 2009. While this was similar to the 5.2% return experienced in 2008, the two years could not have been more different. In 2008, fear drove investors toward the safety of U.S. Treasury securities and away from the risk of corporate bonds, especially those rated below investment grade. In contrast, investors were more willing to embrace risk in 2009. This produced an enormous recovery in below investment grade bonds; the Barclays Capital U.S. Corporate High Yield Index returned over 58% in 2009 after falling 26% in 2008. The Barclays Capital U.S. Treasury Index returned 13.7% in 2008, but declined 3.6% in 2009.

Stock investors also became less pessimistic in 2009. While the stock market indices are still far from the record levels reached in 2007, investors were rewarded in 2009 as stocks returned 26.5% as measured by the Standard & Poor’s 500 Index, its best return since 2003. Foreign stocks, as measured by the MSCI EAFE Index, returned 31.8% during 2009.

On the following pages, you will find a complete review of your Portfolio and its investment performance.

MetLife is committed to building your financial freedom. We appreciate your trust and will continue to focus our efforts on meeting your investment needs.

Sincerely,

Elizabeth M. Forget

President

Met Investors Series Trust

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Clarion Global Real Estate Portfolio

Managed by ING Clarion Real Estate Securities, LLC

Portfolio Manager Commentary*

Performance

For the year ended December 31, 2009, the Clarion Global Real Estate Portfolio had a return of 35.12%, 34.74% and 34.96% for Class A, B and E Shares, respectively, versus 38.26% for its benchmark, the FTSE EPRA/NAREIT Developed Index¹.

Market Environment / Conditions

The past twelve months have been a period of positive total return for global real estate stocks, which have advanced by more than 38% as improving capital market conditions and improving economic conditions have benefited investors. We entered the year with considerable uncertainty in the forecast for the economy and debt markets. Economic conditions began to improve to the point that most developed countries began to emerge from the worst recession in decades by the end of the year. Recent indicators show that an economic recovery is underway, although it remains challenging to determine the strength and sustainability of the recovery. Gross domestic product (GDP) numbers over the past six months have generally surprised to the upside with a concurrent recovery in the world’s capital markets.

Three major factors have contributed to the turnaround and rally of listed property companies. First, property companies moved decisively to repair their balance sheets as companies raised material amounts of equity. The equity raises were generally well supported given the cheap valuations and began in earnest during the first quarter in Australia, followed by the United Kingdom (U.K.), then, during the second quarter and beyond, in the United States (U.S.). Second, the debt markets began to open for property companies due in part to the equity raising, but also as a result of broader credit market improvements. Particularly in the U.S., listed property companies began to access unsecured debt in the capital markets as spreads began to tighten materially during the second quarter. The balance sheet repair and refinancing of debt continued during the second and third quarters. The third important contributor to the rally in property stocks came as investors turned their attention to the prospect of listed companies growing via potential acquisitions. With newly repaired balance sheets, listed property companies were correctly perceived as being able to potentially take advantage of “buying opportunities” should attractively priced real estate be brought to market. In hindsight, the improvement in sentiment during the year has been stunning in its speed but, in some respects, unsurprising in its eventuality given the pattern of past recessions and recoveries.

Portfolio Review / Current Positioning

While absolute returns were strong during the year, the Portfolio lagged its benchmark as the result of asset allocation decisions, which more than offset positive stock selection. The majority of the Portfolio’s relative underperformance for the year occurred during the second quarter when Asia-Pacific property companies were up 44% versus a total return in the Americas of 31% and in Europe of 26%. In hindsight, we were slow to add to companies and geographies which had been characterized by above-average risk with respect to business model, market or property type, including the developers of Hong Kong, Singapore and Mainland China, and the less than transparent companies of Central and Eastern Europe. Conversely, we remained overweight many of the better-managed, more conservative property companies which generally underperformed for the year. Since the end of the second quarter, the Portfolio has generated performance in-line with benchmark returns, which increases our confidence that we have turned the corner in an unusually volatile year.

Stock selection was generally good in 2009, particularly in the Americas and Europe. Stock selection in the U.S. provided the largest contribution to relative performance during the period and was largely the result of the outperformance by many of the Portfolio’s top holdings within the region, led by the performance of Macerich, Simon Property Group and ProLogis. In Europe, stock selection was positive in most countries and was particularly strong in the U.K., France, Austria and the Netherlands. In the Asia-Pacific region, stock selection detracted from returns in 2009 as the benefit of positive stock selection in Japan was more than offset by underperformance in the Hong Kong and Singapore markets, with the majority of the relative shortfall occurring in the first half of the year. Some of the names we were underweight during the first half of the year that contributed significantly to our relative underperformance included Hong Kong developers Agile Property Holdings and New World Development as well as Singapore developer Keppel Land.

The Portfolio continues to maintain a bias toward high-quality companies. We remain overweight sectors and geographies offering long-term leases and high percentages of earnings from recurring sources (primarily contract lease rental income). We prefer companies offering transparency, strong balance sheets and experienced management teams.

T. Ritson Ferguson, Chief Investment Officer

Steven D. Burton, Managing Director

Joseph P. Smith, Managing Director

Portfolio Manager

ING Clarion Real Estate Securities, LLC

*This commentary may include statements that constitute “forward-looking statements” under the U.S. securities laws. Forward-looking statements include, among other things, projections, estimates, and information about possible or future results related to the Portfolio, market or regulatory developments. The views expressed above are not guarantees of future performance or economic results and involve certain risks, uncertainties and assumptions that could cause actual outcomes and results to differ materially from the views expressed herein. The views expressed above are subject to change at any time based upon economic, market, or other conditions and the subadvisory firm undertakes no obligation to update the views expressed herein. Any discussions of specific securities should not be considered a recommendation to buy or sell those securities. The

1

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Clarion Global Real Estate Portfolio

Managed by ING Clarion Real Estate Securities, LLC

Portfolio Manager Commentary* (continued)

views expressed above (including any forward-looking statement) may not be relied upon as investment advice or as an indication of the Portfolio’s trading intent. Information about the Portfolio’s holdings, asset allocation or country diversification is historical and is not an indication of future Portfolio composition, which may vary. Direct investment in any index is not possible. The performance of any index mentioned in this commentary has not been adjusted for ongoing management, distribution and operating expenses, and sales charges applicable to mutual fund investments. In addition, the returns do not reflect additional fees charged by separate accounts or variable insurance contracts that an investor in the Portfolio may pay. If these additional fees were reflected, performance would have been lower.

Portfolio Composition as of December 31, 2009

Top Holdings

	Percent of Net Assets
Simon Property Group, Inc. (REIT)	5.6%
Sun Hung Kai Properties, Ltd.	5.4%
Westfield Group (REIT)	4.2%
Unibail-Rodamco (REIT)	4.1%
Mitsui Fudosan Co., Ltd.	3.2%
Vornado Realty Trust	2.8%
Mitsubishi Estate Co., Ltd.	2.8%
Land Securities Group Plc (REIT)	2.2%
Macerich Co. (The) (REIT)	2.0%
Wharf Holdings, Ltd. (The)	1.9%

Top Countries

	Percent of Portfolio Market Value
United States	39.3%
Hong Kong	11.5%
Australia	9.7%
Japan	9.7%
United Kingdom	8.4%
Others	6.8%
France	6.3%
Cayman Islands	3.1%
Bermuda	2.9%
Singapore	2.3%

2

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Clarion Global Real Estate Portfolio

Clarion Global Real Estate Portfolio managed by

ING Clarion Real Estate Securities, LLC vs. FTSE EPRA/NAREIT Developed Index¹

	Average Annual Return2 (for the year ended 12/31/09)
	1 Year	3 Year	5 Year	Since Inception3
Clarion Global Real Estate Portfolio—Class A	35.12%	-12.37%	1.06%	5.68%
Class B	34.74%	-12.59%	0.81%	5.42%
Class E	34.96%	-12.49%	0.91%	5.53%
FTSE EPRA/NAREIT Developed Index1	38.26%	-12.39%	2.00%	7.50%

The performance of Class A shares will differ from that of the other classes of shares because of the difference in expenses paid by policyholders investing in the different share classes.

¹The FTSE EPRA/NAREIT Developed Index is designed to track the performance of listed real estate companies and REITS worldwide.

²“Average Annual Return” is calculated including reinvestment of all income dividends and capital gain distributions.

³Inception of Class A, B and E shares is 5/1/04. Index returns are based on an inception date of 5/1/04.

Past performance does not guarantee future results. The investment return and principal value of an investment in the Portfolio will fluctuate, so that shares, on any given day or when redeemed, may be worth more or less than their original cost. Performance numbers are net of all Portfolio expenses but do not include any insurance, sales, or administration charges of variable annuity or life insurance contracts. If these charges were included, the returns would be lower. The Index does not include fees or expenses and is not available for direct investment.

3

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Clarion Global Real Estate Portfolio

Understanding Your Portfolio’s Expenses

Shareholder Expense Example

As a shareholder of the Portfolio, you incur ongoing costs, including management fees; distribution and service (12b-1) fees; and other Portfolio expenses. This example is intended to help you understand your ongoing costs (in dollars) (referred to as “expenses”) of investing in the Portfolio and compare these costs with the ongoing costs of investing in other mutual funds. The example is based on an investment of $1,000 invested at the beginning of the period and held for the entire period, July 1, 2009 through December 31, 2009.

Actual Expenses

The first line for each share class of the Portfolio in the table below provides information about actual account values and actual expenses. You may use the information in this line, together with the amount you invested in the particular share class of the Portfolio, to estimate the expenses that you paid over the period. Simply divide your account value by $1,000 (for example, an $8,600 account value divided by $1,000 = 8.6), then multiply the result by the number in the first line under the heading entitled “Expenses Paid During Period” to estimate the expenses you paid on your account during this period.

Hypothetical Example for Comparison Purposes

The second line for each share class of the Portfolio in the table below provides information about hypothetical account values and hypothetical expenses based on the Portfolio’s actual expense ratio and an assumed rate of return of 5% per year before expenses, which is not the Portfolio’s actual return. The hypothetical account values and expenses may not be used to estimate the actual ending account balance or expenses you paid for the period. You may use this information to compare the ongoing costs of investing in the Portfolio and other funds. To do so, compare this 5% hypothetical example with the 5% hypothetical examples that appear in the shareholder reports of the other funds.

Please note that the expenses shown in the table are meant to highlight your ongoing costs only and do not reflect any fees or charges of your variable insurance product or any additional expenses that participants in certain eligible qualified plans may bear relating to the operations of their plan. Therefore, the second line for each share class in the table is useful in comparing ongoing costs only, and will not help you determine the relative total costs of owning different funds. In addition, if these other costs were included, your costs would have been higher.

	Annualized Expense Ratio	Beginning Account Value 7/1/09		Ending Account Value 12/31/09		Expenses Paid During Period* 7/1/09-12/31/09
Class A
Actual	0.71%	$	1,000.00	$	1,308.74	$	4.13
Hypothetical	0.71%		1,000.00		1,021.63		3.62
Class B
Actual	0.96%	$	1,000.00	$	1,306.43	$	5.64
Hypothetical	0.96%		1,000.00		1,020.32		4.94
Class E
Actual	0.86%	$	1,000.00	$	1,307.38	$	5.00
Hypothetical	0.86%		1,000.00		1,020.87		4.38

* Expenses paid are equal to the Portfolio’s annualized expense ratio for the most recent six month period, as shown above, multiplied by the average account value over the period, multiplied by the number of days (184 days) in the most recent fiscal half-year, divided by 365 (to reflect the one-half year period).

4

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Clarion Global Real Estate Portfolio

PORTFOLIO OF INVESTMENTS

December 31, 2009

(Percentage of Net Assets)

Security Description	Shares	Value
Common Stocks - 99.1%
Australia - 10.2%
CFS Retail Property Trust (REIT)(a)	2,522,848	$	4,270,113
Dexus Property Group (REIT)(a)	22,397,412		16,901,857
Goodman Group (REIT)	24,577,905		13,823,033
GPT Group (REIT)	14,925,900		8,011,116
ING Office Fund(a)	11,135,800		6,325,673
Mirvac Group (REIT)	3,954,897		5,498,615
Stockland (REIT)	4,134,436		14,520,245
Westfield Group (REIT)	4,371,950		48,727,357
			118,078,009
Bermuda - 3.1%
Great Eagle Holdings, Ltd.	1,005,600		2,600,197
Hongkong Land Holdings, Ltd.(a)	4,032,300		19,843,956
Kerry Properties, Ltd.	2,559,500		12,922,862
			35,367,015
Brazil - 0.5%
PDG Realty SA Empreendimentos e Participacoes	559,600		5,483,506
Canada - 2.1%
Calloway Real Estate Investment Trust (REIT)	307,000		5,723,430
Canadian Real Estate Investment Trust (REIT)	87,000		2,254,601
Cominar Real Estate Investment Trust (REIT)	120,800		2,233,617
H&R Real Estate Investment Trust (REIT)	260,000		3,838,509
Primaris Retail Real Estate Investment Trust (REIT)	146,500		2,259,446
RioCan Real Estate Investment Trust (REIT)	386,800		7,336,818
			23,646,421
Cayman Islands - 3.3%
China Resources Land, Ltd.	8,677,736		19,577,038
Glorious Property Holdings, Ltd.*	7,413,000		3,325,780
Longfor Properties*	2,077,100		2,341,255
New World China Land, Ltd.	4,837,950		1,824,306
Shimao Property Holdings, Ltd.	5,711,000		10,710,412
			37,778,791
Channel Islands - 0.2%
Atrium European Real Estate, Ltd.	377,700		2,520,947
China - 0.1%
Shui On Land, Ltd.	2,847,600		1,672,384
France - 6.7%
Gecina S.A. (REIT)	36,270		3,925,322
ICADE (REIT)	11,570		1,100,228
Klepierre (REIT)(a)	408,280		16,606,862
Mercialys (REIT)(a)	226,805		7,978,954
Unibail-Rodamco (REIT)	215,000		47,324,740
			76,936,106

Security Description	Shares	Value
Germany - 0.1%
Deutsche Wohnen AG*	111,790	$	1,072,800
Hong Kong - 12.0%
China Overseas Land & Investment, Ltd.	1,101,100		2,302,594
Hang Lung Properties, Ltd.	3,167,100		12,372,948
Henderson Land Development Co., Ltd.	2,772,000		20,723,772
Hysan Development Co. Ltd.	845,500		2,393,927
Link (The)	3,153,500		7,991,982
Sino-Ocean Land Holdings, Ltd.	8,610,100		7,885,897
Sun Hung Kai Properties, Ltd.	4,244,600		62,979,191
Wharf Holdings, Ltd. (The)	3,940,100		22,528,412
			139,178,723
Japan - 10.1%
Aeon Mall Co., Ltd.(a)	132,500		2,565,281
Frontier Real Estate Investment Corp. (REIT)(a)	474		3,360,585
Japan Excellent, Inc. (REIT)(a)	139		617,477
Japan Logistics Fund, Inc. (REIT)	581		4,261,255
Japan Real Estate Investment Corp. (REIT)(a)	572		4,200,597
Kenedix Realty Investment Corp. (REIT)	1,074		2,929,546
Mitsubishi Estate Co., Ltd.	2,028,910		32,197,052
Mitsui Fudosan Co., Ltd.	2,213,874		37,195,136
Nippon Accommodations Fund, Inc. (REIT)	431		2,247,787
Orix JREIT, Inc. (REIT)	621		3,087,826
Sumitomo Realty & Development Co., Ltd.(a)	1,050,900		19,719,671
Top REIT, Inc. (REIT)	138		610,308
United Urban Investment Corp. (REIT)	802		4,220,594
			117,213,115
Luxembourg - 0.3%
ProLogis European Properties*	644,363		3,969,057
Netherlands - 1.6%
Corio N.V. (REIT)	223,102		15,235,805
Eurocommercial Properties N.V.	83,507		3,445,495
			18,681,300
Norway - 1.1%
Norwegian Property ASA*	5,370,350		12,425,179
Singapore - 2.5%
Ascendas Real Estate Investment Trust (REIT)	7,710,246		12,084,036
CapitaCommercial Trust (REIT)	4,413,000		3,654,759
Capitaland, Ltd.	1,511,500		4,480,532
CapitaMall Trust (REIT)	4,500,723		5,711,412
Suntec Real Estate Investment Trust (REIT)(a)	2,660,100		2,546,370
			28,477,109
Sweden - 0.4%
Castellum A.B. (REIT)(a)	502,000		5,065,111

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

5

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Clarion Global Real Estate Portfolio

PORTFOLIO OF INVESTMENTS - continued

December 31, 2009

(Percentage of Net Assets)

Security Description	Shares	Value
Switzerland - 0.7%
Swiss Prime Site A.G.	150,820	$	8,447,705
United Kingdom - 8.9%
Atrium European Real Estate Ltd.	608,250		4,097,509
British Land Co. Plc (REIT)(a)	2,425,643		18,606,770
Derwent London Plc (REIT)	333,590		7,050,867
Grainger Plc(a)	1,971,170		4,041,536
Great Portland Estates Plc (REIT)	508,400		2,356,773
Hammerson Plc (REIT)	1,802,569		12,249,829
Helical Bar Plc	592,230		3,249,080
Land Securities Group Plc (REIT)	2,294,575		25,164,680
Liberty International Plc (REIT)(a)	1,829,822		15,080,079
Safestore Holdings Plc	2,288,900		6,101,880
Segro Plc (REIT)	772,235		4,265,710
			102,264,713
United States - 35.2%
Acadia Realty Trust (REIT)	206,271		3,479,792
Alexandria Real Estate Equities, Inc. (REIT)(a)	128,200		8,241,978
AMB Property Corp. (REIT)	408,600		10,439,730
Apartment Investment & Management Co. - Class A (REIT)	297,100		4,729,832
AvalonBay Communities, Inc.	156,048		12,813,101
Boston Properties, Inc. (REIT)	150,800		10,114,156
BRE Properties, Inc. - Class A (REIT)(a)	240,346		7,950,646
Camden Property Trust	242,967		10,294,512
Digital Realty Trust, Inc.(a)	229,100		11,519,148
Duke Realty Corp. (REIT)	684,800		8,334,016
Equity Residential (REIT)	240,400		8,120,712
Essex Property Trust, Inc.(a)	56,376		4,715,852
Extra Space Storage, Inc.	195,800		2,261,490
Federal Realty Investment Trust (REIT)	153,834		10,417,639
HCP, Inc.	325,900		9,952,986
Highwoods Properties, Inc. (REIT)	328,078		10,941,401
Host Hotels & Resorts, Inc. (REIT)	1,505,071		17,564,179
Hyatt Hotels Corp. - Class A*	157,600		4,698,056
Kimco Realty Corp. (REIT)	166,700		2,255,451
Liberty Property Trust	451,900		14,465,319
Macerich Co. (The) (REIT)(a)	654,252		23,520,359
Nationwide Health Properties, Inc. (REIT)	424,159		14,921,914
OMEGA Healthcare Investors, Inc. (REIT)	309,600		6,021,720
Pebblebrook Hotel Trust*	72,800		1,602,328
Peoples Choice Financial Corp. (144A)*(b)	60,000		—
ProLogis (REIT)(a)	1,357,900		18,589,651
Public Storage	98,100		7,990,245
Regency Centers Corp. (REIT)	275,000		9,641,500
Simon Property Group, Inc. (REIT)	805,843		64,306,271
SL Green Realty Corp. (REIT)(a)	155,760		7,825,382
Tanger Factory Outlet Centers(a)	196,465		7,660,170
Taubman Centers, Inc. (REIT)(a)	138,813		4,984,775

Security Description	Shares/Par Amount		Value
United States - continued
UDR, Inc. (REIT)(a)		626,575	$	10,300,893
Ventas, Inc.		334,700		14,639,778
Vornado Realty Trust		468,769		32,785,704
Weingarten Realty Investors (REIT)		420,800		8,327,632
				406,428,318
Total Common Stocks (Cost $1,055,345,738)				1,144,706,309
Right - 0.0%
Luxembourg - 0.0%
ProLogis European Properties, expire 12/14/09 *(d) (Cost - $0)		644,363		—
Short-Term Investments - 6.1%
Mutual Funds - 5.7%
State Street Navigator Securities Lending Prime Portfolio(c)		65,761,095		65,761,095
Repurchase Agreement - 0.4%
Fixed Income Clearing Corp., Repurchase Agreement, dated 12/31/09 at 0.005% to be repurchased at $5,088,003 on 01/04/10 collateralized by $5,105,000 Federal National Mortgage Association. at 2.750% due 03/13/14 with a value of $5,194,338.	$	5,088,000		5,088,000
Total Short-Term Investments (Cost $70,849,095)				70,849,095
Total Investments - 105.2% (Cost $1,126,194,833)				1,215,555,404
Other Assets and Liabilities (net) -(5.2)%				(59,785,381	)
Net Assets - 100.0%			$	1,155,770,023

* Non-income producing security.

(a) All or portion of security is on loan.

(b) Securities that may be resold to “qualified institutional buyers” under Rule 144A or securities offered pursuant to Section 4(2) of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended.

(c) Represents investment of collateral received from securities lending transactions.

(d) Rights Lapsed.

REIT - A Real Estate Investment Trust is a pooled investment vehicle that invests primarily in income-producing real estate or real estate related loans or interest.

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

6

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Clarion Global Real Estate Portfolio

Sector Diversification as of December 31, 2009 (Unaudited)

Top Sectors	Percent of Net Assets
Diversified	29.6%
Regional Malls	16.5%
Operating & Development	13.3%
Real Estate	9.2%
Diversified Financial Services	5.3%
Apartments	5.3%
Office	4.0%
Health Care Providers & Services	3.9%
Industrials	3.2%
Management & Services	2.8%

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

7

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Clarion Global Real Estate Portfolio

Various inputs are used in determining the value of the Portfolio’s investments, which are as follows:

Level 1—unadjusted quoted prices in active markets for identical investments

Level 2—other significant observable inputs (including, but not limited to: quoted prices for similar investments in markets that are both active or inactive; inputs other than quoted prices that are observable such as interest rates, yield curves, credit risks, default rates, etc.)

Level 3—significant unobservable inputs based on the best information available in the circumstances, to the extent observable inputs are unavailable (including the Portfolio’s own assumptions in determining the fair value of investments)

The inputs or methodology used for valuing investments are not necessarily an indication of the risk associated with investing in them. For information about the Portfolio’s policy regarding valuation of investments and other significant accounting policies, please refer to Note 2 of the Notes to Financial Statements.

The following table summarizes the inputs used in determining the value the Portfolio’s investments as of December 31, 2009:

ASSETS VALUATION INPUTS

Description	Level 1		Level 2		Level 3		Total
Common Stocks
Australia	$	—	$	118,078,009	$	—	$	118,078,009
Bermuda		—		35,367,015		—		35,367,015
Brazil		—		5,483,506		—		5,483,506
Canada		23,646,421		—		—		23,646,421
Cayman Islands		—		37,778,791		—		37,778,791
Channel Islands		—		2,520,947		—		2,520,947
China		—		1,672,384		—		1,672,384
France		—		76,936,106		—		76,936,106
Germany		—		1,072,800		—		1,072,800
Hong Kong		—		139,178,723		—		139,178,723
Japan		—		117,213,115		—		117,213,115
Luxembourg		—		3,969,057		—		3,969,057
Netherlands		—		18,681,300		—		18,681,300
Norway		—		12,425,179		—		12,425,179
Singapore		—		28,477,109		—		28,477,109
Sweden		—		5,065,111		—		5,065,111
Switzerland		—		8,447,705		—		8,447,705
United Kingdom		—		102,264,713		—		102,264,713
United States		406,428,318		—		—		406,428,318
Total Common Stocks		430,074,739		714,631,570		—		1,144,706,309
Right
Luxembourg		—		—		—		—
Short-Term Investments
Mutual Funds		65,761,095		—		—		65,761,095
Repurchase Agreement		—		5,088,000		—		5,088,000
Total Short-Term Investments		65,761,095		5,088,000		—		70,849,095
TOTAL INVESTMENTS	$	495,835,834	$	719,719,570	$	—	$	1,215,555,404

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

8

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Clarion Global Real Estate Portfolio

Statement of Assets and Liabilities

December 31, 2009

Assets
Investments at value (a)(b)	$	1,210,467,404
Repurchase Agreement		5,088,000
Cash		1,000
Cash denominated in foreign currencies (c)		216,035
Receivable for investments sold		9,083,006
Receivable for shares sold		257,811
Dividends receivable		2,826,197
Total assets		1,227,939,453
Liabilities
Payables for:
Investments purchased		5,225,604
Shares redeemed		370,835
Collateral for securities loaned		65,761,095
Accrued Expenses:
Management fees		603,852
Distribution and service fees - Class B		81,398
Distribution and service fees - Class E		5,068
Administration fees		6,252
Custodian and accounting fees		42,777
Deferred trustees’ fees		7,518
Other expenses		65,031
Total liabilities		72,169,430
Net Assets	$	1,155,770,023
Net Assets Represented by
Paid in surplus	$	1,555,235,929
Accumulated net realized loss		(531,789,770	)
Unrealized appreciation on investments and foreign currency transactions		89,365,345
Undistributed net investment income		42,958,519
Net Assets	$	1,155,770,023
Net Assets
Class A	$	727,049,726
Class B		388,575,346
Class E		40,144,951
Capital Shares Outstanding
Class A		75,924,812
Class B		40,701,489
Class E		4,196,116
Net Asset Value, Offering Price and Redemption Price Per Share
Class A	$	9.58
Class B		9.55
Class E		9.57

(a) Identified cost of investments, excluding repurchase agreement, was $1,121,106,833.

(b) Includes securities loaned at value of $62,054,501.

(c) Identified cost of cash denominated in foreign currencies was $223,145.

Statement of Operations

For the Year Ended December 31, 2009

Investment Income
Dividends (a)	$	36,135,217
Interest (b)		524,429
Total investment income		36,659,646
Expenses
Management fees		6,047,170
Administration fees		70,954
Custodian and accounting fees		462,128
Distribution and service fees - Class B		777,104
Distribution and service fees - Class E		50,934
Audit and tax services		32,200
Legal		36,351
Trustees’ fees and expenses		22,763
Shareholder reporting		185,127
Insurance		15,392
Miscellaneous		14,724
Total expenses		7,714,847
Less broker commission recapture		(131,152	)
Net expenses		7,583,695
Net investment income		29,075,951
Net Realized and Unrealized Gain (Loss) on Investments and Foreign Currency Transactions
Net realized gain (loss) on:
Investments		(282,739,314	)
Foreign currency transactions		185,735
Net realized loss on investments and foreign currency transactions		(282,553,579	)
Net change in unrealized appreciation (depreciation) on:
Investments		577,723,492
Foreign currency transactions		(4,291	)
Net change in unrealized appreciation on investments and foreign currency transactions		577,719,201
Net realized and unrealized gain on investments and foreign currency transactions		295,165,622
Net Increase in Net Assets from Operations	$	324,241,573
(a) Net of foreign withholding taxes of $2,427,437.
(b) Includes net income on securities loaned of $522,267.

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

9

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Clarion Global Real Estate Portfolio

Statements of Changes in Net Assets

	Year Ended December 31, 2009			Year Ended December 31, 2008
Increase (Decrease) in Net Assets:
Operations
Net investment income	$	29,075,951		$	31,088,700
Net realized loss on investments and foreign currency transactions		(282,553,579	)		(227,254,371	)
Net change in unrealized appreciation (depreciation) on investments and foreign currency transactions		577,719,201			(370,943,992	)
Net increase (decrease) in net assets resulting from operations		324,241,573			(567,109,663	)
Distributions to Shareholders
From net investment income
Class A		(21,395,042	)		(12,871,229	)
Class B		(9,985,927	)		(6,742,260	)
Class E		(1,151,099	)		(996,047	)
From net realized gains
Class A		—			(62,356,696	)
Class B		—			(39,830,003	)
Class E		—			(5,590,157	)
Net decrease in net assets resulting from distributions		(32,532,068	)		(128,386,392	)
Capital Share Transactions
Proceeds from shares sold
Class A		120,866,113			301,131,736
Class B		56,009,403			85,885,098
Class E		3,684,574			8,098,339
Net asset value of shares issued through dividend reinvestment
Class A		21,395,042			75,227,925
Class B		9,985,927			46,572,263
Class E		1,151,099			6,586,204
Cost of shares repurchased
Class A		(136,442,146	)		(132,676,732	)
Class B		(51,766,215	)		(97,137,626	)
Class E		(8,876,651	)		(19,624,926	)
Net increase in net assets from capital share transactions		16,007,146			274,062,281
Net Increase (Decrease) in Net Assets		307,716,651			(421,433,774	)
Net assets at beginning of period		848,053,372			1,269,487,146
Net assets at end of period	$	1,155,770,023		$	848,053,372
Undistributed net investment income at end of period	$	42,958,519		$	30,640,912

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

10

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Clarion Global Real Estate Portfolio

Financial Highlights

Selected Per Share Data for the Years Ended:
	Class A
	For the Years Ended December 31,
	2009			2008			2007			2006			2005
Net Asset Value, Beginning of Period	$	7.40		$	14.08		$	18.13		$	14.15		$	12.47
Income (Loss) from Investment Operations
Net investment income(a)		0.24			0.32			0.22			0.28			0.30
Net realized/unrealized gain (loss) on investments		2.21			(5.53	)		(2.59	)		4.81			1.40
Total from investment operations		2.45			(5.21	)		(2.37	)		5.09			1.70
Less Distributions
Dividends from net investment income		(0.27	)		(0.25	)		(0.19	)		(0.19	)		—
Distributions from net realized capital gains		—			(1.22	)		(1.49	)		(0.92	)		(0.02	)
Total distributions		(0.27	)		(1.47	)		(1.68	)		(1.11	)		(0.02	)
Net Asset Value, End of Period	$	9.58		$	7.40		$	14.08		$	18.13		$	14.15
Total Return		35.12	%		(41.56	)%		(14.79	)%		37.90	%		13.61	%
Ratio of expenses to average net assets after reimbursement		0.73	%		0.67	%		0.62	%		0.66	%		0.69	%
Ratio of expenses to average net assets before reimbursement and rebates		0.73	%		0.69	%		0.65	%		0.70	%		0.70	%
Ratio of net investment income to average net assets		3.16	%		2.91	%		1.35	%		1.74	%		2.27	%
Portfolio turnover rate		66.0	%		146.2	%		110.0	%		73.0	%		13.5	%
Net assets, end of period (in millions)	$	727.0		$	534.1		$	711.9		$	627.5		$	204.1
	Class B
	For the Years Ended December 31,
	2009			2008			2007			2006			2005
Net Asset Value, Beginning of Period	$	7.37		$	14.01		$	18.06		$	14.11		$	12.47
Income (Loss) from Investment Operations
Net investment income(a)		0.22			0.29			0.21			0.23			0.26
Net realized/unrealized gain (loss) on investments		2.21			(5.50	)		(2.62	)		4.81			1.40
Total from investment operations		2.43			(5.21	)		(2.41	)		5.04			1.66
Less Distributions
Dividends from net investment income		(0.25	)		(0.21	)		(0.15	)		(0.17	)		—
Distributions from net realized capital gains		—			(1.22	)		(1.49	)		(0.92	)		(0.02	)
Total distributions		(0.25	)		(1.43	)		(1.64	)		(1.09	)		(0.02	)
Net Asset Value, End of Period	$	9.55		$	7.37		$	14.01		$	18.06		$	14.11
Total Return		34.74	%		(41.67	)%		(15.01	)%		37.58	%		13.29	%
Ratio of expenses to average net assets after reimbursement		0.98	%		0.92	%		0.87	%		0.92	%		0.94	%
Ratio of expenses to average net assets before reimbursement and rebates		0.98	%		0.93	%		0.90	%		0.95	%		0.95	%
Ratio of net investment income to average net assets		2.90	%		2.57	%		1.30	%		1.43	%		2.00	%
Portfolio turnover rate		66.0	%		146.2	%		110.0	%		73.0	%		13.5	%
Net assets, end of period (in millions)	$	388.6		$	279.2		$	484.8		$	623.4		$	316.4

Please see following page for Financial Highlights footnote legend.

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

11

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Clarion Global Real Estate Portfolio

Financial Highlights

Selected Per Share Data for the Years Ended:
	Class E
	For the Years Ended December 31,
	2009			2008			2007			2006			2005
Net Asset Value, Beginning of Period	$	7.38		$	14.04		$	18.08		$	14.13		$	12.47
Income (Loss) from Investment Operations
Net investment income(a)		0.23			0.29			0.26			0.25			0.28
Net realized/unrealized gain (loss) on investments		2.22			(5.51	)		(2.64	)		4.80			1.40
Total from investment operations		2.45			(5.22	)		(2.38	)		5.05			1.68
Less Distributions
Dividends from net investment income		(0.26	)		(0.22	)		(0.17	)		(0.18	)		—
Distributions from net realized capital gains		—			(1.22	)		(1.49	)		(0.92	)		(0.02	)
Total distributions		(0.26	)		(1.44	)		(1.66	)		(1.10	)		(0.02	)
Net Asset Value, End of Period	$	9.57		$	7.38		$	14.04		$	18.08		$	14.13
Total Return		34.96	%		(41.68	)%		(14.86	)%		37.62	%		13.45	%
Ratio of expenses to average net assets after reimbursement		0.88	%		0.81	%		0.76	%		0.82	%		0.84	%
Ratio of expenses to average net assets before reimbursement and rebates		0.88	%		0.83	%		0.80	%		0.85	%		0.84	%
Ratio of net investment income to average net assets		3.02	%		2.62	%		1.54	%		1.55	%		2.14	%
Portfolio turnover rate		66.0	%		146.2	%		110.0	%		73.0	%		13.5	%
Net assets, end of period (in millions)	$	40.1		$	34.7		$	72.7		$	119.2		$	51.3

(a) Per share amounts based on average shares outstanding during the period.

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

12

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Clarion Global Real Estate Portfolio

Notes to Financial Statements—December 31, 2009

1. Organization

Met Investors Series Trust (the “Trust”) is registered as an open-end management investment company under the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended (the “1940 Act”). The Trust currently offers forty-eight Portfolios (the “Portfolios”), each of which operates as a distinct investment vehicle of the Trust. The portfolio included in this report is Clarion Global Real Estate Portfolio (the “Portfolio”), which is diversified. Shares in the Trust are not offered directly to the general public and are currently available only to separate accounts established by certain affiliated life insurance companies.

The Trust is managed by MetLife Advisers, LLC (the “Manager”), an affiliate of MetLife, Inc.

The Trust has registered four classes of shares: Class A, B, C and E Shares. Class A, B and E Shares are currently offered by the Portfolio. Shares of each Class of the Portfolio represent an equal pro rata interest in the Portfolio and generally give the shareholder the same voting, dividend, liquidation, and other rights. Investment income, realized and unrealized capital gains and losses, the common expenses of the Portfolio and certain Portfolio-level expense reductions, if any, are allocated on a pro rata basis to each Class based on the relative net assets of each Class to the net assets of the Portfolio. Each Class of shares differs in its respective distribution expenses.

2. Significant Accounting Policies

The financial statements have been prepared in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (“GAAP”) which require management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of income and expenses during the reporting period. Actual results could differ from these estimates.

The following is a summary of significant accounting policies consistently followed by the Trust in the preparation of its financial statements.

Valuation - Equity securities for which the primary market is on a domestic exchange (except the NASDAQ) will be valued at the last sale price on the day of valuation or, if there was no sale that day, at the last reported bid price, using prices as of the close of trading. Equity securities traded over-the-counter and quoted on NASDAQ are valued at the NASDAQ Official Closing Price. Equity securities not quoted on NASDAQ that are actively traded in the over-the-counter market, including listed securities for which the primary market is believed to be over-the-counter, will be valued at the most recently quoted bid price provided by the principal market makers. Short positions traded in the OTC market are valued at the last available ask price.

Debt securities (other than short term obligations with a remaining maturity of sixty days or less) are generally valued on the basis of evaluated or composite bid quotations obtained by independent pricing services and/or brokers and dealers selected by the relevant adviser pursuant to authorization of the Board of Trustees (the “Board”). Such quotations take into account appropriate factors such as trading in similar groups of securities, yield, quality, coupon rate, maturity, type of issue, trading characteristics and other data. Short term obligations with a remaining maturity of sixty days or less are valued at amortized cost which approximates fair market value.

Financial futures contracts and options thereon, which are traded on exchanges, are valued at their closing prices as of the close of such exchanges. Exchange traded options are valued at the mean price. Swap agreements and options traded in the over the counter (“OTC”) market are valued based upon quoted fair valuations received daily by the Portfolio from a pricing service or counterparty. Forward currency exchange contracts are valued daily at forward foreign currency exchange rates. Investments in mutual funds are valued at the daily net asset value (“NAV”) of the mutual fund.

The Portfolio has retained a third party pricing service to fair value its equity investments that are traded principally on a foreign exchange or market which closes prior to the Portfolio’s time of valuation. The fair value of each security that is traded principally on an exchange or market outside of the United States generally is calculated by applying a valuation factor provided by the third party pricing service to the last sales price for that security, or, if there is no reported sale during the day, the last reported bid price for that security.

If market values are not readily available, or if available market quotations are not reliable, securities are priced at their fair value as determined by the Manager using procedures approved by the Board. The Portfolio may use fair value pricing if the value of a security has been materially affected by events occurring before the Portfolio’s calculation of NAV but after the close of the primary markets on which the security is traded. The Portfolio may also use fair value pricing if reliable market quotations are unavailable due to infrequent trading or if trading in a particular security was halted during the day and did not resume prior to the Portfolio’s calculation of NAV.

Security Transactions - Security transactions are recorded on a trade date basis. Realized gains and losses on investments and unrealized appreciation and depreciation are determined on the identified cost basis, which is the same basis used for federal income tax purposes. The Portfolio may purchase and sell securities on a “when-issued” or “delayed delivery” basis, with settlement to occur at a later date. The value of the security so purchased is subject to market fluctuations during this period. The Portfolio segregates assets having an aggregate value at least equal to the amount of the when-issued or delayed delivery purchase commitments until payment is made.

13

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Clarion Global Real Estate Portfolio

Notes to Financial Statements—December 31, 2009—(Continued)

2. Significant Accounting Policies - continued

Investment Income and Expenses - Interest income is recorded on an accrual basis. Discounts and premiums on securities purchased are amortized over the lives of the respective securities. Dividend income is recorded on the ex-dividend date. Foreign dividend income is recorded on the ex-dividend date or as soon as practicable after the Portfolio has determined the existence of a dividend declaration after exercising reasonable due diligence. Foreign income and foreign capital gains on some foreign securities may be subject to foreign withholding taxes, which are accrued as applicable.

Income Taxes - It is the Portfolio’s policy to comply with the requirements of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”), and regulations thereunder, applicable to regulated investment companies and to distribute, with respect to each taxable year, all of its taxable income to shareholders. Therefore, no federal income tax provision is required. The Portfolio files U.S. Federal and various state tax returns. No income tax returns are currently under examination. The Portfolio’s federal tax returns for the prior three fiscal years remain subject to examination by the Internal Revenue Service.

Dividends and Distributions to Shareholders - The Portfolio records dividends and distributions on the ex-dividend date. Net realized gains from security transactions (if any) are generally distributed annually to shareholders. The timing and characterization of certain income and capital gains distributions are determined in accordance with federal tax regulations that may differ from GAAP. Permanent book and tax basis differences relating to shareholder distributions will result in reclassification between under/over distributed net investment income, accumulated net realized gains/losses and paid in surplus. Book-tax differences are primarily due to futures transactions, foreign currency transactions, certain foreign withholding taxes, passive foreign investment companies (PFIC), partnerships, deferred trustees compensation, capital loss carryforwards and losses deferred due to wash sales, as applicable. These adjustments have no impact on net assets or the results of operations.

Securities Lending - The Portfolio may lend its securities to certain qualified brokers who borrow securities in order to complete certain transactions. By lending its investment securities, the Portfolio attempts to increase its net investment income through the receipt of income on the loan. Any gain or loss in the market price of the securities loaned that might occur and any interest earned or dividends declared during the term of the loan would accrue to the account of the Portfolio.

Upon entering into a securities lending transaction, the Portfolio receives cash or other securities as collateral in an amount equal to or exceeding 102% of the current market value of the loaned securities (105% for foreign equity securities). Any cash received as collateral is generally invested by State Street Bank and Trust Company, acting in its capacity as securities lending agent (the “Agent”), in the State Street Navigator Securities Lending Prime Portfolio, which is a money market fund registered under the 1940 Act. A portion of net income (income after the deduction of expenses and fees of the Navigator Securities Lending Prime Portfolio) on the collateral is rebated to the borrower of the securities and the remainder is split between the Agent and the Portfolio. On loans collateralized by U.S. Treasuries, a fee is received from the borrower and is allocated between the Portfolio and the Agent. Risks of delay in recovery of the securities or even loss of rights in the collateral may occur should the borrower of the securities fail financially. Risks may also arise to the extent that the value of the collateral decreases below the value of the securities loaned.

Repurchase Agreements - The Portfolio may enter into repurchase agreements with selected commercial banks and broker-dealers, under which the Portfolio acquires securities as collateral and agrees to resell the securities at an agreed upon time and at an agreed upon price. The Portfolio accrues interest for the difference between the amount it pays for the securities and the amount it receives upon resale. At the time the Portfolio enters into a repurchase agreement, the value of the collateral securities, including accrued interest, will be equal to or exceed the value of the repurchase agreement and, for repurchase agreements that mature in more than one day, the seller will agree that the value of the collateral securities, including accrued interest, will continue to be at least equal to the value of the repurchase agreement.

Directed Brokerage Agreement - The Trust has entered into a directed brokerage arrangement with State Street Global Markets (“SSGM”). Under this arrangement, the Portfolio directs certain trades to SSGM in return for a recapture credit. SSGM issues a cash rebate to the Portfolio. Amounts paid to the Portfolio are shown separately as an expense reduction on the Statement of Operations of the Portfolio.

Mortgage Related and Other Asset Backed Securities - The Portfolio may invest in mortgage related or other asset-backed securities. These securities may include mortgage pass-through securities, collateralized mortgaged obligations (“CMOs”), commercial mortgage-backed securities, mortgage dollar rolls, CMO residuals, stripped mortgage backed securities (“SMBS”) and other securities that directly or indirectly represent a participation in, or are secured by a payable from, mortgage loans on real property or other receivables. The value of some mortgage or asset-backed securities may be particularly sensitive to changes in prevailing interest rates. Early repayment of principal on some mortgage-related securities may expose the Portfolio to a lower rate of return upon reinvestment of principal. The value of these securities may fluctuate in response to the market’s perception of the creditworthiness of the issuers. Additionally, although mortgages and mortgage-related securities are generally supported by some form of government or private guarantee and/or insurance, there is no assurance that private guarantors or insurers will meet their obligations.

In one type of SMBS, one class receives all of the interest from the mortgage assets (the interest-only or “IO” class), while the other class will receive all of the principal (the principal-only or “PO” class). Payments received for the IOs are included in interest income on the Statement of Operations of the Portfolio. Because principal will not be received at the maturity of an IO, adjustments are made to the book value on the security on a daily basis until maturity. These adjustments are included in interest income on the Statement of Operations of the Portfolio. Payments received for POs are treated as reductions to the cost and par value of the securities. Details of mortgage related and other asset-backed securities held at year end are included in the Portfolio’s Portfolio of Investments.

14

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Clarion Global Real Estate Portfolio

Notes to Financial Statements—December 31, 2009—(Continued)

2. Significant Accounting Policies - continued

The Portfolio may invest a significant portion of its assets in securities of issuers that hold mortgage and asset backed securities and direct investments in securities backed by commercial and residential mortgage loans and other financial assets. The value and related income of these securities are sensitive to changes in economic conditions, including delinquencies and/or defaults, and may be negatively impacted by increased volatility of market prices and periods of illiquidity.

3. Investment Management Agreement and Other Transactions with Affiliates

Investment Management Agreement - The Trust has entered into a management agreement with the Manager (the “Management Agreement”) for investment management services in connection with the investment management of the Portfolio. The Manager is subject to the supervision and direction of the Board and has overall responsibility for the general management and administration of the Trust. The Manager has entered into an advisory agreement with ING Clarion Real Estate Securities, LLC (the “Adviser”) for investment advisory services in connection with the investment management of the Portfolio.

Subject to the supervision and direction of the Board, the Manager supervises the Adviser and has full discretion with respect to the retention or renewal of the advisory agreement. The Manager pays the Adviser a fee based on the Portfolio’s average daily net assets.

Under the terms of the Portfolio’s Management Agreement, the Portfolio pays the Manager a monthly fee based upon annual rates applied to the Portfolio’s average daily net assets as follows:

Management Fees earned by the Manager for the period ended December 31, 2009		% per annum	Average Daily Net Assets
$	6,047,170	0.70%	First $200 Million
		0.65%	$200 Million to $750 Million
		0.55%	Over $750 Million

Transfer Agency Agreement - Metropolitan Life Insurance Company (“MLIC”) serves as the transfer agent for the Trust. MLIC is an affiliate of the Manager. MLIC receives no fees for its services to the Trust under the transfer agency agreement.

Distribution Agreements and Plans - The Trust has distribution agreements with MetLife Investors Distribution Company (“MIDC” or the “Distributor”) in which MIDC serves as the Distributor for the Trust’s Class A, Class B and Class E Shares. MIDC is a wholly-owned subsidiary of MetLife Investors Group, Inc., an affiliate of the Manager. The Class B and Class E distribution plans provide that the Trust, on behalf of the Portfolio, may pay annually up to 0.50% and 0.25%, respectively, of the average net assets of the Portfolio attributable to its Class B and Class E Shares in respect to activities primarily intended to result in the sale of Class B and Class E Shares. However, under the Class B and Class E distribution agreements, payments to the Distributor for activities pursuant to the Class B and Class E distribution plans are currently limited to payments at an annual rate equal to 0.25% and 0.15% of average daily net assets of the Portfolio attributable to its Class B and Class E Shares, respectively.

Under the terms of the Class B and Class E distribution plans and distribution agreements, the Portfolio is authorized to make payments monthly to the Distributor that may be used to pay or reimburse entities providing distribution and shareholder servicing with respect to the Class B and Class E Shares for such entities’ fees or expenses incurred.

Deferred Trustee Compensation - Each Trustee of the Trust who is not currently an employee of the Manager or any of its affiliates receives compensation from the Trust for his or her service to the Portfolio. A deferred compensation plan (the “Plan”) is available to the Trustees on a voluntary basis. Deferred amounts remain in the Trust until distributed in accordance with the provisions of the Plan. The value of a participating Trustee’s deferral account is based on theoretical investments of deferred amounts, on the normal payment dates, in certain portfolios of the Trust or Metropolitan Series Fund, Inc. as designated by the participating Trustee. Changes in the value of participants’ deferral accounts are reflected as Trustees’ fees and expenses in the Statement of Operations. The portion of the accrued obligations allocated to the Portfolio, if any, under the Plan are reflected as Deferred Trustees’ fees in the Statement of Assets and Liabilities.

15

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Clarion Global Real Estate Portfolio

Notes to Financial Statements—December 31, 2009—(Continued)

4. Shares of Beneficial Interest

Transactions in shares of beneficial interest for the periods ended noted below were as follows:

	Beginning Shares	Sales	Reinvestments	Redemptions		Net Increase (Decrease) in Shares Outstanding		Ending Shares
Class A
12/31/2009	72,177,666	17,353,373	3,423,207	(17,029,434	)	3,747,146		75,924,812
12/31/2008	50,556,453	27,654,913	5,746,977	(11,780,677	)	21,621,213		72,177,666
Class B
12/31/2009	37,897,348	7,901,309	1,597,748	(6,694,916	)	2,804,141		40,701,489
12/31/2008	34,595,270	8,140,621	3,566,023	(8,404,566	)	3,302,078		37,897,348
Class E
12/31/2009	4,706,373	520,313	183,882	(1,214,452	)	(510,257	)	4,196,116
12/31/2008	5,179,996	745,349	503,532	(1,722,504	)	(473,623	)	4,706,373

The Portfolio is authorized to issue an unlimited number of shares.

5. Investment Transactions

Aggregate cost of purchases and proceeds of sales of investment securities, excluding short-term securities, for the period ended December 31, 2009 were as follows:

Purchases			Sales
U.S. Government	Non-Government		U.S. Government		Non-Government
$—	$	638,310,609	$	—	$	614,977,515

At December 31, 2009, the cost of securities for federal income tax purposes and the unrealized appreciation (depreciation) of investments for federal income tax purposes for the Portfolio were as follows:

Federal Income Tax Cost	Gross Unrealized Appreciation		Gross Unrealized Depreciation			Net Unrealized Depreciation
$1,290,395,902	$	137,624,591	$	(212,465,089	)	$	(74,840,498	)

6. Securities Lending

As of December 31, 2009, the Portfolio had loaned securities which were collateralized by short-term investments. The value of securities loaned and the value of the related collateral were as follows:

Value of Securities	Value of Cash Collateral		Value of Non-Cash Collateral*		Total Collateral
$62,054,501	$	65,761,095	$	—	$	65,761,095

* The Portfolio cannot repledge or resell this collateral. The non-cash collateral is typically comprised of government securities and/or bank letters of credit.

7. Contractual Obligations

The Trust has a variety of indemnification obligations under contracts with its service providers. The Trust’s maximum exposure under these arrangements is unknown. However, the Trust has not had prior claims or losses pursuant to these contracts and expects the risk of loss to be remote.

16

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Clarion Global Real Estate Portfolio

Notes to Financial Statements—December 31, 2009—(Continued)

8. Market, Credit and Counterparty Risk

In the normal course of business, the Portfolio invests in securities and enters into transactions where risks exist due to fluctuations in the market (market risk) or failure of the other party to a transaction to perform (credit risk). The value of securities held by the Portfolio may decline in response to certain events, including those directly involving the companies whose securities are owned by the Portfolio; conditions affecting the general economy; overall market changes; local, regional or global political, social or economic instability; and currency and interest rate and price fluctuations. The Portfolio may be exposed to counterparty risk, or the risk that an entity with which the Portfolio has unsettled or open transactions may default. The potential loss could exceed the value of the financial assets recorded in the financial statements. Financial assets, which potentially expose the Portfolio to credit risk, consist principally of cash due from counterparties and investments. The Portfolio restricts its exposure to credit losses by entering into master agreements with counterparties (approved brokers) with whom it undertakes a significant volume of transactions to include certain safeguards for derivatives and non-standard settlement trades. The credit risk associated with favorable contracts is reduced by a master netting arrangement to the extent that if an event of default occurs, all amounts with the counterparty are terminated and settled on a net basis. The Portfolio’s overall exposure to credit risk on derivative instruments subject to master netting arrangements can change substantially within a short period, as it is affected by each transaction subject to the arrangement.

9. Income Tax Information

The tax character of distributions paid for the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2008 were as follows:

Ordinary Income			Long-Term Capital Gain				Total
2009	2008		2009		2008		2009		2008
$32,532,068	$	20,609,620	$	—	$	107,776,773	$	32,532,068	$	128,386,393

As of December 31, 2009, the components of distributable earnings (accumulated losses) on a federal income tax basis were as follows:

Undistributed Ordinary Income	Undistributed Long-Term Gain		Net Unrealized Depreciation			Loss Carryforwards			Total
$100,350,772	$	—	$	(74,838,887	)	$	(424,970,273	)	$	(399,458,388	)

The Portfolio utilizes the provisions of the federal income tax laws that provide for the carryforward of capital losses for eight years, offsetting such losses against any future net realized capital gains. At December 31, 2009, the accumulated capital loss carryforwards and expiration dates by the Portfolio were as follows:

Expiring 12/31/2016	Expiring 12/31/2017		Total
$193,635,592	$	231,334,681	$	424,970,273

10. Recent Accounting Pronouncement

On January 21, 2010, the Financial Accounting Standards Board issued Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) 2010-06, “Improving Disclosures About Fair Value Measurements.” The ASU amends Accounting Standards Codification 820 to add new requirements for disclosures about transfers into and out of Levels 1 and 2. It also clarifies existing fair value disclosures about the level of disaggregation and about inputs and valuation techniques used to measure fair value. Additionally, the ASU amends disclosures about providing purchases, sales, issuances, and settlements on a gross basis relating to Level 3 measurements. The ASU guidance is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2009, and for interim periods within those fiscal years, except for the requirement to provide the Level 3 activity of purchases, sales, issuances, and settlements on a gross basis, which will be effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2010, and for interim periods within those fiscal years. Management is currently evaluating the impact the adoption of ASU 2010-06 will have on the Portfolio’s financial statements.

11. Subsequent Events

Management’s evaluation of the impact of all subsequent events on the Portfolio’s financial statements was completed through February 26, 2010, the date the financial statements were issued, and management has determined that as of that date there were no subsequent events requiring adjustments or disclosure in the Portfolio’s financial statements.

17

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Clarion Global Real Estate Portfolio

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

To the Shareholders and Board of Trustees of Met Investors Series Trust:

We have audited the accompanying statement of assets and liabilities, including the portfolio of investments, of the Clarion Global Real Estate Portfolio, one of the portfolios constituting Met Investors Series Trust (the “Trust”) as of December 31, 2009, and the related statement of operations for the year then ended, the statements of changes in net assets each of the two years in the period then ended, and the financial highlights for each of the five years in the period then ended. These financial statements and financial highlights are the responsibility of the Trust’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements and financial highlights based on our audits.

We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements and financial highlights are free of material misstatement. The Trust is not required to have, nor were we engaged to perform, an audit of its internal control over financial reporting. Our audits included consideration of internal control over financial reporting as a basis for designing audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the Trust’s internal control over financial reporting. Accordingly, we express no such opinion. An audit also includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements, assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. Our procedures included confirmation of securities owned as of December 31, 2009, by correspondence with the custodian and brokers; where replies were not received from brokers, we performed other auditing procedures. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.

In our opinion, the financial statements and financial highlights referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of the Clarion Global Real Estate Portfolio of the Met Investors Series Trust as of December 31, 2009, the results of its operations for the year then ended, the changes in its net assets for each of the two years in the period then ended, and the financial highlights for each of the five years in the period then ended, in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.

Deloitte & Touche LLP

Boston, Massachusetts

February 26, 2010

18

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Trustees and Officers (Unaudited) December 31, 2009

The Trustees and executive officers of the Trust, their ages and their principal occupations during the past five years are set forth below. Unless otherwise indicated, the business address of each is 5 Park Plaza, Suite 1900 Irvine, California 92614. Each Trustee who is deemed an “interested person,” as such term is defined in the 1940 Act, is indicated by an asterisk. Those Trustees who are not “interested persons” as defined in the 1940 Act are referred to as “Independent Trustees.” Additional information about the Trustees is available in the Statement of Additional Information which is available without charge, upon request, by calling (800) 848-3854.

The Trustees
Name and Age	Position(s) Held with Registrant	Term of Office and Length of Time Served	Principal Occupation(s) During Past 5 Years	Number of Portfolios in Fund Complex+ overseen by Trustee	Other Directorships Held by Trustee
Interested Trustees
Elizabeth M. Forget* (43)	President and Trustee	Indefinite; From December 2000 to present	Since May 2007, Senior Vice President, MetLife, Inc.; since December 2000, President of MetLife Advisers, LLC and its predecessor; December 2003 to April 2007, Vice President, MetLife, Inc.	84	Director, Metropolitan Series Fund, Inc. since August 2006.
Independent Trustees
Stephen M. Alderman (50)	Trustee	Indefinite; From December 2000 to present	Since November 1991, Shareholder in the law firm of Garfield and Merel, Ltd.	48	None
Jack R. Borsting (80)	Trustee	Indefinite; From December 2000 to present	Since 2006, Professor and Dean Emeritus, Marshall School of Business, University of Southern California (USC); from 2001 to 2005, Professor of Business Administration and Dean Emeritus.	48	Director, Los Angeles Orthopedic Hospital, Trustee, The Rose Hills Foundation. Member, Army Science Board.
Robert Boulware (53)	Trustee	Indefinite; From March 2008 to present	From 2004 to 2009, Director of Norwood Promotional Products, Inc.; from 2007 to 2008, Director of Wealthpoint Advisors (a business development company); from 2007 to 2009, Director of Holladay Bank; from 1992-2006, President and Chief Executive Officer of ING Fund Distributor, LLC.	48	Since 2005, Director of Gainsco, Inc. (auto insurance).
Daniel A. Doyle (51)	Trustee	Indefinite; From February 2007 to present	From October 2000 to June 2009, Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of ATC Management, Inc. (public utility); since June 2009, independent business consultant.	48	Director, Wisconsin Sports Development Corporation
Susan C. Gause (57)	Trustee	Indefinite; From March 2008 to present	From 2000 to December 2002, Chief Executive Officer of Allianz Dresdner Asset Management; since 2003, private investor.	48	None

19

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Trustees and Officers (Unaudited)—(Continued) December 31, 2009

Name and Age	Position(s) Held with Registrant	Term of Office and Length of Time Served	Principal Occupation(s) During Past 5 Years	Number of Portfolios in Fund Complex+ overseen by Trustee	Other Directorships Held by Trustee
Independent Trustees - continued
Dawn M. Vroegop (43)	Trustee	Indefinite; From December 2000 to present	From September 1999 to September 2003, Managing Director, Dresdner RCM Global Investors.	84	Director, Metropolitan Series Fund, Inc. since May 2009; from 2003 to present, Director and Finance Committee Chair, City College of San Francisco Foundation

The Executive Officers
Name and Age	Position(s) Held with Registrant	Term of Office and Length of Time Served	Principal Occupation(s) During Past 5 Years
Jeffrey L. Bernier (38)	Vice President	From February 2009 to present	Since December 2007, Vice President, Metropolitan Life Insurance Company; since 2008 Senior Vice President of MetLife Advisers, LLC and its predecessor; from July 2004 to December 2007, Director and Senior Investment Analyst of Investment Management Services for John Hancock Financial Services.
Jeffrey A. Tupper (39)	Chief Financial Officer, Treasurer	From August 2002 to present	Since February 2009, Vice President, MetLife Advisers, LLC. Since October 2006, Assistant Vice President, MetLife Group, Inc. Since February 2001, Assistant Vice President of MetLife Investors Insurance Company.
Richard C. Pearson (66)	Vice President and Secretary	From December 2000 to present	Since June 2001, President or Executive Vice President of MetLife Investors Distribution Company; since January 2001, Executive Vice President, General Counsel and Secretary of MetLife Investors Group, Inc. and Vice President, Secretary and Associate General Counsel of its affiliated life insurance companies; since November 2000, Senior Vice President and General Counsel of MetLife Advisers, LLC and its predecessor.
Jeffrey P. Halperin (42)	Chief Compliance Officer	From November 2006 to present	Since March 2006, Vice President, Corporate Ethics and Compliance Department, MetLife, Inc.; from October 2002 to March 2006, Assistant Vice President; from November 2005 to August 2006, Interim Chief Compliance Officer, Met Investors Series Trust; since April 2007, Chief Compliance Officer, Metropolitan Series Funds; from August 2006 to April 2007, Interim Chief Compliance Officer, Metropolitan Series Funds; since August 2006, Chief Compliance Officer, MetLife Advisers, LLC and its predecessor; since November 2006, Chief Compliance Officer, MetLife Investment Advisors Company, LLC.

+ The Fund Complex includes the Trust (48 portfolios) and Metropolitan Series Fund, Inc. (36 portfolios).

* Ms. Forget is an “interested person” of the Trust as a result of her affiliation with the Manager and the Distributor.

Quarterly Portfolio Schedule

The Trust files Form N-Q for the first and third quarters of each fiscal year. The Trust’s Forms N-Q will be available on the Securities and Exchange Commission’s website at http://www.sec.gov. The Trust’s Forms N-Q may be reviewed and copied at the Securities and Exchange Commission’s

20

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Trustees and Officers (Unaudited)—(Continued) December 31, 2009

Public Reference Room in Washington, D.C. and information on the operation of the Public Reference Room may be obtained by calling 1-800-SEC-0330. Once filed, the most recent Form N-Q will be available without charge, upon request, by calling (800) 848-3854.

Proxy Voting Policies and Procedures

A description of the policies and procedures that the Trust uses to determine how to vote proxies relating to portfolio securities is available without charge, upon request, by calling (800) 848-3854 and on the Securities and Exchange Commission’s website at http://www.sec.gov.

Proxy Voting Record

The Trust, on behalf of each of its Portfolios, has filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission its proxy voting record for the 12-month period ending June 30 on Form N-PX. Form N-PX must be filed by the Trust each year by August 31. Once filed, the most recent Form N-PX will be available without charge, upon request, by calling (800) 848-3854 or on the Securities and Exchange Commission’s website at http://www.sec.gov.

21

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Clarion Global Real Estate Portfolio

Board of Trustees’ Consideration of Advisory and Sub-Advisory Agreements

At an in-person meeting of the Board of Trustees (the “Board”) of the Met Investors Series Trust (the “Trust”) held on November 10-11, 2009, the Board, including a majority of the Trustees who are not considered to be “interested persons” of the Trust (the “Independent Trustees”) under the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended (the “1940 Act”), approved for an annual period the continuation of the Trust’s advisory agreement (the “Advisory Agreement”) with MetLife Advisers, LLC (the “Adviser”) and the applicable sub-advisory agreements (each a “Sub-Advisory Agreement”, and collectively with the Advisory Agreement, the “Agreements”) between the Adviser and the investment sub-advisers (each a “Sub-Adviser”, and collectively, the “Sub-Advisers”) for each of the series of the Trust, including the Clarion Global Real Estate Portfolio (each a “Portfolio,” and collectively, the “Portfolios”).¹

In considering the Agreements, the Board reviewed a variety of materials provided by the Adviser and the Sub-Advisers relating to each Portfolio, the Adviser and each Sub-Adviser, including comparative performance, fee and expense information for an appropriate peer group of similar mutual funds, performance information for relevant benchmark indices and other information regarding the nature, extent and quality of services provided by the Adviser and the Sub-Advisers under their respective Agreements. The Board also took into account information provided to the Board in its meetings throughout the year with respect to the services provided by the Adviser and the Sub-Advisers, including quarterly performance reports prepared by management containing reviews of investment results, and periodic presentations from the Sub-Advisers with respect to the Portfolios they manage. The Independent Trustees also assessed reports provided by independent consultants, who reviewed and provided analyses regarding investment performance, fees and expenses, profitability and other information provided by, or at the direction of, the Adviser and the Sub-Advisers, as more fully discussed below.

The Independent Trustees were separately advised by independent legal counsel throughout the process. Prior to voting, the Independent Trustees also received a memorandum from their independent counsel discussing the legal standards for their consideration of the proposed continuation of the Agreements. The Board met in person with personnel of the Adviser prior to the November meeting for the specific purpose of considering the proposed continuation of the Agreements. The Independent Trustees also discussed the proposed continuation of the Agreements in private sessions with their independent legal counsel at which no representatives of management were present.

In considering whether to approve the renewal of the Advisory Agreement with the Adviser and any applicable Sub-Advisory Agreements with respect to each Portfolio, the Board reviewed and analyzed the factors it deemed relevant, including: (1) the nature, extent and quality of the services to be provided to the Portfolios by the Adviser and the Sub-Advisers; (2) the performance of the Portfolios as compared to a peer group and an appropriate index; (3) the Adviser’s and each of the Sub-Adviser’s personnel and operations; (4) the financial condition of the Adviser and of the Sub-Advisers; (5) the level and method of computing each Portfolio’s advisory and sub-advisory fees; (6) the profitability of the Adviser under the Advisory Agreement and of the Sub-Advisers under the Sub-Advisory Agreements; (7) any “fall-out” benefits to the Adviser, the Sub-Advisers and their affiliates (i.e., ancillary benefits realized by the Adviser, the Sub-Advisers or their affiliates from the Adviser’s or Sub-Advisers’ relationship with the Trust); (8) the anticipated effect of growth in size on each Portfolio’s performance and expenses; (9) fees paid to the Sub-Advisers by comparable institutional and retail accounts; and (10) possible conflicts of interest. The Board also considered the nature, quality, and extent of the services to be provided to the Portfolios by the Adviser’s affiliates, including distribution services.

Nature, extent and quality of services. In considering the nature, extent and quality of the services to be provided by the Adviser to the Portfolios, the Board took into account the extensive responsibilities that the Adviser has as investment manager to the Portfolios, including the provision of investment advice to: (i) MetLife Aggressive Strategy Portfolio, MetLife Balanced Strategy Portfolio, MetLife Defensive Strategy Portfolio, MetLife Growth Strategy Portfolio, and MetLife Moderate Strategy Portfolio (together, the “Asset Allocation Portfolios”), (ii) American Funds Balanced Allocation Portfolio, American Funds Growth Allocation Portfolio, and American Funds Moderate Allocation Portfolio (together, the “American Funds of Funds”), and (iii) the Met/Franklin Templeton Founding Strategy Portfolio, the selection of the Sub-Advisers for the other Portfolios and oversight of the Sub-Advisers’ compliance with fund policies and objectives, review of brokerage matters including with respect to trade allocation and best execution, oversight of general fund compliance with federal and state laws, and the implementation of Board directives as they relate to the Portfolios. The Adviser’s role in coordinating the activities of the Portfolios’ other service providers was also considered. The Board also evaluated the expertise and performance of the investment personnel with respect to the Asset Allocation Portfolios, the American Funds of Funds and the Met/Franklin Templeton Founding Strategy Portfolio and of the personnel overseeing the Sub-Advisers of the other Portfolios, and compliance with each Portfolio’s investment restrictions, tax and other requirements. The Board considered information received from the Trust’s Chief Compliance Officer (“CCO”) regarding the Portfolios’ compliance policies and procedures established pursuant to Rule 38a-1 under the 1940 Act, including the policies and procedures in place relating to proxy voting. The Board also took into account its familiarity with management through Board meetings, discussions and reports during the preceding year.

The Board also recognized the Adviser^’s reputation and long-standing experience in serving as an investment adviser to the Trust, and considered the benefit to shareholders of investing in funds that are part of a family of variable annuity portfolios offering a variety of investments. In addition, the Board reviewed the financial condition of the Adviser and whether it had the financial wherewithal to provide a high level and quality of services to the Portfolios. In its review, the Board also received and took into account information regarding any services and/or payments provided to the Adviser by the Sub-Advisers in connection with marketing activities.

¹ The Met/Templeton International Bond Portfolio recently commenced operations and, therefore, the Agreements with respect to this Portfolio were not up for renewal.

22

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Clarion Global Real Estate Portfolio

Board of Trustees’ Consideration of Advisory and Sub-Advisory Agreements—(Continued)

With respect to the services provided by each of the Sub-Advisers, the Board considered information provided to the Board by each Sub-Adviser, including each Sub-Adviser’s Form ADV, as well as information presented throughout the past year. The Board considered the Sub-Adviser’s current level of staffing and its overall resources, as well as its compensation program. The Board reviewed each Sub-Adviser’s history and investment experience, as well as information regarding the qualifications, background and responsibilities of the Sub-Adviser’s investment and compliance personnel who provide services to the Portfolios. The Board also considered, among other things, the Sub-Adviser’s compliance program and any disciplinary history. The Board noted each Sub-Adviser’s regulatory history, including whether it was currently involved in any regulatory actions or investigations as well as material litigation, and any settlements and ameliatory actions undertaken, as appropriate. The Board also noted that the CCO and his staff conduct regular, periodic compliance reviews with each of the Sub-Advisers and present reports to the Independent Trustees regarding the same, which includes evaluating the regulatory compliance systems of the Sub-Advisers and procedures reasonably designed by them to assure compliance with the federal securities laws, including issues related to late trading and market timing, best execution, fair value pricing, and proxy voting procedures, among others. The Board also took into account the financial condition of each Sub-Adviser.

The Board considered each Sub-Adviser’s investment process and philosophy. The Board took into account that each Sub-Adviser’s responsibilities include the development and maintenance of an investment program for the applicable Portfolio which is consistent with the Portfolio’s investment objectives, the selection of investment securities and the placement of orders for the purchase and sale of such securities, as well as the implementation of compliance controls related to performance of these services. The Board also reviewed each Sub-Adviser’s brokerage policies and practices, including with respect to best execution and soft dollars.

Based on its consideration and review of the foregoing information, the Board concluded that the nature, extent and quality of services provided by the Adviser and by each Sub-Adviser were satisfactory and that there was a reasonable basis on which to conclude that each would provide a high quality of investment services to the Portfolios.

Performance. The Board considered the performance of the Portfolios as described in the quarterly reports prepared by management, and as also analyzed in reports prepared by the Independent Trustees’ independent consultant. The Board noted that the Adviser reviews with the Board on a quarterly basis detailed information about the Portfolios’ performance results, portfolio composition and investment strategies. The Board also reviewed and considered a separate report prepared by Lipper Inc. (“Lipper”), an independent third party, which provided a statistical analysis comparing the Portfolios’ investment performance, expenses, and fees to comparable funds underlying variable insurance products (the “Performance Universe”). In addition, the Independent Trustees met separately with a representative of Bobroff Consulting, Inc., an independent consultant (“Bobroff”), at a special board meeting in September 2009, to review the separate reports prepared by such consultant (“Bobroff Report”), which analyzed the report prepared by Lipper, as well as certain of the other factors to be considered by the Board including supplemental alpha and information coefficient analysis. The Board also considered each Portfolio’s more recent performance subsequent to the performance period covered by the Lipper reports, and management’s discussion of the same, including the effect of current market conditions on each Portfolio’s more recent performance.

The Board closely reviewed the Portfolios’ performance records and the Adviser’s and Sub-Advisers’ management styles and long-term performance records with the Portfolios and comparable funds. The Board focused particular attention on Portfolios with less favorable performance records. The Board was mindful of the Adviser’s focus on each Sub-Adviser’s performance and noted that the Adviser has been active in monitoring and responding to any performance issues with respect to the Portfolios. The Board also took into account its discussions with management regarding factors that contributed to the performance of each Portfolio.

Among other data relating specifically to the Clarion Global Real Estate Portfolio’s performance, the Board considered that the Portfolio outperformed both the median of its Performance Universe and its Lipper Index for the one-, three- and five-year periods ended July 31, 2009. The Board further considered that the Portfolio outperformed its benchmark, the FTSE EPRA/NAREIT Developed Index, for the one-year period and underperformed the benchmark for the three- and five year periods ended August 31, 2009. The Board took into account management’s discussion of the Portfolio’s performance and the fact that the Portfolio’s previous Adviser was replaced on April 28, 2008. The Board also noted the change to the Portfolio’s investment strategy the previous year. Based on its review, the Board concluded that the Portfolio’s performance was satisfactory.

Fees and Expenses. The Board gave substantial consideration to the advisory fees payable under the Advisory Agreement and the sub-advisory fees payable under each of the Sub-Advisory Agreements. In this regard, the Board reviewed the advisory fees payable in the aggregate as well as on a Portfolio-by-Portfolio basis based on information provided by the Adviser. The Independent Trustees, with the assistance of Bobroff, also examined the fees paid by each Portfolio in light of fees paid to other investment managers by comparable funds and the method of computing each Portfolio’s fee, as well as considered the fees charged by the Adviser to manage other comparable funds. The Lipper report included comparisons of the Adviser’s fee schedule with that of its peers based on an asset-based analysis of relative fee structures according to the size of each Portfolio. In addition, the Board considered the Portfolios’ advisory and sub-advisory fees and total expenses as compared to similarly situated investment companies underlying variable insurance products deemed to be comparable to the Portfolios as determined by Lipper. The Board considered each Portfolio’s ranking within a smaller group of peer funds chosen by Lipper (the “Expense Group”), as well as the Portfolio’s ranking within broader groups of funds (the “Expense Universe” and the “Sub-advised Expense Universe”). The Board also considered each Portfolio’s contractual sub-advisory fees, as applicable, as compared to the Sub-advised Expense Universe as well as a smaller group of funds

23

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Clarion Global Real Estate Portfolio

Board of Trustees’ Consideration of Advisory and Sub-Advisory Agreements—(Continued)

(the “Sub-advised Expense Group”). In comparing each Portfolio’s actual and contractual management fee to that of comparable funds, the Board noted that such fee includes both advisory and administrative fees.

The Board noted that the sub-advisory fees for the Portfolios are paid by the Adviser, not the Portfolios, out of the advisory fee. It was further noted that the Adviser negotiates such fees at arm’s length. The Board also considered that the Adviser had entered into expense limitation agreements with certain of the Portfolios as noted below, pursuant to which the Adviser has agreed to waive a portion of its advisory fee and/or reimburse certain expenses as a means of limiting a Portfolio’s total annual operating expenses. In addition, the Board noted that the Adviser effected fee reductions in 2009 with respect to several Portfolios. The Board also noted that the Adviser had re-negotiated the securities lending arrangement with State Street Corporation to further maximize the income to the Portfolios from such program.

With respect to each sub-advised Portfolio, the Board also compared the sub-advisory fees paid by the Adviser to fees charged by the Portfolio’s Sub-Adviser to manage other sub-advised portfolios and portfolios not subject to regulation under the 1940 Act, such as separate accounts, as applicable. The Board considered the fee comparisons in light of the differences required to manage different types of accounts.

With respect to the Clarion Global Real Estate Portfolio, the Board considered that the Portfolio’s actual management fees and total expenses (exclusive of 12b-1 fees) were below the median of the Expense Group, the Expense Universe and the Sub-advised Expense Universe. The Board further noted that the Portfolio’s contractual management fees were below the normalized median of the Expense Group at the Portfolio’s current size. The Board also noted that the Portfolio’s contractual sub-advisory fees were below the average of the Sub-advised Expense Group at the Portfolio’s current size. After consideration of all relevant factors, the Board concluded that the advisory and sub-advisory fees are consistent with industry norms and are fair and reasonable in light of the services to be provided.

Profitability. The Board examined the profitability of the Adviser on an aggregate basis with respect to all Portfolios, as well as on a Portfolio-by-Portfolio basis. With respect to the Asset Allocation Portfolios and Met/Franklin Templeton Founding Strategy Portfolio, the Board noted that the advisory fee is in addition to the fees received by the Adviser and its affiliates with regard to the other Portfolios of the Trust or of Metropolitan Series Fund, Inc., in which the Asset Allocation Portfolios and Met/Franklin Templeton Founding Strategy Portfolio may invest. With respect to the other Portfolios, the Board noted that a major component of profitability of the Adviser was the margin between the sub-advisory fees that the Adviser receives from the Trust and the portion of those fees paid to the Sub-Advisers. In this regard, the Board took into account certain comparative information in the Lipper report. The Board also reviewed the Adviser’s unaudited income statements and balance sheet information supplied by the Adviser regarding costs borne by the Adviser’s affiliates which support the operations of the Adviser but are not reflected on the unaudited income statements of the Adviser, as well as considered the profitability of the insurance products, the function of which is supported in part by the Adviser’s revenues under the Advisory Agreement, and other information and analysis prepared by the Adviser. With respect to the American Funds Bond Portfolio, American Funds Growth Portfolio, American Funds Growth-Income Portfolio, American Funds Global Small Capitalization Portfolio and American Funds International Portfolio, the Board noted that the Adviser currently does not receive an advisory fee. The Board also considered that the Distributor, MetLife Investors Distribution Company, receives 12b-1 payments to support the distribution of the products. The Board concluded after extensive discussions with management that the profitability of the Adviser and its affiliates from their relationship with each Portfolio was reasonable in light of all relevant factors.

In considering the profitability to the Sub-Advisers and their affiliates of their relationships with the Portfolios, the Board noted that the fees under the Sub-Advisory Agreements were paid by the Adviser out of the advisory fees that it receives under the Advisory Agreement. The Board also relied on the ability of the Adviser to negotiate the Sub-Advisory Agreements and the fees thereunder at arm’s length. The Board reviewed portfolio specific data with regard to the profitability of the Portfolios to each Sub-Adviser, as available, and analyzed the reasonableness of such profitability finding no indication of excessive profitability. However, the Board placed more reliance on the fact that the Sub-Advisory Agreement was negotiated at arm’s length and that the advisory fee was paid by the Adviser than on Sub-Adviser profitability.

Economies of scale. The Board also considered the effect of the Portfolios’ growth in size on their performances and fees. The Board noted that the fee schedules for all but eleven of the Portfolios contain breakpoints that reduce the fee rate above specified asset levels. The Board noted those Portfolios that did not contain breakpoints in the advisory fee and took into account management’s discussion of the same. The Board noted that those Portfolios with advisory fee schedules containing breakpoints generally reflect the inclusion of breakpoints in the sub-advisory fee schedule for such Portfolios. The Board considered the effective fees under the Advisory Agreement for each Portfolio as a percentage of assets at different asset levels and possible economies of scale that may be realized if the assets of the Portfolio grow. Among other data, the Board examined the effect of each Portfolio’s growth in size on various fee schedules and reviewed the Lipper and Bobroff Reports, which compared fee schedules among peers. The Board also took into account that the Sub-Adviser fees are paid by the Adviser out of the advisory fee. The Board also noted that if the Portfolios’ assets increase over time, the Portfolios may realize other economies of scale if assets increase proportionally more than certain other fixed expenses.

With respect to the Clarion Global Real Estate Portfolio, the Board noted that the Portfolio’s advisory fee and sub-advisory fee each contains breakpoints that reduce the advisory fee rate on assets above certain specified asset levels. The Board considered the fact that the Portfolio’s fee levels decline as portfolio assets increase. The Board further considered that the Portfolio’s management fees were below the asset-weighted average of comparable funds at all asset levels. The Board concluded that the advisory fee structure for the Portfolio, including breakpoints, was reasonable and appropriately reflects potential economies of scale.

24

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Clarion Global Real Estate Portfolio

Board of Trustees’ Consideration of Advisory and Sub-Advisory Agreements—(Continued)

Other factors. As part of its evaluation of the Adviser’s compensation, the Board considered other benefits that may be realized by the Adviser and its affiliates from their relationship with the Trust. Among them, the Board recognized that an affiliate of the Adviser, MetLife Investors Distribution Company, serves as the Distributor for the Trust, and, as such, receives payments pursuant to Rule 12b-1 from the Portfolios to compensate it for providing shareholder services and selling activities, which could lead to growth in the Trust’s assets and corresponding benefits from such growth, including economies of scale. The Board also considered that affiliates of the Adviser may benefit from certain indirect tax benefits relating to dividend received deductions and foreign tax credits. The Board concluded that ancillary benefits accruing to the Adviser and its affiliates by virtue of the Adviser’s relationship with the Portfolios are fair and reasonable in light of the costs of providing investment management and other services to the Portfolios and the ongoing commitment of the Adviser to the Portfolios.

The Board considered other benefits that may be realized by each Subadviser and its affiliates from their relationship with the Trust, including the opportunity to provide advisory services to additional portfolios of the Trust and reputational benefits. The Board concluded that the benefits accruing to the Subadvisers and their affiliates by virtue of the Subadvisers’ relationships to the Portfolios are fair and reasonable in light of the costs of providing investment advisory services to the Portfolios and the ongoing commitment of the Subadvisers to the Portfolios.

The Board considered any possible conflicts of interest in the form of material benefits or detriments to the Trust resulting from the nature of the Trust’s and the Adviser’s or the Subadvisers’ affiliations. Here, the Board considered possible conflicts of interest that may arise between the Trust and the Adviser or a Subadviser in connection with the services provided to the Trust and the various relationships that they and their affiliates may have with the Trust. The Board considered the procedures for monitoring and managing such potential conflicts.

Conclusion. In considering the renewal of each of the Agreements, the Board, including the Independent Trustees, did not identify any single factor as controlling, and each Trustee may have attributed different weights to various factors. The Board evaluated all information available to them on a Portfolio-by-Portfolio basis, and their determinations were made separately with respect to each Portfolio. Based on all of the above-mentioned considerations, and the recommendations of management, the Board, including a majority of the Independent Trustees, determined that approval of the Advisory Agreement and the Sub-Advisory Agreements was in the best interests of each Portfolio. After full consideration of these and other factors, the Board, including a majority of the Independent Trustees, with the assistance of independent counsel, approved the Advisory Agreement and the Sub-Advisory Agreement with respect to each Portfolio.

25

Simplify your life…

with MetLife eDelivery^® while helping MetLife preserve the planet’s natural resources.

(see details on inside cover)

Met Investors Series Trust Dreman Small Cap Value Portfolio Annual Report December 31, 2009

• get rid of all that paper?

• access important documents whenever you want?

• conveniently receive valuable information online?

Get it all with MetLife eDelivery!

MetLife’s eDelivery service is your resource for electronic delivery of your variable annuity or variable life prospectuses, semiannual and annual reports, and other information. Available to variable product clients of Metropolitan Life Insurance Company, First MetLife Investors Insurance Company, General American Life Insurance Company, MetLife Investors Insurance Company, MetLife Investors USA Insurance Company, MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut and New England Life Insurance Company.*

Why sign up for MetLife eDelivery?

It’s Free** – No cost to enroll or use the service.

It’s Paperless – We’ll email you when your documents are available.

It’s Easy – Enrollment takes just a few minutes.

How do you sign up?

Just type in www.metlife.esourcelink.net to get to MetLife’s online registration form. You will need your policy/account numbers, which can be found on your statements. The form takes only a few minutes to complete. Please note, for jointly owned contracts, both owners will need to register in order to eliminate paper delivery.

  * Not all MetLife products offer eDelivery at this time. ** Your internet provider may impose fees for this service. L0210086208[0911]

Letter from the President

Letter to Policy Holders

February 1, 2010

2009 can best be described as a year of recovery. The year began with the stock market in a broad decline and the economy mired in a deep recession. However, investors’ sentiment improved dramatically during the year as fiscal and monetary authorities took measures to jump start the economy which helped spark a strong market rally in equities and corporate bonds.

The Barclays Capital U.S. Aggregate Bond Index returned 5.9% during 2009. While this was similar to the 5.2% return experienced in 2008, the two years could not have been more different. In 2008, fear drove investors toward the safety of U.S. Treasury securities and away from the risk of corporate bonds, especially those rated below investment grade. In contrast, investors were more willing to embrace risk in 2009. This produced an enormous recovery in below investment grade bonds; the Barclays Capital U.S. Corporate High Yield Index returned over 58% in 2009 after falling 26% in 2008. The Barclays Capital U.S. Treasury Index returned 13.7% in 2008, but declined 3.6% in 2009.

Stock investors also became less pessimistic in 2009. While the stock market indices are still far from the record levels reached in 2007, investors were rewarded in 2009 as stocks returned 26.5% as measured by the Standard & Poor’s 500 Index, its best return since 2003. Foreign stocks, as measured by the MSCI EAFE Index, returned 31.8% during 2009.

On the following pages, you will find a complete review of your Portfolio and its investment performance.

MetLife is committed to building your financial freedom. We appreciate your trust and will continue to focus our efforts on meeting your investment needs.

Sincerely,

Elizabeth M. Forget

President

Met Investors Series Trust

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Dreman Small Cap Value Portfolio

Managed by Dreman Value Management, LLC

Portfolio Manager Commentary*

Performance

For the year ended December 31, 2009, the Dreman Small Cap Value Portfolio had a return of 29.09% and 28.77% for Class A and B Shares, respectively, versus 20.58% for its benchmark, the Russell 2000 Value Index¹.

Market Environment / Conditions

Calendar year 2009 was a tale of two markets: one of panic; the other of recovery. In the panic phase of the market the indices hit lows not seen in a decade. Valuations were depressed and the economic picture looked dismal. During this time we found several attractive investment opportunities. Our low price to earnings process uncovered many sound companies trading at historically low valuation levels. We viewed this precipitous fall in stock prices during the panic phase as a classic market over-reaction and positioned the Portfolio for a rally. The recovery phase of the 2009 market started after the March 9^th lows. We saw many of our investments grow 60%, 70% or even 100% in as little as just 6 months. During this amazing run, however, the economic picture remained bleak. Unemployment hovered around 10% and many market pundits thought the consumer was dead. It is interesting to note that the Consumer Discretionary sector in the Russell 2000 Value Index was the second best performing sector (behind Materials), rising 145% from the March 9^th low. While the Portfolio participated during the initial stages of this rally, we began to take profits as valuations appeared excessive given the meteoric rise in stock prices. This conservative approach weighed upon returns in the third quarter, causing us to relinquish some of our outperformance from earlier in the year. The positive momentum lasted through the end of the year but with much less volatility then the first three quarters.

Portfolio Review / Current Positioning

The Portfolio’s alpha was generated through both superior stock selection and sector allocation. Our best performing sectors on a relative basis were Financials, Industrials, Energy, Materials, and Consumer Staples. Sectors that detracted from performance were Consumer Discretionary, Information Technology, and Telecommunication Services.

The Financial Sector was the Portfolio’s best relative performing sector; however, it was the worst performing sector from an absolute standpoint. The Financial Sector of the Russell 2000 Value Index posted an average return of -3.02%, making it the only negative return sector in the index. Our strategy to remain underweight the small cap banks proved correct as this industry was down nearly 30% for the year. Stock selection also drove performance in this space. In the Consumer Finance Industry, Cash America, a pawn shop operator, posted a 55% increase over the year. We bought the company in July as investors grew concerned over new legislation on pay day loans, a key component of the company’s business. At that time the stock was trading at just seven times 2010 earnings. Another big winner for the Portfolio was Legg Mason, an asset management company. Legg Mason was bogged down with several issues towards the end of 2008, including underperforming products and capital needs to support its balance sheet. The stock was in a free fall through March of 2009 and actually hit a price of $10.35, a level not seen since 1997. To give some perspective, in 1997 Legg mason had revenues of approximately $640 million and earnings of roughly $0.50 per share. In 2008, the company posted revenues of approximately $4.6 billion and earnings of $1.85 per share. We unfortunately had to sell Legg Mason following a meteoric rise in the stock price that resulted in a market capitalization of the company above our maximum of $4 billion for the Portfolio. One of the Portfolio’s largest detractors was Associated Banc-Corp, down 43% for the year. When we bought the stock we had believed that the company’s aggressive posture in writing off bad loans would portend a faster healing time of their balance sheet. Despite a low price to book valuation, we soon realized that weakening economic conditions would further deteriorate their fragile balance sheet and we sold the stock out of the Portfolio. We remain underweight the Financial Sector.

The Industrial Sector was another strong area for the Portfolio. Our stock selection powered the alpha in this space with many of the Portfolio’s companies posting robust gains. Joy Global, a leading coal mining equipment manufacturer was up over 65%, Gardner Denver, a manufacturer of compressors and vacuums for the fluid transfer process was up over 80% and General Cable, a leading manufacturer of aluminum and copper wires used for the transmission and distribution of power, was up 66%. Curtis-Wright, an Aerospace and Defense company, fell 5% during the year as earnings missed their mark and estimates were revised lower due to order delays in the oil and gas and metal treatment businesses. During the year we added RINO International to the Portfolio. RINO provides waste water treatment and flue gas desulphurization equipment for the iron and steel industry in China as well as anti-oxidation equipment used in the manufacture of hot rolled steel plates. RINO has an attractive valuation trading at just thirteen times the next twelve months earnings and offers a substantial opportunity for the Portfolio to participate in China’s economic development. We remain equal weight the Industrial Sector.

Our underweight coupled with poor stock selection hurt our performance in the Consumer Discretionary Sector. From an absolute standpoint many of our stocks posted strong returns for the year in this sector. Unfortunately, many stocks, including those we believe to be fundamentally flawed, posted better returns. The Auto Components Industry posted a return of nearly 200% for the year in the Russell 2000 Value Index. We held no companies in this space as our fundamental analysis suggested these companies were too levered to the US auto industry which remains in peril, in our opinion. From a positive side, several of the Portfolio’s best stocks came from this sector as Dick’s Sporting Goods, a sporting good retailer, was up over 81%; Radio Shack, a specialty electronics retailer, was up 97%; and Dream Works Animation, a producer of computer animated films, was up 43%. We sold several of our winners early as valuations crept higher. Despite evidence of a still challenged consumer and lofty valuations, the stocks continued their strong momentum through the end of the year. We remain slightly underweight this sector.

1

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Dreman Small Cap Value Portfolio

Managed by Dreman Value Management, LLC

Portfolio Manager Commentary* (continued)

David Dreman, E. Clifton Hoover Jr., Mark Roach

Portfolio Managers

Dreman Value Management, LLC

*This commentary may include statements that constitute “forward-looking statements” under the U.S. securities laws. Forward-looking statements include, among other things, projections, estimates, and information about possible or future results related to the Portfolio, market or regulatory developments. The views expressed above are not guarantees of future performance or economic results and involve certain risks, uncertainties and assumptions that could cause actual outcomes and results to differ materially from the views expressed herein. The views expressed above are subject to change at any time based upon economic, market, or other conditions and the subadvisory firm undertakes no obligation to update the views expressed herein. Any discussions of specific securities should not be considered a recommendation to buy or sell those securities. The views expressed above (including any forward-looking statement) may not be relied upon as investment advice or as an indication of the Portfolio’s trading intent. Information about the Portfolio’s holdings, asset allocation or country diversification is historical and is not an indication of future Portfolio composition, which may vary. Direct investment in any index is not possible. The performance of any index mentioned in this commentary has not been adjusted for ongoing management, distribution and operating expenses, and sales charges applicable to mutual fund investments. In addition, the returns do not reflect additional fees charged by separate accounts or variable insurance contracts that an investor in the Portfolio may pay. If these additional fees were reflected, performance would have been lower.

Portfolio Composition as of December 31, 2009

Top Holdings

	Percent of Net Assets
Hospitality Properties Trust	1.3%
Gammon Gold, Inc.	1.3%
Jabil Circuit, Inc.	1.3%
Whiting Petroleum Corp.	1.3%
EMCOR Group, Inc.	1.3%
Synaptics, Inc.	1.3%
Washington Federal, Inc.	1.2%
RPM International, Inc.	1.2%
Waddell & Reed Financial, Inc. - Class A	1.2%
Microsemi Corp.	1.2%

Top Sectors

	Percent of Portfolio Market Value
Industrials	17.3%
Non-cyclical	15.4%
Financials	14.2%
Short Term Investment	13.5%
Cyclical	9.3%
Energy	9.3%
Technology	6.6%
Basic Materials	5.8%
Utilities	5.1%
Communications	3.5%

2

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Dreman Small Cap Value Portfolio

Dreman Small Cap Value Portfolio managed by

Dreman Value Management, LLC vs. Russell 2000 Value Index¹

	Average Annual Return2 (for the year ended 12/31/09)
	1 Year	3 Year	Since Inception3
Dreman Small Cap Value Portfolio—Class A	29.09%	-1.49%	6.62%
Class B	28.77%	—	-1.90%
Russell 2000 Value Index1	20.58%	-8.22%	2.02%

The performance of Class A shares will differ from that of the other class of shares because of the difference in expenses paid by policyholders investing in the different share classes.

¹The Russell 2000 Value Index is an unmanaged index which measures the performance of those Russell 2000 companies with lower price-to-book ratios and lower forecasted growth values.

² “Average Annual Return” is calculated including reinvestment of all income dividend and capital gains distributions.

³Inception of Class A shares is 05/02/2005. Inception of Class B shares is 4/28/2008. Index returns are based on an inception date of 05/02/2005.

Past performance does not guarantee future results. The investment return and principal value of an investment in the Portfolio will fluctuate, so that shares, on any given day or when redeemed, may be worth more or less than their original cost. Performance numbers are net of all Portfolio expenses but do not include any insurance, sales, or administration charges of variable annuity or life insurance contracts. If these charges were included, the returns would be lower. The Index does not include fees or expenses and is not available for direct investment.

3

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Dreman Small Cap Value Portfolio

Understanding Your Portfolio’s Expenses

Shareholder Expense Example

As a shareholder of the Portfolio, you incur ongoing costs, including management fees; distribution and service (12b-1) fees; and other Portfolio expenses. This example is intended to help you understand your ongoing costs (in dollars) (referred to as “expenses”) of investing in the Portfolio and compare these costs with the ongoing costs of investing in other mutual funds. The example is based on an investment of $1,000 invested at the beginning of the period and held for the entire period, July 1, 2009 through December 31, 2009.

Actual Expenses

The first line for each share class of the Portfolio in the table below provides information about actual account values and actual expenses. You may use the information in this line, together with the amount you invested in the particular share class of the Portfolio, to estimate the expenses that you paid over the period. Simply divide your account value by $1,000 (for example, an $8,600 account value divided by $1,000 = 8.6), then multiply the result by the number in the first line under the heading entitled “Expenses Paid During Period” to estimate the expenses you paid on your account during this period.

Hypothetical Example for Comparison Purposes

The second line for each share class of the Portfolio in the table below provides information about hypothetical account values and hypothetical expenses based on the Portfolio’s actual expense ratio and an assumed rate of return of 5% per year before expenses, which is not the Portfolio’s actual return. The hypothetical account values and expenses may not be used to estimate the actual ending account balance or expenses you paid for the period. You may use this information to compare the ongoing costs of investing in the Portfolio and other funds. To do so, compare this 5% hypothetical example with the 5% hypothetical examples that appear in the shareholder reports of the other funds.

Please note that the expenses shown in the table are meant to highlight your ongoing costs only and do not reflect any fees or charges of your variable insurance product or any additional expenses that participants in certain eligible qualified plans may bear relating to the operations of their plan. Therefore, the second line for each share class in the table is useful in comparing ongoing costs only, and will not help you determine the relative total costs of owning different funds. In addition, if these other costs were included, your costs would have been higher.

	Annualized Expense Ratio	Beginning Account Value 7/1/09		Ending Account Value 12/31/09		Expenses Paid During Period* 7/1/09-12/31/09
Class A
Actual	0.89%	$	1,000.00	$	1,267.21	$	5.09
Hypothetical	0.89%		1,000.00		1,020.72		4.53
Class B
Actual	1.14%	$	1,000.00	$	1,265.72	$	6.51
Hypothetical	1.14%		1,000.00		1,019.46		5.80

* Expenses paid are equal to the Portfolio’s annualized expense ratio for the most recent six month period, as shown above, multiplied by the average account value over the period, multiplied by the number of days (184 days) in the most recent fiscal half-year, divided by 365 (to reflect the one-half year period).

4

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Dreman Small Cap Value Portfolio

PORTFOLIO OF INVESTMENTS

December 31, 2009

(Percentage of Net Assets)

Security Description	Shares	Value
Common Stocks - 95.8%
Aerospace & Defense - 1.9%
Curtiss-Wright Corp.	69,185	$	2,166,874
Esterline Technologies Corp.*	47,025		1,917,209
			4,084,083
Beverages - 0.9%
Central European Distribution Corp.*	65,325		1,855,883
Capital Markets - 2.8%
Investment Technology Group, Inc.*	79,025		1,556,792
Raymond James Financial, Inc.(a)	81,100		1,927,747
Waddell & Reed Financial, Inc. - Class A	82,190		2,510,083
			5,994,622
Chemicals - 3.0%
OM Group, Inc.*	67,200		2,109,408
RPM International, Inc.	123,600		2,512,788
Scotts Miracle-Gro Co. (The) - Class A	48,500		1,906,535
			6,528,731
Commercial & Professional Services - 1.9%
Brink’s Co. (The)	82,375		2,005,008
RINO International Corp.*(a)	74,002		2,046,155
			4,051,163
Commercial Banks - 1.9%
Bank of Hawaii Corp.	46,500		2,188,290
FirstMerit Corp.	99,458		2,003,084
			4,191,374
Communications Equipment - 2.0%
CommScope, Inc.*	79,620		2,112,319
Plantronics, Inc.	85,425		2,219,341
			4,331,660
Computers & Peripherals - 2.2%
Lexmark International, Inc. - Class A*	80,800		2,099,184
Synaptics, Inc.*(a)	88,650		2,717,123
			4,816,307
Construction & Engineering - 2.2%
EMCOR Group, Inc.*	102,770		2,764,513
Tutor Perini Corp.*(a)	113,364		2,049,621
			4,814,134
Consumer Finance - 1.1%
Cash America International, Inc.(a)	68,716		2,402,311
Diversified Consumer Services - 0.7%
Regis Corp.	91,110		1,418,583
Diversified Telecommunication Services - 0.8%
Iowa Telecommunications Services, Inc.	108,140		1,812,426
Electric Utilities - 2.9%
Allete, Inc.	60,525		1,977,957
IDACORP, Inc.	73,445		2,346,568

Security Description	Shares	Value
Electric Utilities - continued
NV Energy, Inc.	165,000	$	2,042,700
			6,367,225
Electrical Equipment - 2.0%
General Cable Corp.*(a)	71,815		2,112,797
Regal-Beloit Corp.	43,670		2,268,220
			4,381,017
Electronic Equipment, Instruments & Components - 3.3%
Anixter International, Inc.*(a)	50,535		2,380,199
Jabil Circuit, Inc.	163,050		2,832,178
Park Electrochemical Corp.	72,308		1,998,593
			7,210,970
Energy Equipment & Services - 4.1%
Atwood Oceanics, Inc.*	69,225		2,481,716
Cal Dive International, Inc.*	256,950		1,942,542
Oil States International, Inc.*	56,600		2,223,814
Superior Energy Services, Inc.*	91,905		2,232,373
			8,880,445
Food & Staples Retailing - 1.7%
Nash Finch Co.	52,670		1,953,530
Ruddick Corp.(a)	67,515		1,737,161
			3,690,691
Food Products - 2.6%
Corn Products International, Inc.	59,000		1,724,570
Del Monte Foods Co.	203,185		2,304,118
Ralcorp Holdings, Inc.*	26,510		1,582,912
			5,611,600
Health Care Equipment & Supplies - 2.1%
Inverness Medical Innovations, Inc.*(a)	53,400		2,216,634
Teleflex, Inc.	42,000		2,263,380
			4,480,014
Health Care Providers & Services - 6.1%
Amedisys, Inc.*(a)	46,550		2,260,468
Amsurg Corp.*	100,014		2,202,308
Healthspring, Inc.*	126,740		2,231,892
LifePoint Hospitals, Inc.*	73,190		2,379,407
MEDNAX, Inc.*	35,225		2,117,375
Owens & Minor, Inc.	48,025		2,061,713
			13,253,163
Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure - 3.1%
Brinker International, Inc.	149,375		2,228,675
International Speedway Corp. - Class A	78,730		2,239,868
LIFE TIME FITNESS, Inc.*(a)	89,450		2,229,989
			6,698,532
Household Durables - 2.1%
Helen of Troy, Ltd.*	84,025		2,055,252

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

5

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Dreman Small Cap Value Portfolio

PORTFOLIO OF INVESTMENTS - continued

December 31, 2009

(Percentage of Net Assets)

Security Description	Shares	Value
Household Durables - continued
Jarden Corp.	78,275	$	2,419,480
			4,474,732
Insurance - 6.6%
Allied World Assurance Holdings, Ltd.	44,000		2,027,080
Argo Group International Holdings, Ltd.*	71,591		2,086,162
Aspen Insurance Holdings, Ltd.	72,200		1,837,490
Endurance Specialty Holdings, Ltd.	57,350		2,135,140
Hanover Insurance Group, Inc. (The)	43,650		1,939,370
Platinum Underwriters Holdings, Ltd.	57,030		2,183,679
Protective Life Corp.	119,230		1,973,256
StanCorp Financial Group, Inc.	3,100		124,062
			14,306,239
IT Services - 1.9%
CACI International, Inc. - Class A*	45,425		2,219,011
DST Systems, Inc.*	44,800		1,951,040
			4,170,051
Leisure Equipment & Products - 0.8%
JAKKS Pacific, Inc.*(a)	148,975		1,805,577
Life Sciences Tools & Services - 2.1%
Mettler-Toledo International, Inc.*	22,300		2,341,277
PerkinElmer, Inc.	103,800		2,137,242
			4,478,519
Machinery - 2.1%
Barnes Group, Inc.	134,880		2,279,472
Gardner Denver, Inc.	52,200		2,221,110
			4,500,582
Marine - 0.9%
Diana Shipping, Inc.*	130,375		1,887,830
Metals & Mining - 4.2%
Gammon Gold, Inc.*	259,200		2,853,792
PAN American Silver Corp.*(a)	103,980		2,475,764
Reliance Steel & Aluminum Co.	42,500		1,836,850
Thompson Creek Metals Co., Inc.*	173,975		2,038,987
			9,205,393
Multi-Utilities - 2.7%
Integrys Energy Group, Inc.(a)	36,490		1,532,215
TECO Energy, Inc.	148,075		2,401,777
Vectren Corp.	74,855		1,847,421
			5,781,413
Oil, Gas & Consumable Fuels - 6.2%
Contango Oil & Gas Co.*	40,500		1,903,905
Forest Oil Corp.*	108,100		2,405,225
St. Mary Land & Exploration Co.	56,255		1,926,171
Tesoro Corp.	157,836		2,138,678

Security Description	Shares	Value
Oil, Gas & Consumable Fuels - continued
W&T Offshore, Inc.	185,695	$	2,172,631
Whiting Petroleum Corp.*	39,500		2,822,275
			13,368,885
Professional Services - 0.8%
Kelly Services, Inc.*	151,345		1,805,546
Real Estate Investment Trusts (REITs) - 3.3%
Alexandria Real Estate Equities, Inc.(a)	34,225		2,200,325
Anworth Mortgage Asset Corp.	284,775		1,993,425
Hospitality Properties Trust	123,100		2,918,701
			7,112,451
Road & Rail - 1.9%
Genesee & Wyoming, Inc. - Class A*	66,475		2,169,744
Ryder System, Inc.	47,800		1,967,926
			4,137,670
Semiconductors & Semiconductor Equipment - 1.1%
Microsemi Corp.*	140,700		2,497,425
Software - 3.0%
Jack Henry & Associates, Inc.	81,240		1,878,269
Net 1 UEPS Technologies, Inc.*	108,525		2,107,555
Sybase, Inc.*(a)	55,710		2,417,814
			6,403,638
Specialty Retail - 0.9%
RadioShack Corp.	101,537		1,979,972
Textiles, Apparel & Luxury Goods - 1.9%
Hanesbrands, Inc.*(a)	90,300		2,177,133
Wolverine World Wide, Inc.	74,700		2,033,334
			4,210,467
Thrifts & Mortgage Finance - 1.2%
Washington Federal, Inc.	132,525		2,563,034
Tobacco - 1.9%
Universal Corp.(a)	47,600		2,171,036
Vector Group, Ltd.(a)	134,475		1,882,650
			4,053,686
Trading Companies & Distributors - 0.9%
GATX Corp.(a)	71,205		2,047,143
Total Common Stocks (Cost $174,607,731)			207,665,187
Short-Term Investments - 15.0%
Mutual Funds - 10.9%
State Street Navigator Securities Lending Prime Portfolio (b)	23,595,325		23,595,325

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

6

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Dreman Small Cap Value Portfolio

PORTFOLIO OF INVESTMENTS - continued

December 31, 2009

(Percentage of Net Assets)

Security Description	Par Amount		Value
Repurchase Agreement - 4.1%
Fixed Income Clearing Corp., Repurchase Agreement, dated 12/31/2009 at 0.005% to be repurchased at $8,854,005 on 01/04/10 collateralized by $8,900,000 Federal National Mortgage Association at 3.000% due 01/13/14 with a value of $9,033,500.	$	8,854,000	$	8,854,000
Total Short-Term Investments (Cost $32,449,325)				32,449,325
Total Investments - 110.8% (Cost $207,057,056)				240,114,512
Other Assets and Liabilities (net) - (10.8)%				(23,494,999	)
Net Assets - 100.0%			$	216,619,513

* Non-income producing security.

(a) All or portion of security is on loan.

(b) Represents investment of collateral received from securities lending transactions.

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

7

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Dreman Small Cap Value Portfolio

Various inputs are used in determining the value of the Portfolio’s investments, which are as follows:

Level 1—unadjusted quoted prices in active markets for identical investments

Level 2—other significant observable inputs (including, but not limited to: quoted prices for similar investments in markets that are both active or inactive; inputs other than quoted prices that are observable such as interest rates, yield curves, credit risks, default rates, etc.)

Level 3—significant unobservable inputs based on the best information available in the circumstances, to the extent observable inputs are unavailable (including the Portfolio’s own assumptions in determining the fair value of investments)

The inputs or methodology used for valuing investments are not necessarily an indication of the risk associated with investing in them. For information about the Portfolio’s policy regarding valuation of investments and other significant accounting policies, please refer to Note 2 of the Notes to Financial Statements.

The following table summarizes the inputs used in determining the value the Portfolio’s investments as of December 31, 2009:

ASSETS VALUATION INPUTS

Description	Level 1		Level 2		Level 3		Total
Total Common Stocks*	$	207,665,187	$	—	$	—	$	207,665,187
Short-Term Investments
Mutual Funds		23,595,325		—		—		23,595,325
Repurchase Agreement		—		8,854,000		—		8,854,000
Total Short-Term Investments		23,595,325		8,854,000		—		32,449,325
TOTAL INVESTMENTS	$	231,260,512	$	8,854,000	$	—	$	240,114,512

* See Portfolio of Investments for additional detailed categorizations.

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

8

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Dreman Small Cap Value Portfolio

Statement of Assets and Liabilities

December 31, 2009

Assets
Investments at value (a)(b)	$	231,260,512
Repurchase Agreement		8,854,000
Cash		766
Receivable for shares sold		122,169
Dividends receivable		208,362
Interest receivable		1
Total assets		240,445,810
Liabilities
Payables for:
Investments purchased		47,987
Shares redeemed		25,411
Collateral for securities loaned		23,595,325
Accrued Expenses:
Management fees		141,390
Distribution and service fees - Class B		1,460
Administration fees		1,528
Custodian and accounting fees		1,171
Deferred trustees’ fees		7,518
Other expenses		4,507
Total liabilities		23,826,297
Net Assets	$	216,619,513
Net Assets Represented by
Paid in surplus	$	232,181,155
Accumulated net realized loss		(50,412,033	)
Unrealized appreciation on investments		33,057,456
Undistributed net investment income		1,792,935
Net Assets	$	216,619,513
Net Assets
Class A	$	209,353,614
Class B		7,265,899
Capital Shares Outstanding
Class A		16,724,192
Class B		582,410
Net Asset Value, Offering Price and Redemption Price Per Share
Class A	$	12.52
Class B		12.48
(a) Identified cost of investments, excluding repurchase agreement, was $198,203,056.
(b) Includes securities loaned at value of $23,022,675.

Statement of Operations

For the Year Ended December 31, 2009

Investment Income
Dividends (a)	$	3,262,883
Interest (b)		243,316
Total investment income		3,506,199
Expenses
Management fees		1,415,095
Administration fees		16,733
Custodian and accounting fees		28,209
Distribution and service fees - Class B		8,907
Audit and tax services		31,003
Legal		36,351
Trustees’ fees and expenses		22,763
Shareholder reporting		33,910
Insurance		1,326
Miscellaneous		7,872
Total expenses		1,602,169
Net investment income		1,904,030
Net Realized and Unrealized Gain (Loss) on Investments and Foreign Currency Transactions
Net realized gain (loss) on:
Investments		(22,710,560	)
Foreign currency transactions		220
Net realized loss on investments and foreign currency transactions		(22,710,340	)
Net change in unrealized appreciation on:
Investments		69,785,109
Foreign currency transactions		250
Net change in unrealized appreciation on investments and foreign currency transactions		69,785,359
Net realized and unrealized gain on investments and foreign currency transactions		47,075,019
Net Increase in Net Assets from Operations	$	48,979,049
(a) Net of foreign withholding taxes of $723.
(b) Includes net income on securities loaned of $242,395.

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

9

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Dreman Small Cap Value Portfolio

Statements of Changes in Net Assets

	Year Ended December 31, 2009			Year Ended December 31, 2008
Increase (Decrease) in Net Assets:
Operations
Net investment income	$	1,904,030		$	2,452,410
Net realized loss on investments, futures contracts and foreign currency transactions		(22,710,340	)		(27,513,264	)
Net change in unrealized appreciation (depreciation) on investments and foreign currency transactions		69,785,359			(28,980,442	)
Net increase (decrease) in net assets resulting from operations		48,979,049			(54,041,296	)
Distributions to Shareholders
From net investment income
Class A		(1,773,690	)		(1,803,717	)
Class B		(19,643	)		—
From net realized gains
Class A		—			(6,775,539	)
Class B		—			—
Net decrease in net assets resulting from distributions		(1,793,333	)		(8,579,256	)
Capital Share Transactions
Proceeds from shares sold
Class A		36,503,884			66,519,605
Class B		5,559,941			1,113,178
Net asset value of shares issued through dividend reinvestment
Class A		1,773,690			8,579,256
Class B		19,643			—
Cost of shares repurchased
Class A		(49,216,199	)		(63,248,091	)
Class B		(522,989	)		(185,186	)
Net increase (decrease) in net assets from capital share transactions		(5,882,030	)		12,778,762
Net Decrease in Net Assets		41,303,686			(49,841,790	)
Net assets at beginning of period		175,315,827			225,157,617
Net assets at end of period	$	216,619,513		$	175,315,827
Undistributed net investment income at end of period	$	1,792,935		$	1,755,424

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

10

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Dreman Small Cap Value Portfolio

Financial Highlights

Selected Per Share Data for the Years or Period Ended:
	Class A
	For the Years Ended December 31,
	2009			2008			2007			2006			2005(b)
Net Asset Value, Beginning of Period	$	9.80		$	13.57		$	13.77		$	11.20		$	10.00
Income (Loss) from Investment Operations
Net investment income(a)		0.11			0.14			0.12			0.13			0.07
Net realized/unrealized gain (loss) on investments		2.70			(3.44	)		(0.25	)		2.57			1.30
Total from investment operations		2.81			(3.30	)		(0.13	)		2.70			1.37
Less Distributions
Dividends from net investment income		(0.09	)		(0.10	)		—			(0.06	)		(0.05	)
Distributions from net realized capital gains		—			(0.37	)		(0.07	)		(0.07	)		(0.12	)
Total distributions		(0.09	)		(0.47	)		(0.07	)		(0.13	)		(0.17	)
Net Asset Value, End of Period	$	12.52		$	9.80		$	13.57		$	13.77		$	11.20
Total Return		29.09	%		(25.22	)%		(0.97	)%		24.23	%		13.56	%
Ratio of expenses to average net assets after reimbursement		0.89	%		0.86	%		0.92	%		1.10	%		1.10	%*
Ratio of expenses to average net assets before reimbursement and rebates		0.89	%		0.86	%		0.95	%(c)		1.40	%		3.83	%*
Ratio of net investment income to average net assets		1.07	%		1.17	%		0.89	%		0.99	%		0.86	%*
Portfolio turnover rate		59.9	%		73.6	%		69.6	%		62.0	%		55.0	%
Net assets, end of period (in millions)	$	209.4		$	174.5		$	225.2		$	83.6		$	5.0

	Class B
	For the Years Ended December 31,
	2009			2008(d)
Net Asset Value, Beginning of Period	$	9.79		$	13.02
Income (Loss) from Investment Operations
Net investment income(a)		0.09			0.11
Net realized/unrealized gain (loss) on investments		2.69			(3.34	)
Total from investment operations		2.78			(3.23	)
Less Distributions
Dividends from net investment income		(0.09	)		—
Distributions from net realized capital gains		—			—
Total distributions		(0.09	)		—
Net Asset Value, End of Period	$	12.48		$	9.79
Total Return		28.77	%		(24.81	)%
Ratio of expenses to average net assets after reimbursement		1.14	%		1.16	%*
Ratio of expenses to average net assets before reimbursement and rebates		1.14	%		1.16	%*
Ratio of net investment income to average net assets		0.79	%		1.50	%*
Portfolio turnover rate		59.9	%		73.6	%
Net assets, end of period (in millions)	$	7.3		$	0.8

* Annualized

(a) Per share amounts based on average shares outstanding during the period.

(b) Commencement of operations—05/02/2005.

(c) Excludes effect of deferred expense reimbursement.

(d) Commencement of operations—4/28/2008.

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

11

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Dreman Small Cap Value Portfolio

Notes to Financial Statements—December 31, 2009

1. Organization

Met Investors Series Trust (the “Trust”) is registered as an open-end management investment company under the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended (the “1940 Act”). The Trust currently offers forty-eight Portfolios (the “Portfolios”), each of which operates as a distinct investment vehicle of the Trust. The portfolio included in this report is Dreman Small Cap Value Portfolio (the “Portfolio”), which is diversified. Shares in the Trust are not offered directly to the general public and are currently available only to separate accounts established by certain affiliated life insurance companies.

The Trust is managed by MetLife Advisers, LLC (the “Manager”), an affiliate of MetLife, Inc.

The Trust has registered four classes of shares: Class A, B, C and E Shares. Class A and B Shares are currently offered by the Portfolio. Shares of each Class of the Portfolio represent an equal pro rata interest in the Portfolio and generally give the shareholder the same voting, dividend, liquidation, and other rights. Investment income, realized and unrealized capital gains and losses, the common expenses of the Portfolio and certain Portfolio-level expense reductions, if any, are allocated on a pro rata basis to each Class based on the relative net assets of each Class to the net assets of the Portfolio. Each Class of shares differs in its respective distribution expenses.

2. Significant Accounting Policies

The financial statements have been prepared in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (“GAAP”) which require management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of income and expenses during the reporting period. Actual results could differ from these estimates.

The following is a summary of significant accounting policies consistently followed by the Trust in the preparation of its financial statements.

Valuation - Equity securities for which the primary market is on a domestic exchange (except the NASDAQ) will be valued at the last sale price on the day of valuation or, if there was no sale that day, at the last reported bid price, using prices as of the close of trading. Equity securities traded over-the-counter and quoted on NASDAQ are valued at the NASDAQ Official Closing Price. Equity securities not quoted on NASDAQ that are actively traded in the over-the-counter market, including listed securities for which the primary market is believed to be over-the-counter, will be valued at the most recently quoted bid price provided by the principal market makers. Short positions traded in the OTC market are valued at the last available ask price.

Debt securities (other than short term obligations with a remaining maturity of sixty days or less) are generally valued on the basis of evaluated or composite bid quotations obtained by independent pricing services and/or brokers and dealers selected by the relevant adviser pursuant to authorization of the Board of Trustees (the “Board”). Such quotations take into account appropriate factors such as trading in similar groups of securities, yield, quality, coupon rate, maturity, type of issue, trading characteristics and other data. Short term obligations with a remaining maturity of sixty days or less are valued at amortized cost which approximates fair market value.

Financial futures contracts and options thereon, which are traded on exchanges, are valued at their closing prices as of the close of such exchanges. Exchange traded options are valued at the mean price. Swap agreements and options traded in the over the counter (“OTC”) market are valued based upon quoted fair valuations received daily by the Portfolio from a pricing service or counterparty. Forward currency exchange contracts are valued daily at forward foreign currency exchange rates. Investments in mutual funds are valued at the daily net asset value (“NAV”) of the mutual fund.

The Portfolio has retained a third party pricing service to fair value its equity investments that are traded principally on a foreign exchange or market which closes prior to the Portfolio’s time of valuation. The fair value of each security that is traded principally on an exchange or market outside of the United States generally is calculated by applying a valuation factor provided by the third party pricing service to the last sales price for that security, or, if there is no reported sale during the day, the last reported bid price for that security.

If market values are not readily available, or if available market quotations are not reliable, securities are priced at their fair value as determined by the Manager using procedures approved by the Board. The Portfolio may use fair value pricing if the value of a security has been materially affected by events occurring before the Portfolio’s calculation of NAV but after the close of the primary markets on which the security is traded. The Portfolio may also use fair value pricing if reliable market quotations are unavailable due to infrequent trading or if trading in a particular security was halted during the day and did not resume prior to the Portfolio’s calculation of NAV.

B. Security Transactions - Security transactions are recorded on a trade date basis. Realized gains and losses on investments and unrealized appreciation and depreciation are determined on the identified cost basis, which is the same basis used for federal income tax purposes. The Portfolio may purchase and sell securities on a “when-issued” or “delayed delivery” basis, with settlement to occur at a later date. The value of the security so purchased is subject to market fluctuations during this period. The Portfolio segregates assets having an aggregate value at least equal to the amount of the when-issued or delayed delivery purchase commitments until payment is made.

12

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Dreman Small Cap Value Portfolio

Notes to Financial Statements—December 31, 2009—(Continued)

2. Significant Accounting Policies - continued

Investment Income and Expenses - Interest income is recorded on an accrual basis. Discounts and premiums on securities purchased are amortized over the lives of the respective securities. Dividend income is recorded on the ex-dividend date. Foreign dividend income is recorded on the ex-dividend date or as soon as practicable after the Portfolio has determined the existence of a dividend declaration after exercising reasonable due diligence. Foreign income and foreign capital gains on some foreign securities may be subject to foreign withholding taxes, which are accrued as applicable.

Income Taxes - It is the Portfolio’s policy to comply with the requirements of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”), and regulations thereunder, applicable to regulated investment companies and to distribute, with respect to each taxable year, all of its taxable income to shareholders. Therefore, no federal income tax provision is required. The Portfolio files U.S. Federal and various state tax returns. No income tax returns are currently under examination. The Portfolio’s federal tax returns for the prior three fiscal years remain subject to examination by the Internal Revenue Service.

Dividends and Distributions to Shareholders - The Portfolio records dividends and distributions on the ex-dividend date. Net realized gains from security transactions (if any) are generally distributed annually to shareholders. The timing and characterization of certain income and capital gains distributions are determined in accordance with federal tax regulations that may differ from GAAP. Permanent book and tax basis differences relating to shareholder distributions will result in reclassification between under/over distributed net investment income, accumulated net realized gains/losses and paid in surplus. Book-tax differences are primarily due to futures transactions, foreign currency transactions, certain foreign withholding taxes, passive foreign investment companies (PFIC), partnerships, deferred trustees compensation, capital loss carryforwards and losses deferred due to wash sales, as applicable. These adjustments have no impact on net assets or the results of operations.

Repurchase Agreements - The Portfolio may enter into repurchase agreements with selected commercial banks and broker-dealers, under which the Portfolio acquires securities as collateral and agrees to resell the securities at an agreed upon time and at an agreed upon price. The Portfolio accrues interest for the difference between the amount it pays for the securities and the amount it receives upon resale. At the time the Portfolio enters into a repurchase agreement, the value of the collateral securities, including accrued interest, will be equal to or exceed the value of the repurchase agreement and, for repurchase agreements that mature in more than one day, the seller will agree that the value of the collateral securities, including accrued interest, will continue to be at least equal to the value of the repurchase agreement.

Securities Lending - The Portfolio may lend its securities to certain qualified brokers who borrow securities in order to complete certain transactions. By lending its investment securities, the Portfolio attempts to increase its net investment income through the receipt of income on the loan. Any gain or loss in the market price of the securities loaned that might occur and any interest earned or dividends declared during the term of the loan would accrue to the account of the Portfolio.

Upon entering into a securities lending transaction, the Portfolio receives cash or other securities as collateral in an amount equal to or exceeding 102% of the current market value of the loaned securities (105% for foreign equity securities). Any cash received as collateral is generally invested by State Street Bank and Trust Company, acting in its capacity as securities lending agent (the “Agent”), in the State Street Navigator Securities Lending Prime Portfolio, which is a money market fund registered under the 1940 Act. A portion of net income (income after the deduction of expenses and fees of the Navigator Securities Lending Prime Portfolio) on the collateral is rebated to the borrower of the securities and the remainder is split between the Agent and the Portfolio. On loans collateralized by U.S. Treasuries, a fee is received from the borrower and is allocated between the Portfolio and the Agent. Risks of delay in recovery of the securities or even loss of rights in the collateral may occur should the borrower of the securities fail financially. Risks may also arise to the extent that the value of the collateral decreases below the value of the securities loaned.

Foreign Currency Translation - The books and records of the Portfolio are maintained in U.S. dollars. Foreign currencies, investments and other assets and liabilities are translated into U.S. dollars on a daily basis using prevailing exchange rates. Purchases and sales of securities are translated at the rates of exchange prevailing when such securities were acquired or sold. Income is translated at rates of exchange prevailing when interest is accrued or dividends are recorded.

The Portfolio does not isolate that portion of operations resulting from changes in foreign exchange rates on investments from the fluctuations arising from changes in market prices of securities held. Such fluctuations are included with the net realized and unrealized gain or loss from investments.

Reported net realized foreign exchange gains or losses arise from activity in forward foreign currency exchange contracts; sales of foreign currencies; currency gains or losses realized between the trade and settlement dates on securities transactions; and the difference between the amounts of dividends, interest, and foreign withholding taxes recorded on the Portfolio’s books and the U.S. dollar equivalent of the amounts actually received or paid. Net unrealized foreign exchange gains or losses arise from changes in the value of assets and liabilities other than investments in securities at fiscal year end; from changes in the exchange rates of foreign currency held; and from changes in the contract value of forward foreign currency exchange contracts.

3. Investment Management Agreement and Other Transactions with Affiliates

Investment Management Agreement - The Trust has entered into a management agreement with the Manager (the “Management Agreement”) for investment management services in connection with the investment management of the Portfolios. The Manager is subject to the supervision

13

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Dreman Small Cap Value Portfolio

Notes to Financial Statements—December 31, 2009—(Continued)

3. Investment Management Agreement and Other Transactions with Affiliates - continued

and direction of the Board and has overall responsibility for the general management and administration of the Trust. The Manager has entered into an advisory agreement with Dreman Value Management, LLC (the “Adviser”) for investment advisory services in connection with the investment management of the Portfolio.

Subject to the supervision and direction of the Board, the Manager supervises the Adviser and has full discretion with respect to the retention or renewal of the advisory agreement. The Manager pays the Adviser a fee based on the Portfolio’s average daily net assets.

Under the terms of the Portfolio’s Management Agreement, the Portfolio pays the Manager a monthly fee based upon annual rates applied to the Portfolio’s average daily net assets as follows:

Management Fees earned by the Manager for the period ended December 31, 2009	% per annum		Average Daily Net Assets
$1,415,095	0.800	%	First $100 Million
	0.775	%	$100 Million to $500 Million
	0.750	%	$500 Million to $1 Billion
	0.725	%	Over $1 Billion

Transfer Agency Agreement - Metropolitan Life Insurance Company (“MLIC”) serves as the transfer agent for the Trust. MLIC is an affiliate of the Manager. MLIC receives no fees for its services to the Trust under the transfer agency agreement.

Expense Limitation Agreement - The Manager has entered into an expense limitation agreement with the Trust (“Expense Limitation Agreement”) in the interest of limiting expenses of the Portfolio. The Expense Limitation Agreement shall continue in effect with respect to the Portfolio until April 30, 2010. Pursuant to that Expense Limitation Agreement, the Manager has agreed to waive or limit its fees and to assume other expenses so that the total annual operating expenses of the Portfolio other than interest, taxes, brokerage commissions, other expenditures which are capitalized in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America, and other extraordinary expenses not incurred in the ordinary course of the Portfolio’s business, but including amounts payable pursuant to a plan adopted in accordance with Rule 12b-1 under the 1940 Act, are limited to the following expense ratios as a percentage of the Portfolio’s average daily net assets:

Maximum Expense Ratio under current       Expense Limitation Agreement
Class A		Class B
1.10	%	1.35	%

If in any year in which the Management Agreement is still in effect, the estimated aggregate portfolio operating expenses of the Portfolio for the fiscal year are less than the Maximum Expense Ratios for that year, subject to approval by the Trust’s Board, the Manager shall be entitled to reimbursement by the Portfolio to the extent that the charge does not cause the expenses in such subsequent year to exceed the Maximum Expense Ratios as stated above. The Portfolio is not obligated to repay any expense paid by the Manager more than five years after the end of the fiscal year in which such expense was incurred.

Distribution Agreements and Plans - The Trust has distribution agreements with MetLife Investors Distribution Company (“MIDC” or the “Distributor”) in which MIDC serves as the Distributor for the Trust’s Class A and Class B Shares. MIDC is a wholly-owned subsidiary of MetLife Investors Group, Inc., an affiliate of the Manager. The Class B distribution plan provides that the Trust, on behalf of the Portfolio, may pay annually up to 0.50% of the average net assets of the Portfolio attributable to its Class B Shares in respect to activities primarily intended to result in the sale of Class B Shares.

However, under the Class B distribution agreement, payments to the Distributor for activities pursuant to the Class B distribution plan are currently limited to payments at an annual rate equal to 0.25% of average daily net assets of the Portfolio attributable to its Class B Shares.

Under the terms of the Class B distribution plan and distribution agreement, the Portfolio is authorized to make payments monthly to the Distributor that may be used to pay or reimburse entities providing distribution and shareholder servicing with respect to the Class B Shares for such entities’ fees or expenses incurred.

Deferred Trustee Compensation - Each Trustee of the Trust who is not currently an employee of the Manager or any of its affiliates receives compensation from the Trust for his or her service to the Portfolio. A deferred compensation plan (the “Plan”) is available to the Trustees on a

14

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Dreman Small Cap Value Portfolio

Notes to Financial Statements—December 31, 2009—(Continued)

3. Investment Management Agreement and Other Transactions with Affiliates - continued

voluntary basis. Deferred amounts remain in the Trust until distributed in accordance with the provisions of the Plan. The value of a participating Trustee’s deferral account is based on theoretical investments of deferred amounts, on the normal payment dates, in certain portfolios of the Trust or Metropolitan Series Fund, Inc. as designated by the participating Trustee. Changes in the value of participants’ deferral accounts are reflected as Trustees’ fees and expenses in the Statement of Operations. The portion of the accrued obligations allocated to the Portfolio, if any, under the Plan are reflected as Deferred Trustees’ fees in the Statement of Assets and Liabilities.

4. Shares of Beneficial Interest

Transactions in shares of beneficial interest for the periods ended noted below were as follows:

	Beginning Shares	Sales	Reinvestments	Redemptions		Net Increase (Decrease) in Shares Outstanding		Ending Shares
Class A
12/31/2009	17,801,446	3,708,000	197,077	(4,982,331	)	(1,077,254	)	16,724,192
12/31/2008	16,587,405	5,538,196	655,405	(4,979,560	)	1,214,041		17,801,446
Class B
12/31/2009	84,037	543,873	2,187	(47,687	)	498,373		582,410
04/28/2008-12/31/2008	—	99,657	—	(15,620	)	84,037		84,037

The Portfolio is authorized to issue an unlimited number of shares.

5. Investment Transactions

Aggregate cost of purchases and proceeds of sales of investment securities, excluding short-term securities, for the period ended December 31, 2009 were as follows:

Purchases			Sales
U.S. Government	Non-Government		U.S. Government		Non-Government
$—	$	101,530,938	$	—	$	108,829,733

At December 31, 2009, the cost of securities for federal income tax purposes and the unrealized appreciation (depreciation) of investments for federal income tax purposes for the Portfolio were as follows:

Federal Income Tax Cost	Gross Unrealized Appreciation		Gross Unrealized Depreciation			Net Unrealized Appreciation
$213,932,719	$	40,932,292	$	(14,750,499	)	$	26,181,793

6. Securities Lending

As of December 31, 2009, the Portfolio had loaned securities which were collateralized by short term investments. The value of securities loaned and the value of the related collateral were as follows:

Value of Securities	Value of Cash Collateral		Value of Non-Cash Collateral*		Total Collateral
$23,022,675	$	23,595,325	$	130	$	23,595,455

* The Portfolio cannot repledge or resell this collateral. The non-cash collateral is typically comprised of government securities and/or bank letters of credit.

7. Contractual Obligations

The Trust has a variety of indemnification obligations under contracts with its service providers. The Trust’s maximum exposure under these arrangements is unknown. However, the Trust has not had prior claims or losses pursuant to these contracts and expects the risk of loss to be remote.

15

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Dreman Small Cap Value Portfolio

Notes to Financial Statements—December 31, 2009—(Continued)

8. Market, Credit and Counterparty Risk

In the normal course of business, the Portfolio invests in securities and enters into transactions where risks exist due to fluctuations in the market (market risk) or failure of the other party to a transaction to perform (credit risk). The value of securities held by the Portfolio may decline in response to certain events, including those directly involving the companies whose securities are owned by the Portfolio; conditions affecting the general economy; overall market changes; local, regional or global political, social or economic instability; and currency and interest rate and price fluctuations. The Portfolio may be exposed to counterparty risk, or the risk that an entity with which the Portfolio has unsettled or open transactions may default. The potential loss could exceed the value of the financial assets recorded in the financial statements. Financial assets, which potentially expose the Portfolio to credit risk, consist principally of cash due from counterparties and investments. The Portfolio restricts its exposure to credit losses by entering into master agreements with counterparties (approved brokers) with whom it undertakes a significant volume of transactions to include certain safeguards for derivatives and non-standard settlement trades. The credit risk associated with favorable contracts is reduced by a master netting arrangement to the extent that if an event of default occurs, all amounts with the counterparty are terminated and settled on a net basis. The Portfolio’s overall exposure to credit risk on derivative instruments subject to master netting arrangements can change substantially within a short period, as it is affected by each transaction subject to the arrangement.

9. Income Tax Information

The tax character of distributions paid for the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2008 were as follows:

Ordinary Income				Long-Term Capital Gain				Total
2009		2008		2009		2008		2009		2008
$	1,793,333	$	6,273,503	$	—	$	2,305,753	$	1,793,333	$	8,579,256

As of December 31, 2009, the components of distributable earnings (accumulated losses) on a federal income tax basis were as follows:

Undistributed Ordinary Income	Undistributed Long-Term Gain		Net Unrealized Appreciation		Loss Carryforwards			Total
$1,800,453	$	—	$	26,181,793	$	(43,536,370	)	$	(15,554,124	)

The Portfolio utilizes the provisions of the federal income tax laws that provide for the carryforward of capital losses for eight years, offsetting such losses against any future net realized capital gains. At December 31, 2009, the accumulated capital loss carryforwards and expiration dates by the Portfolio were as follows:

Expiring 12/31/2016	Expiring 12/31/2017	Total
$21,896,444	$21,639,926	$	43,536,370

10. Recent Accounting Pronouncement

On January 21, 2010, the Financial Accounting Standards Board issued Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) 2010-06, “Improving Disclosures About Fair Value Measurements.” The ASU amends Accounting Standards Codification 820 to add new requirements for disclosures about transfers into and out of Levels 1 and 2. It also clarifies existing fair value disclosures about the level of disaggregation and about inputs and valuation techniques used to measure fair value. Additionally, the ASU amends disclosures about providing purchases, sales, issuances, and settlements on a gross basis relating to Level 3 measurements. The ASU guidance is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2009, and for interim periods within those fiscal years, except for the requirement to provide the Level 3 activity of purchases, sales, issuances, and settlements on a gross basis, which will be effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2010, and for interim periods within those fiscal years. Management is currently evaluating the impact the adoption of ASU 2010-06 will have on the Portfolio’s financial statements.

11. Subsequent Events

Management’s evaluation of the impact of all subsequent events on the Portfolio’s financial statements was completed through February 25, 2010, the date the financial statements were issued, and management has determined that as of that date there were no subsequent events requiring adjustments or disclosure in the Portfolio’s financial statements.

16

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Dreman Small Cap Value Portfolio

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

To the Shareholders and Board of Trustees of Met Investors Series Trust:

We have audited the accompanying statement of assets and liabilities, including the portfolio of investments, of the Dreman Small Cap Value Portfolio, one of the portfolios constituting Met Investors Series Trust (the “Trust”), as of December 31, 2009, and the related statement of operations for the year then ended, the statements of changes in net assets for each of the two years in the period then ended, and the financial highlights for each of the periods presented. These financial statements and financial highlights are the responsibility of the Trust’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements and financial highlights based on our audits.

We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements and financial highlights are free of material misstatement. The Trust is not required to have, nor were we engaged to perform, an audit of its internal control over financial reporting. Our audits included consideration of internal control over financial reporting as a basis for designing audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the Trust’s internal control over financial reporting. Accordingly, we express no such opinion. An audit also includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements, assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. Our procedures included confirmation of securities owned as of December 31, 2009, by correspondence with the custodian and brokers; where replies were not received from brokers, we performed other auditing procedures. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.

In our opinion, the financial statements and financial highlights referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of the Dreman Small Cap Value Portfolio of Met Investors Series Trust as of December 31, 2009, the results of its operations for the year then ended, the changes in its net assets for each of the two years in the period then ended, and the financial highlights for each of the periods presented, in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.

Deloitte & Touche LLP

Boston, Massachusetts

February 25, 2010

17

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Trustees and Officers (Unaudited) December 31, 2009

The Trustees and executive officers of the Trust, their ages and their principal occupations during the past five years are set forth below. Unless otherwise indicated, the business address of each is 5 Park Plaza, Suite 1900 Irvine, California 92614. Each Trustee who is deemed an “interested person,” as such term is defined in the 1940 Act, is indicated by an asterisk. Those Trustees who are not “interested persons” as defined in the 1940 Act are referred to as “Independent Trustees.” Additional information about the Trustees is available in the Statement of Additional Information which is available without charge, upon request, by calling (800) 848-3854.

The Trustees
Name and Age	Position(s) Held with Registrant	Term of Office and Length of Time Served	Principal Occupation(s) During Past 5 Years	Number of Portfolios in Fund Complex+ overseen by Trustee	Other Directorships Held by Trustee
Interested Trustees
Elizabeth M. Forget* (43)	President and Trustee	Indefinite; From December 2000 to present	Since May 2007, Senior Vice President, MetLife, Inc.; since December 2000, President of MetLife Advisers, LLC and its predecessor; December 2003 to April 2007, Vice President, MetLife, Inc.	84	Director, Metropolitan Series Fund, Inc. since August 2006.
Independent Trustees
Stephen M. Alderman (50)	Trustee	Indefinite; From December 2000 to present	Since November 1991, Shareholder in the law firm of Garfield and Merel, Ltd.	48	None
Jack R. Borsting (80)	Trustee	Indefinite; From December 2000 to present	Since 2006, Professor and Dean Emeritus, Marshall School of Business, University of Southern California (USC); from 2001 to 2005, Professor of Business Administration and Dean Emeritus.	48	Director, Los Angeles Orthopedic Hospital, Trustee, The Rose Hills Foundation. Member, Army Science Board.
Robert Boulware (53)	Trustee	Indefinite; From March 2008 to present	From 2004 to 2009, Director of Norwood Promotional Products, Inc.; from 2007 to 2008, Director of Wealthpoint Advisors (a business development company); from 2007 to 2009, Director of Holladay Bank; from 1992-2006, President and Chief Executive Officer of ING Fund Distributor, LLC.	48	Since 2005, Director of Gainsco, Inc. (auto insurance).
Daniel A. Doyle (51)	Trustee	Indefinite; From February 2007 to present	From October 2000 to June 2009, Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of ATC Management, Inc. (public utility); since June 2009, independent business consultant.	48	Director, Wisconsin Sports Development Corporation
Susan C. Gause (57)	Trustee	Indefinite; From March 2008 to present	From 2000 to December 2002, Chief Executive Officer of Allianz Dresdner Asset Management; since 2003, private investor.	48	None

18

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Trustees and Officers (Unaudited)—(Continued) December 31, 2009

Name and Age	Position(s) Held with Registrant	Term of Office and Length of Time Served	Principal Occupation(s) During Past 5 Years	Number of Portfolios in Fund Complex+ overseen by Trustee	Other Directorships Held by Trustee
Independent Trustees - continued
Dawn M. Vroegop (43)	Trustee	Indefinite; From December 2000 to present	From September 1999 to September 2003, Managing Director, Dresdner RCM Global Investors.	84	Director, Metropolitan Series Fund, Inc. since May 2009; from 2003 to present, Director and Finance Committee Chair, City College of San Francisco Foundation

The Executive Officers
Name and Age	Position(s) Held with Registrant	Term of Office and Length of Time Served	Principal Occupation(s) During Past 5 Years
Jeffrey L. Bernier (38)	Vice President	From February 2009 to present	Since December 2007, Vice President, Metropolitan Life Insurance Company; since 2008 Senior Vice President of MetLife Advisers, LLC and its predecessor; from July 2004 to December 2007, Director and Senior Investment Analyst of Investment Management Services for John Hancock Financial Services.
Jeffrey A. Tupper (39)	Chief Financial Officer, Treasurer	From August 2002 to present	Since February 2009, Vice President, MetLife Advisers, LLC. Since October 2006, Assistant Vice President, MetLife Group, Inc. Since February 2001, Assistant Vice President of MetLife Investors Insurance Company.
Richard C. Pearson (66)	Vice President and Secretary	From December 2000 to present	Since June 2001, President or Executive Vice President of MetLife Investors Distribution Company; since January 2001, Executive Vice President, General Counsel and Secretary of MetLife Investors Group, Inc. and Vice President, Secretary and Associate General Counsel of its affiliated life insurance companies; since November 2000, Senior Vice President and General Counsel of MetLife Advisers, LLC and its predecessor.
Jeffrey P. Halperin (42)	Chief Compliance Officer	From November 2006 to present	Since March 2006, Vice President, Corporate Ethics and Compliance Department, MetLife, Inc.; from October 2002 to March 2006, Assistant Vice President; from November 2005 to August 2006, Interim Chief Compliance Officer, Met Investors Series Trust; since April 2007, Chief Compliance Officer, Metropolitan Series Funds; from August 2006 to April 2007, Interim Chief Compliance Officer, Metropolitan Series Funds; since August 2006, Chief Compliance Officer, MetLife Advisers, LLC and its predecessor; since November 2006, Chief Compliance Officer, MetLife Investment Advisors Company, LLC.

+ The Fund Complex includes the Trust (48 portfolios) and Metropolitan Series Fund, Inc. (36 portfolios).

* Ms. Forget is an “interested person” of the Trust as a result of her affiliation with the Manager and the Distributor.

Quarterly Portfolio Schedule

The Trust files Form N-Q for the first and third quarters of each fiscal year. The Trust’s Forms N-Q will be available on the Securities and Exchange Commission’s website at http://www.sec.gov. The Trust’s Forms N-Q may be reviewed and copied at the Securities and Exchange Commission’s

19

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Trustees and Officers (Unaudited)—(Continued) December 31, 2009

Public Reference Room in Washington, D.C. and information on the operation of the Public Reference Room may be obtained by calling 1-800-SEC-0330. Once filed, the most recent Form N-Q will be available without charge, upon request, by calling (800) 848-3854.

Proxy Voting Policies and Procedures

A description of the policies and procedures that the Trust uses to determine how to vote proxies relating to portfolio securities is available without charge, upon request, by calling (800) 848-3854 and on the Securities and Exchange Commission’s website at http://www.sec.gov.

Proxy Voting Record

The Trust, on behalf of each of its Portfolios, has filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission its proxy voting record for the 12-month period ending June 30 on Form N-PX. Form N-PX must be filed by the Trust each year by August 31. Once filed, the most recent Form N-PX will be available without charge, upon request, by calling (800) 848-3854 or on the Securities and Exchange Commission’s website at http://www.sec.gov.

20

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Dreman Small Cap Value Portfolio

Board of Trustees’ Consideration of Advisory and Sub-Advisory Agreements

At an in-person meeting of the Board of Trustees (the “Board”) of the Met Investors Series Trust (the “Trust”) held on November 10-11, 2009, the Board, including a majority of the Trustees who are not considered to be “interested persons” of the Trust (the “Independent Trustees”) under the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended (the “1940 Act”), approved for an annual period the continuation of the Trust’s advisory agreement (the “Advisory Agreement”) with MetLife Advisers, LLC (the “Adviser”) and the applicable sub-advisory agreements (each a “Sub-Advisory Agreement”, and collectively with the Advisory Agreement, the “Agreements”) between the Adviser and the investment sub-advisers (each a “Sub-Adviser”, and collectively, the “Sub-Advisers”) for each of the series of the Trust, including the Dreman Small Cap Value Portfolio (each a “Portfolio,” and collectively, the “Portfolios”).¹

In considering the Agreements, the Board reviewed a variety of materials provided by the Adviser and the Sub-Advisers relating to each Portfolio, the Adviser and each Sub-Adviser, including comparative performance, fee and expense information for an appropriate peer group of similar mutual funds, performance information for relevant benchmark indices and other information regarding the nature, extent and quality of services provided by the Adviser and the Sub-Advisers under their respective Agreements. The Board also took into account information provided to the Board in its meetings throughout the year with respect to the services provided by the Adviser and the Sub-Advisers, including quarterly performance reports prepared by management containing reviews of investment results, and periodic presentations from the Sub-Advisers with respect to the Portfolios they manage. The Independent Trustees also assessed reports provided by independent consultants, who reviewed and provided analyses regarding investment performance, fees and expenses, profitability and other information provided by, or at the direction of, the Adviser and the Sub-Advisers, as more fully discussed below.

The Independent Trustees were separately advised by independent legal counsel throughout the process. Prior to voting, the Independent Trustees also received a memorandum from their independent counsel discussing the legal standards for their consideration of the proposed continuation of the Agreements. The Board met in person with personnel of the Adviser prior to the November meeting for the specific purpose of considering the proposed continuation of the Agreements. The Independent Trustees also discussed the proposed continuation of the Agreements in private sessions with their independent legal counsel at which no representatives of management were present.

In considering whether to approve the renewal of the Advisory Agreement with the Adviser and any applicable Sub-Advisory Agreements with respect to each Portfolio, the Board reviewed and analyzed the factors it deemed relevant, including: (1) the nature, extent and quality of the services to be provided to the Portfolios by the Adviser and the Sub-Advisers; (2) the performance of the Portfolios as compared to a peer group and an appropriate index; (3) the Adviser’s and each of the Sub-Adviser’s personnel and operations; (4) the financial condition of the Adviser and of the Sub-Advisers; (5) the level and method of computing each Portfolio’s advisory and sub-advisory fees; (6) the profitability of the Adviser under the Advisory Agreement and of the Sub-Advisers under the Sub-Advisory Agreements; (7) any “fall-out” benefits to the Adviser, the Sub-Advisers and their affiliates (i.e., ancillary benefits realized by the Adviser, the Sub-Advisers or their affiliates from the Adviser’s or Sub-Advisers’ relationship with the Trust); (8) the anticipated effect of growth in size on each Portfolio’s performance and expenses; (9) fees paid to the Sub-Advisers by comparable institutional and retail accounts; and (10) possible conflicts of interest. The Board also considered the nature, quality, and extent of the services to be provided to the Portfolios by the Adviser’s affiliates, including distribution services.

Nature, extent and quality of services. In considering the nature, extent and quality of the services to be provided by the Adviser to the Portfolios, the Board took into account the extensive responsibilities that the Adviser has as investment manager to the Portfolios, including the provision of investment advice to: (i) MetLife Aggressive Strategy Portfolio, MetLife Balanced Strategy Portfolio, MetLife Defensive Strategy Portfolio, MetLife Growth Strategy Portfolio, and MetLife Moderate Strategy Portfolio (together, the “Asset Allocation Portfolios”), (ii) American Funds Balanced Allocation Portfolio, American Funds Growth Allocation Portfolio, and American Funds Moderate Allocation Portfolio (together, the “American Funds of Funds”), and (iii) the Met/Franklin Templeton Founding Strategy Portfolio, the selection of the Sub-Advisers for the other Portfolios and oversight of the Sub-Advisers’ compliance with fund policies and objectives, review of brokerage matters including with respect to trade allocation and best execution, oversight of general fund compliance with federal and state laws, and the implementation of Board directives as they relate to the Portfolios. The Adviser’s role in coordinating the activities of the Portfolios’ other service providers was also considered. The Board also evaluated the expertise and performance of the investment personnel with respect to the Asset Allocation Portfolios, the American Funds of Funds and the Met/Franklin Templeton Founding Strategy Portfolio and of the personnel overseeing the Sub-Advisers of the other Portfolios, and compliance with each Portfolio’s investment restrictions, tax and other requirements. The Board considered information received from the Trust’s Chief Compliance Officer (“CCO”) regarding the Portfolios’ compliance policies and procedures established pursuant to Rule 38a-1 under the 1940 Act, including the policies and procedures in place relating to proxy voting. The Board also took into account its familiarity with management through Board meetings, discussions and reports during the preceding year.

The Board also recognized the Adviser^’s reputation and long-standing experience in serving as an investment adviser to the Trust, and considered the benefit to shareholders of investing in funds that are part of a family of variable annuity portfolios offering a variety of investments. In addition, the Board reviewed the financial condition of the Adviser and whether it had the financial wherewithal to provide a high level and quality of services to the Portfolios. In its review, the Board also received and took into account information regarding any services and/or payments provided to the Adviser by the Sub-Advisers in connection with marketing activities.

¹ The Met/Templeton International Bond Portfolio recently commenced operations and, therefore, the Agreements with respect to this Portfolio were not up for renewal.

21

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Dreman Small Cap Value Portfolio

Board of Trustees’ Consideration of Advisory and Sub-Advisory Agreements—(Continued)

With respect to the services provided by each of the Sub-Advisers, the Board considered information provided to the Board by each Sub-Adviser, including each Sub-Adviser’s Form ADV, as well as information presented throughout the past year. The Board considered the Sub-Adviser’s current level of staffing and its overall resources, as well as its compensation program. The Board reviewed each Sub-Adviser’s history and investment experience, as well as information regarding the qualifications, background and responsibilities of the Sub-Adviser’s investment and compliance personnel who provide services to the Portfolios. The Board also considered, among other things, the Sub-Adviser’s compliance program and any disciplinary history. The Board noted each Sub-Adviser’s regulatory history, including whether it was currently involved in any regulatory actions or investigations as well as material litigation, and any settlements and ameliatory actions undertaken, as appropriate. The Board also noted that the CCO and his staff conduct regular, periodic compliance reviews with each of the Sub-Advisers and present reports to the Independent Trustees regarding the same, which includes evaluating the regulatory compliance systems of the Sub-Advisers and procedures reasonably designed by them to assure compliance with the federal securities laws, including issues related to late trading and market timing, best execution, fair value pricing, and proxy voting procedures, among others. The Board also took into account the financial condition of each Sub-Adviser.

The Board considered each Sub-Adviser’s investment process and philosophy. The Board took into account that each Sub-Adviser’s responsibilities include the development and maintenance of an investment program for the applicable Portfolio which is consistent with the Portfolio’s investment objectives, the selection of investment securities and the placement of orders for the purchase and sale of such securities, as well as the implementation of compliance controls related to performance of these services. The Board also reviewed each Sub-Adviser’s brokerage policies and practices, including with respect to best execution and soft dollars.

Based on its consideration and review of the foregoing information, the Board concluded that the nature, extent and quality of services provided by the Adviser and by each Sub-Adviser were satisfactory and that there was a reasonable basis on which to conclude that each would provide a high quality of investment services to the Portfolios.

Performance. The Board considered the performance of the Portfolios as described in the quarterly reports prepared by management, and as also analyzed in reports prepared by the Independent Trustees’ independent consultant. The Board noted that the Adviser reviews with the Board on a quarterly basis detailed information about the Portfolios’ performance results, portfolio composition and investment strategies. The Board also reviewed and considered a separate report prepared by Lipper Inc. (“Lipper”), an independent third party, which provided a statistical analysis comparing the Portfolios’ investment performance, expenses, and fees to comparable funds underlying variable insurance products (the “Performance Universe”). In addition, the Independent Trustees met separately with a representative of Bobroff Consulting, Inc., an independent consultant (“Bobroff”), at a special board meeting in September 2009, to review the separate reports prepared by such consultant (“Bobroff Report”), which analyzed the report prepared by Lipper, as well as certain of the other factors to be considered by the Board including supplemental alpha and information coefficient analysis. The Board also considered each Portfolio’s more recent performance subsequent to the performance period covered by the Lipper reports, and management’s discussion of the same, including the effect of current market conditions on each Portfolio’s more recent performance.

The Board closely reviewed the Portfolios’ performance records and the Adviser’s and Sub-Advisers’ management styles and long-term performance records with the Portfolios and comparable funds. The Board focused particular attention on Portfolios with less favorable performance records. The Board was mindful of the Adviser’s focus on each Sub-Adviser’s performance and noted that the Adviser has been active in monitoring and responding to any performance issues with respect to the Portfolios. The Board also took into account its discussions with management regarding factors that contributed to the performance of each Portfolio.

Among other data relating specifically to the Dreman Small Cap Value Portfolio’s performance, the Board considered that the Portfolio outperformed both the median of its Performance Universe and its Lipper Index for the one- and three-year periods ended July 31, 2009. The Board further considered that the Portfolio also outperformed its benchmark, the Russell 2000 Value Index, for the one- and three-year periods ended August 31, 2009. Based on its review, the Board concluded that the Portfolio’s performance was satisfactory.

Fees and Expenses. The Board gave substantial consideration to the advisory fees payable under the Advisory Agreement and the sub-advisory fees payable under each of the Sub-Advisory Agreements. In this regard, the Board reviewed the advisory fees payable in the aggregate as well as on a Portfolio-by-Portfolio basis based on information provided by the Adviser. The Independent Trustees, with the assistance of Bobroff, also examined the fees paid by each Portfolio in light of fees paid to other investment managers by comparable funds and the method of computing each Portfolio’s fee, as well as considered the fees charged by the Adviser to manage other comparable funds. The Lipper report included comparisons of the Adviser’s fee schedule with that of its peers based on an asset-based analysis of relative fee structures according to the size of each Portfolio. In addition, the Board considered the Portfolios’ advisory and sub-advisory fees and total expenses as compared to similarly situated investment companies underlying variable insurance products deemed to be comparable to the Portfolios as determined by Lipper. The Board considered each Portfolio’s ranking within a smaller group of peer funds chosen by Lipper (the “Expense Group”), as well as the Portfolio’s ranking within broader groups of funds (the “Expense Universe” and the “Sub-advised Expense Universe”). The Board also considered each Portfolio’s contractual sub-advisory fees, as applicable, as compared to the Sub-advised Expense Universe as well as a smaller group of funds (the “Sub-advised Expense Group”). In comparing each Portfolio’s actual and contractual management fee to that of comparable funds, the Board noted that such fee includes both advisory and administrative fees.

22

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Dreman Small Cap Value Portfolio

Board of Trustees’ Consideration of Advisory and Sub-Advisory Agreements—(Continued)

The Board noted that the sub-advisory fees for the Portfolios are paid by the Adviser, not the Portfolios, out of the advisory fee. It was further noted that the Adviser negotiates such fees at arm’s length. The Board also considered that the Adviser had entered into expense limitation agreements with certain of the Portfolios as noted below, pursuant to which the Adviser has agreed to waive a portion of its advisory fee and/or reimburse certain expenses as a means of limiting a Portfolio’s total annual operating expenses. In addition, the Board noted that the Adviser effected fee reductions in 2009 with respect to several Portfolios. The Board also noted that the Adviser had re-negotiated the securities lending arrangement with State Street Corporation to further maximize the income to the Portfolios from such program.

With respect to each sub-advised Portfolio, the Board also compared the sub-advisory fees paid by the Adviser to fees charged by the Portfolio’s Sub-Adviser to manage other sub-advised portfolios and portfolios not subject to regulation under the 1940 Act, such as separate accounts, as applicable. The Board considered the fee comparisons in light of the differences required to manage different types of accounts.

With respect to the Dreman Small Cap Value Portfolio, the Board considered that the Portfolio’s actual management fees and total expenses (exclusive of 12b-1 fees) were below the Expense Group median, the Expense Universe median and the Sub-advised Expense Universe median. The Board further noted that the Portfolio’s contractual management fees were slightly below the normalized median of the Expense Group at the Portfolio’s current size. The Board also noted that the Portfolio’s contractual sub-advisory fees were above the average of the Sub-advised Expense Group at the Portfolio’s current size. After consideration of all relevant factors, the Board concluded that the advisory and sub-advisory fees are consistent with industry norms and are fair and reasonable in light of the services to be provided.

Profitability. The Board examined the profitability of the Adviser on an aggregate basis with respect to all Portfolios, as well as on a Portfolio-by-Portfolio basis. With respect to the Asset Allocation Portfolios and Met/Franklin Templeton Founding Strategy Portfolio, the Board noted that the advisory fee is in addition to the fees received by the Adviser and its affiliates with regard to the other Portfolios of the Trust or of Metropolitan Series Fund, Inc., in which the Asset Allocation Portfolios and Met/Franklin Templeton Founding Strategy Portfolio may invest. With respect to the other Portfolios, the Board noted that a major component of profitability of the Adviser was the margin between the sub-advisory fees that the Adviser receives from the Trust and the portion of those fees paid to the Sub-Advisers. In this regard, the Board took into account certain comparative information in the Lipper report. The Board also reviewed the Adviser’s unaudited income statements and balance sheet information supplied by the Adviser regarding costs borne by the Adviser’s affiliates which support the operations of the Adviser but are not reflected on the unaudited income statements of the Adviser, as well as considered the profitability of the insurance products, the function of which is supported in part by the Adviser’s revenues under the Advisory Agreement, and other information and analysis prepared by the Adviser. With respect to the American Funds Bond Portfolio, American Funds Growth Portfolio, American Funds Growth-Income Portfolio, American Funds Global Small Capitalization Portfolio and American Funds International Portfolio, the Board noted that the Adviser currently does not receive an advisory fee. The Board also considered that the Distributor, MetLife Investors Distribution Company, receives 12b-1 payments to support the distribution of the products. The Board concluded after extensive discussions with management that the profitability of the Adviser and its affiliates from their relationship with each Portfolio was reasonable in light of all relevant factors.

In considering the profitability to the Sub-Advisers and their affiliates of their relationships with the Portfolios, the Board noted that the fees under the Sub-Advisory Agreements were paid by the Adviser out of the advisory fees that it receives under the Advisory Agreement. The Board also relied on the ability of the Adviser to negotiate the Sub-Advisory Agreements and the fees thereunder at arm’s length. The Board reviewed portfolio specific data with regard to the profitability of the Portfolios to each Sub-Adviser, as available, and analyzed the reasonableness of such profitability finding no indication of excessive profitability. However, the Board placed more reliance on the fact that the Sub-Advisory Agreement was negotiated at arm’s length and that the advisory fee was paid by the Adviser than on Sub-Adviser profitability.

Economies of scale. The Board also considered the effect of the Portfolios’ growth in size on their performances and fees. The Board noted that the fee schedules for all but eleven of the Portfolios contain breakpoints that reduce the fee rate above specified asset levels. The Board noted those Portfolios that did not contain breakpoints in the advisory fee and took into account management’s discussion of the same. The Board noted that those Portfolios with advisory fee schedules containing breakpoints generally reflect the inclusion of breakpoints in the sub-advisory fee schedule for such Portfolios. The Board considered the effective fees under the Advisory Agreement for each Portfolio as a percentage of assets at different asset levels and possible economies of scale that may be realized if the assets of the Portfolio grow. Among other data, the Board examined the effect of each Portfolio’s growth in size on various fee schedules and reviewed the Lipper and Bobroff Reports, which compared fee schedules among peers. The Board also took into account that the Sub-Adviser fees are paid by the Adviser out of the advisory fee. The Board also noted that if the Portfolios’ assets increase over time, the Portfolios may realize other economies of scale if assets increase proportionally more than certain other fixed expenses.

With respect to the Dreman Small Cap Value Portfolio, the Board noted that the Portfolio’s advisory fee and sub-advisory fee each contains breakpoints that reduce the advisory fee rate on assets above certain specified asset levels. The Board considered the fact that the Portfolio’s fee levels decline as portfolio assets increase. The Board further considered that the Portfolio’s management fees were slightly above the asset-weighted average of comparable funds at all asset levels. The Board concluded that the advisory fee structure for the Portfolio, including breakpoints, was reasonable and appropriately reflects potential economies of scale.

Other factors. As part of its evaluation of the Adviser’s compensation, the Board considered other benefits that may be realized by the Adviser and its affiliates from their relationship with the Trust. Among them, the Board recognized that an affiliate of the Adviser, MetLife Investors Distribution

23

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Dreman Small Cap Value Portfolio

Board of Trustees’ Consideration of Advisory and Sub-Advisory Agreements—(Continued)

Company, serves as the Distributor for the Trust, and, as such, receives payments pursuant to Rule 12b-1 from the Portfolios to compensate it for providing shareholder services and selling activities, which could lead to growth in the Trust’s assets and corresponding benefits from such growth, including economies of scale. The Board also considered that affiliates of the Adviser may benefit from certain indirect tax benefits relating to dividend received deductions and foreign tax credits. The Board concluded that ancillary benefits accruing to the Adviser and its affiliates by virtue of the Adviser’s relationship with the Portfolios are fair and reasonable in light of the costs of providing investment management and other services to the Portfolios and the ongoing commitment of the Adviser to the Portfolios.

The Board considered other benefits that may be realized by each Subadviser and its affiliates from their relationship with the Trust, including the opportunity to provide advisory services to additional portfolios of the Trust and reputational benefits. The Board concluded that the benefits accruing to the Subadvisers and their affiliates by virtue of the Subadvisers’ relationships to the Portfolios are fair and reasonable in light of the costs of providing investment advisory services to the Portfolios and the ongoing commitment of the Subadvisers to the Portfolios.

The Board considered any possible conflicts of interest in the form of material benefits or detriments to the Trust resulting from the nature of the Trust’s and the Adviser’s or the Subadvisers’ affiliations. Here, the Board considered possible conflicts of interest that may arise between the Trust and the Adviser or a Subadviser in connection with the services provided to the Trust and the various relationships that they and their affiliates may have with the Trust. The Board considered the procedures for monitoring and managing such potential conflicts.

Conclusion. In considering the renewal of each of the Agreements, the Board, including the Independent Trustees, did not identify any single factor as controlling, and each Trustee may have attributed different weights to various factors. The Board evaluated all information available to them on a Portfolio-by-Portfolio basis, and their determinations were made separately with respect to each Portfolio. Based on all of the above-mentioned considerations, and the recommendations of management, the Board, including a majority of the Independent Trustees, determined that approval of the Advisory Agreement and the Sub-Advisory Agreements was in the best interests of each Portfolio. After full consideration of these and other factors, the Board, including a majority of the Independent Trustees, with the assistance of independent counsel, approved the Advisory Agreement and the Sub-Advisory Agreement with respect to each Portfolio.

24

Simplify your life…

with MetLife eDelivery^® while helping MetLife preserve the planet’s natural resources.

(see details on inside cover)

Met Investors Series Trust Goldman Sachs Mid Cap Value Portfolio Annual Report December 31, 2009

• get rid of all that paper?

• access important documents whenever you want?

• conveniently receive valuable information online?

Get it all with MetLife eDelivery!

MetLife’s eDelivery service is your resource for electronic delivery of your variable annuity or variable life prospectuses, semiannual and annual reports, and other information. Available to variable product clients of Metropolitan Life Insurance Company, First MetLife Investors Insurance Company, General American Life Insurance Company, MetLife Investors Insurance Company, MetLife Investors USA Insurance Company, MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut and New England Life Insurance Company.*

Why sign up for MetLife eDelivery?

It’s Free** – No cost to enroll or use the service.

It’s Paperless – We’ll email you when your documents are available.

It’s Easy – Enrollment takes just a few minutes.

How do you sign up?

Just type in www.metlife.esourcelink.net to get to MetLife’s online registration form. You will need your policy/account numbers, which can be found on your statements. The form takes only a few minutes to complete. Please note, for jointly owned contracts, both owners will need to register in order to eliminate paper delivery.

  * Not all MetLife products offer eDelivery at this time. ** Your internet provider may impose fees for this service. L0210086208[0911]

Letter from the President

Letter to Policy Holders

February 1, 2010

2009 can best be described as a year of recovery. The year began with the stock market in a broad decline and the economy mired in a deep recession. However, investors’ sentiment improved dramatically during the year as fiscal and monetary authorities took measures to jump start the economy which helped spark a strong market rally in equities and corporate bonds.

The Barclays Capital U.S. Aggregate Bond Index returned 5.9% during 2009. While this was similar to the 5.2% return experienced in 2008, the two years could not have been more different. In 2008, fear drove investors toward the safety of U.S. Treasury securities and away from the risk of corporate bonds, especially those rated below investment grade. In contrast, investors were more willing to embrace risk in 2009. This produced an enormous recovery in below investment grade bonds; the Barclays Capital U.S. Corporate High Yield Index returned over 58% in 2009 after falling 26% in 2008. The Barclays Capital U.S. Treasury Index returned 13.7% in 2008, but declined 3.6% in 2009.

Stock investors also became less pessimistic in 2009. While the stock market indices are still far from the record levels reached in 2007, investors were rewarded in 2009 as stocks returned 26.5% as measured by the Standard & Poor’s 500 Index, its best return since 2003. Foreign stocks, as measured by the MSCI EAFE Index, returned 31.8% during 2009.

On the following pages, you will find a complete review of your Portfolio and its investment performance.

MetLife is committed to building your financial freedom. We appreciate your trust and will continue to focus our efforts on meeting your investment needs.

Sincerely,

Elizabeth M. Forget

President

Met Investors Series Trust

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Goldman Sachs Mid Cap Value Portfolio

Managed by Goldman Sachs Asset Management, L.P.

Portfolio Manager Commentary*

Performance Review

For the year ended December 31, 2009, the Goldman Sachs Mid Cap Value Portfolio had a return of 32.67% and 32.30% for Class A and B Shares, respectively, verus its 34.21% for its benchmark, the Russell Midcap Value Index¹.

Market Environment / Conditions

In 2009, U.S. equity markets oscillated between extremes of fear and exuberance. The credit crisis from 2008 spilled into the first quarter, as the nation’s financial system experienced an extremely challenging period. As governments around the world coordinated a response to the financial crisis, extinction risk was removed for many companies. Stocks rallied sharply off of the March 9th trough into the second and third quarters. Propelled by investors’ renewed appetite for risk, markets were driven by the most battered names from the first quarter. Markets continued to experience gains through the end of the year, albeit less pronounced. The economy showed encouraging signs of stabilization and improvement. However, despite some positive economic data, concerns about the elevated unemployment rate of 10%, the Federal Reserve Board’s (the “Fed”) outlook on interest rates, and the strength of the U.S. dollar continue to weigh on the markets.

The S&P 500 Index returned 26.46% in 2009. All sectors ended the year in highly positive territory, and growth stocks outpaced the gains of value stocks.

Within the value space, mid-cap stocks experienced the most dramatic rise in 2009, with gains of over 34% for the year. Market trends were particularly pronounced in the mid- cap value index. Over 40% of the Russell Midcap Value Index consists of the Consumer Discretionary and Financials sectors, which climbed over 148% and 91%, respectively, from their March 9th lows. These sectors contain some of the most credit or economic sensitive companies, including real estate investment trusts, retailers, autos, media, and hotels, many of which rebounded dramatically in the recent risk-charged rally despite the absence of catalysts or improving fundamentals.

Portfolio Review / Current Positioning

Throughout this market cycle, our disciplined focus on quality, cash generating companies with strong balance sheets and disciplined management teams has led to strong, long term performance. Consistent with the historical patterns of our strategy, our quality-biased approach served us well as markets declined, as experienced in the first quarter, but was challenged in the subsequent euphoric environment post March 9th. Despite the extreme rally that was particularly pronounced in the mid-cap space, the Portfolio finished approximately in line for the year (gross) relative to the Russell Mid Cap Value Index. In the portfolio, our stock selection was strong in Energy and Materials, while our select holdings in Consumer Discretionary and Technology detracted from performance.

During the year, shares of some of our retailers, including JCPenney Co, Inc. (0.8%)., were among our detractors, due to market concerns over consumer sales trends. We believe that the current environment presents a tremendous opportunity to add great franchises to the portfolio at compelling valuations, as many companies with strong balance sheets and disciplined management have lagged in the recent rally. Within Financials, we continue to favor insurance companies with opportunity for pricing improvement and market share gains due to decreased competition. As such, we added to W.R. Berkley Corp. (2.1%) on weakness. Stock selection was the strongest in the Energy sector. Several of our holdings experienced double-digit gains that surpassed the mid single digit gains of the market. Two such examples were exploration and production companies Whiting Petroleum Corp. (1.7% of the Portfolio) and Newfield Exploration Co. (2.9%), whose shares were boosted by the announcement of a major acquisition in the industry signaling potential future consolidation, in addition to improving energy prices during the latter part of the fourth quarter.

Team Managed

Andrew Braun

Sean Gallagher

Dolores Bamford, CFA

Scott Carroll, CFA

Goldman Sachs Asset Management, L.P.

*This commentary may include statements that constitute “forward-looking statements” under the U.S. securities laws. Forward-looking statements include, among other things, projections, estimates, and information about possible or future results related to the Portfolio, market or regulatory developments. The views expressed above are not guarantees of future performance or economic results and involve certain risks, uncertainties and assumptions that could cause actual outcomes and results to differ materially from the views expressed herein. The views expressed above are subject to change at any time based upon economic, market, or other conditions and the subadvisory firm undertakes no obligation to update the views expressed herein. Any discussions of specific securities should not be considered a recommendation to buy or sell those securities. The views expressed above (including any forward-looking statement) may not be relied upon as investment advice or as an indication of the Portfolio’s trading intent. Information about the Portfolio’s holdings, asset allocation or country diversification is historical and is not an indication of future Portfolio composition, which may vary. Direct investment in any index is not possible. The performance of any index mentioned in this commentary has not been adjusted for ongoing management, distribution and operating expenses, and sales charges applicable to mutual fund investments. In addition, the returns do not reflect additional fees charged by separate accounts or variable insurance contracts that an investor in the Portfolio may pay. If these additional fees were reflected, performance would have been lower.

1

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Goldman Sachs Mid Cap Value Portfolio

Managed by Goldman Sachs Asset Management, L.P.

Portfolio Composition as of December 31, 2009

Top Holdings

	Percent of Net Assets
Newfield Exploration Co.	2.9%
DISH Network Corp. - Class A	2.2%
W.R. Berkley Corp.	2.1%
Invesco, Ltd.	1.9%
Whiting Petroleum Corp.	1.7%
PPL Corp.	1.6%
Cliffs Natural Resources, Inc.	1.6%
United States Steel Corp.	1.6%
Newell Rubbermaid, Inc.	1.6%
CommScope, Inc.	1.5%

Top Sectors

	Percent of Portfolio Market Value
Basic Materials	25.2%
Short-Term Investments	11.6%
Communications	10.8%
Cyclical	9.1%
Non-Cyclical	8.7%
Energy	8.5%
Financials	7.8%
Industrials	7.5%
Technology	7.3%
Utilities	3.5%

2

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Goldman Sachs Mid Cap Value Portfolio

Goldman Sachs Mid Cap Value Portfolio managed by

Goldman Sachs Asset Management, L.P. vs. Russell Midcap Value Index¹

	Average Annual Return2 (for the year ended 12/31/09)
	1 Year	3 Year	5 Year	Since Inception3
Goldman Sachs Mid Cap Value Portfolio—Class A	32.67%	-4.22%	2.83%	5.99%
Class B	32.30%	-4.46%	2.57%	5.73%
Russell Midcap Value Index1	34.21%	-6.62%	1.98%	5.47%

The performance of Class B shares will differ from that of the other class of shares because of the difference in expenses paid by policyholders investing in the different share classes.

¹The Russell Midcap Value Index is an unmanaged index which measures the performance of those Russell Midcap companies (the 800 smallest companies in the Russell 1000 Index) with lower price-to-book ratios and lower forecasted growth values.

²“Average Annual Return” is calculated including reinvestment of all income dividends and capital gain distributions.

³Inception of the Class A and Class B shares is 5/1/04. Index returns are based on an inception date of 5/1/04.

Past performance does not guarantee future results. The investment return and principal value of an investment in the Portfolio will fluctuate, so that shares, on any given day or when redeemed, may be worth more or less than their original cost. Performance numbers are net of all Portfolio expenses but do not include any insurance, sales, or administration charges of variable annuity or life insurance contracts. If these charges were included, the returns would be lower. The Index does not include fees or expenses and is not available for direct investment.

3

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Goldman Sachs Mid Cap Value Portfolio

Understanding Your Portfolio’s Expenses

Shareholder Expense Example

As a shareholder of the Portfolio, you incur ongoing costs, including management fees; distribution and service (12b-1) fees; and other Portfolio expenses. This example is intended to help you understand your ongoing costs (in dollars) (referred to as “expenses”) of investing in the Portfolio and compare these costs with the ongoing costs of investing in other mutual funds. The example is based on an investment of $1,000 invested at the beginning of the period and held for the entire period, July 1, 2009 through December 31, 2009.

Actual Expenses

The first line for each share class of the Portfolio in the table below provides information about actual account values and actual expenses. You may use the information in this line, together with the amount you invested in the particular share class of the Portfolio, to estimate the expenses that you paid over the period. Simply divide your account value by $1,000 (for example, an $8,600 account value divided by $1,000 = 8.6), then multiply the result by the number in the first line under the heading entitled “Expenses Paid During Period” to estimate the expenses you paid on your account during this period.

Hypothetical Example for Comparison Purposes

The second line for each share class of the Portfolio in the table below provides information about hypothetical account values and hypothetical expenses based on the Portfolio’s actual expense ratio and an assumed rate of return of 5% per year before expenses, which is not the Portfolio’s actual return. The hypothetical account values and expenses may not be used to estimate the actual ending account balance or expenses you paid for the period. You may use this information to compare the ongoing costs of investing in the Portfolio and other funds. To do so, compare this 5% hypothetical example with the 5% hypothetical examples that appear in the shareholder reports of the other funds.

Please note that the expenses shown in the table are meant to highlight your ongoing costs only and do not reflect any fees or charges of your variable insurance product or any additional expenses that participants in certain eligible qualified plans may bear relating to the operations of their plan. Therefore, the second line for each share class in the table is useful in comparing ongoing costs only, and will not help you determine the relative total costs of owning different funds. In addition, if these other costs were included, your costs would have been higher.

	Annualized Expense Ratio	Beginning Account Value 7/1/09		Ending Account Value 12/31/09		Expenses Paid During Period* 7/1/09-12/31/09
Class A
Actual	0.70%	$	1,000.00	$	1,264.90	$	4.00
Hypothetical	0.70%		1,000.00		1,021.68		3.57
Class B
Actual	0.95%	$	1,000.00	$	1,262.10	$	5.42
Hypothetical	0.95%		1,000.00		1,020.42		4.84

* Expenses paid are equal to the Portfolio’s annualized expense ratio for the most recent six month period, as shown above, multiplied by the average account value over the period, multiplied by the number of days (184 days) in the most recent fiscal half-year, divided by 365 (to reflect the one-half year period).

4

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Goldman Sachs Mid Cap Value Portfolio

PORTFOLIO OF INVESTMENTS

December 31, 2009

(Percentage of Net Assets)

Security Description	Shares	Value
Common Stocks - 96.2%
Aerospace & Defense - 0.6%
BE Aerospace, Inc.*	134,590	$	3,162,865
Auto Components - 0.8%
Johnson Controls, Inc.	154,087		4,197,330
Automobiles - 1.1%
Harley-Davidson, Inc.	234,030		5,897,556
Beverages - 1.1%
Molson Coors Brewing Co. - Class B	123,070		5,557,841
Biotechnology - 0.8%
Biogen Idec, Inc.*	74,393		3,980,026
Capital Markets - 3.3%
Invesco, Ltd.	425,942		10,005,378
Janus Capital Group, Inc.	256,430		3,448,983
Raymond James Financial, Inc.(a)	149,420		3,551,713
			17,006,074
Chemicals - 2.9%
FMC Corp.	88,990		4,962,082
Huntsman Corp.	670,940		7,574,913
Terra Industries, Inc.	73,429		2,363,680
			14,900,675
Commercial & Professional Services - 1.7%
Corrections Corp. of America*	172,250		4,228,737
Republic Services, Inc.	167,434		4,740,057
			8,968,794
Commercial Banks - 4.3%
Comerica, Inc.	213,360		6,309,055
First Horizon National Corp.	185,527		2,486,056
M&T Bank Corp.(a)	59,797		3,999,821
Marshall & Ilsley Corp.	687,550		3,747,147
SunTrust Banks, Inc.(a)	275,640		5,592,736
			22,134,815
Communications Equipment - 1.5%
CommScope, Inc.*	299,068		7,934,274
Computers & Peripherals - 1.1%
Lexmark International, Inc. - Class A*	80,620		2,094,508
QLogic Corp.*	188,200		3,551,334
			5,645,842
Construction & Engineering - 0.0%
Fluor Corp.	4,620		208,085
Construction Materials - 1.0%
Vulcan Materials Co.(a)	93,493		4,924,276
Consumer Finance - 1.3%
SLM Corp.*	606,764		6,838,230
Containers & Packaging - 0.6%
Pactiv Corp.*	138,010		3,331,561

Security Description	Shares	Value
Diversified Telecommunication Services - 1.2%
CenturyTel, Inc.	103,471	$	3,746,685
Clearwire Corp. - Class A*(a)	367,430		2,483,827
			6,230,512
Electric Utilities - 6.2%
DPL, Inc.	212,872		5,875,267
Edison International	196,006		6,817,089
FirstEnergy Corp.	80,351		3,732,304
Great Plains Energy, Inc.	66,730		1,293,895
Northeast Utilities	54,900		1,415,871
NV Energy, Inc.	246,330		3,049,565
Pinnacle West Capital Corp.	44,490		1,627,444
PPL Corp.	258,990		8,367,967
			32,179,402
Electrical Equipment - 0.7%
Cooper Industries PLC - Class A	81,643		3,481,258
Electronic Equipment, Instruments & Components - 0.7%
Amphenol Corp. - Class A	76,393		3,527,829
Energy Equipment & Services - 3.2%
Core Laboratories N.V.(a)	27,340		3,229,401
Dril-Quip, Inc.*	129,595		7,319,525
Oil States International, Inc.*	154,000		6,050,660
			16,599,586
Food & Staples Retailing - 0.7%
BJ’s Wholesale Club, Inc.*(a)	108,680		3,554,923
Food Products - 0.6%
J.M. Smucker Co. (The)	48,746		3,010,066
Health Care Equipment & Supplies - 2.8%
C.R. Bard, Inc.	65,070		5,068,953
Edwards Lifesciences Corp.*	50,397		4,376,979
Kinetic Concepts, Inc.*(a)	131,938		4,967,466
			14,413,398
Health Care Providers & Services - 1.5%
Aetna, Inc.	240,630		7,627,971
Hotels, Restaurants & Leisure - 0.8%
Starwood Hotels & Resorts Worldwide, Inc.(a)	109,980		4,021,969
Household Durables - 3.1%
Mohawk Industries, Inc.*(a)	43,876		2,088,498
Newell Rubbermaid, Inc.	537,645		8,070,051
NVR, Inc.*(a)	8,578		6,096,470
			16,255,019
Household Products - 0.5%
Clorox Co.	41,590		2,536,990
Insurance - 12.2%
Arch Capital Group, Ltd.*	63,487		4,542,495
Everest Reinsurance Group, Ltd.	83,136		7,123,093
Genworth Financial, Inc. - Class A*	325,810		3,697,944

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

5

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Goldman Sachs Mid Cap Value Portfolio

PORTFOLIO OF INVESTMENTS - continued

December 31, 2009

(Percentage of Net Assets)

Security Description	Shares	Value
Insurance - continued
Hartford Financial Services Group, Inc. (The)	303,070	$	7,049,408
Lincoln National Corp.	104,017		2,587,943
Marsh & McLennan Cos., Inc.	328,453		7,252,242
Principal Financial Group, Inc.	328,080		7,887,043
Progressive Corp. (The)*	356,753		6,417,986
W.R. Berkley Corp.	436,031		10,743,804
XL Capital, Ltd. - Class A	333,930		6,120,937
			63,422,895
Internet & Catalog Retail - 0.9%
Liberty Media Corp. - Interactive - Class A*	442,590		4,797,676
Internet Software & Services - 1.4%
IAC/InterActiveCorp. - Class B*(a)	359,730		7,367,270
Machinery - 4.5%
Cummins, Inc.	111,090		5,094,587
Eaton Corp.	113,493		7,220,425
Parker Hannifin Corp.	95,984		5,171,618
Pentair, Inc.	96,570		3,119,211
Snap-on, Inc.	66,206		2,797,866
			23,403,707
Media - 3.6%
CBS Corp. - Class B	497,470		6,989,453
DISH Network Corp. - Class A	556,410		11,556,636
‘			18,546,089
Metals & Mining - 3.2%
Cliffs Natural Resources, Inc.	180,110		8,301,270
United States Steel Corp.(a)	147,580		8,134,609
			16,435,879
Multi-Utilities - 2.3%
Alliant Energy Corp.	85,800		2,596,308
CMS Energy Corp.(a)	361,923		5,667,714
SCANA Corp.	50,670		1,909,246
Xcel Energy, Inc.	82,160		1,743,435
			11,916,703
Multiline Retail - 0.8%
JC Penney Co., Inc.	156,364		4,160,846
Oil, Gas & Consumable Fuels - 8.5%
Atlas Energy, Inc.	146,210		4,411,156
Concho Resources, Inc.*	130,130		5,842,837
EXCO Resources, Inc.	238,030		5,053,377
Newfield Exploration Co.*	311,594		15,028,178
Range Resources Corp.	103,006		5,134,849
Whiting Petroleum Corp.*	124,060		8,864,087
			44,334,484
Paper & Forest Products - 1.1%
International Paper Co.	220,000		5,891,600
Real Estate Investment Trusts (REITs) - 6.3%
Alexandria Real Estate Equities, Inc.(a)	66,988		4,306,658
AvalonBay Communities, Inc.	55,040		4,519,334
Boston Properties, Inc.	91,828		6,158,904
Digital Realty Trust, Inc.(a)	88,870		4,468,384

Security Description	Shares/Par Amount		Value
Real Estate Investment Trusts (REITs) - continued
Douglas Emmett, Inc.		230,168	$	3,279,894
Essex Property Trust, Inc.(a)		48,032		4,017,877
Host Hotels & Resorts, Inc.		530,957		6,196,268
				32,947,319
Road & Rail - 1.4%
Kansas City Southern*		111,630		3,716,163
Ryder System, Inc.		84,780		3,490,392
				7,206,555
Semiconductors & Semiconductor Equipment - 1.6%
ON Semiconductor Corp.*		578,090		5,092,973
Teradyne, Inc.*(a)		315,020		3,380,165
				8,473,138
Software - 1.1%
Parametric Technology Corp.*		352,350		5,757,399
Specialty Retail - 1.6%
TJX Cos., Inc. (The)		97,420		3,560,701
Urban Outfitters, Inc.*		137,110		4,797,479
				8,358,180
Textiles, Apparel & Luxury Goods - 0.3%
Fossil, Inc.*		43,120		1,447,107
Wireless Telecommunication Services - 1.3%
Sprint Nextel Corp.*		1,793,802		6,565,316
Total Common Stocks (Cost $442,462,548)				499,159,330
Right - 0.0%
Diversified Telecommunication Services - 0.0%
Clearwire Corp., expire 6/21/10(a)* (Cost - $0)		367,430		146,972
Short-Term Investments - 12.7%
Mutual Funds - 8.9%
State Street Navigator Securities Lending Prime Portfolio(b)		46,053,953		46,053,953
Repurchase Agreement - 3.8%
Fixed Income Clearing Corp., Repurchase Agreement, dated 12/31/09 at 0.005% to be repurchased at $19,695,011 on 01/04/10 collateralized by $19,320,000 Federal Home Loan Bank at 5.625% due 03/14/36 with a value of $20,092,800	$	19,695,000		19,695,000
Total Short-Term Investments (Cost $65,748,953)				65,748,953
Total Investments - 108.9% (Cost $508,211,501)				565,055,255
Other Assets and Liabilities (net) - (8.9)%				(46,006,240	)
Net Assets - 100.0%			$	519,049,015

* Non-income producing security.

(a) All or a portion of security is on loan.

(b) Represents investment of collateral received from securities lending transactions.

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

6

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Goldman Sachs Mid Cap Value Portfolio

Various inputs are used in determining the value of the Portfolio’s investments, which are as follows:

Level 1—unadjusted quoted prices in active markets for identical investments

Level 2—other significant observable inputs (including, but not limited to: quoted prices for similar investments in markets that are both active or inactive; inputs other than quoted prices that are observable such as interest rates, yield curves, credit risks, default rates, etc.)

Level 3—significant unobservable inputs based on the best information available in the circumstances, to the extent observable inputs are unavailable (including the Portfolio’s own assumptions in determining the fair value of investments)

The inputs or methodology used for valuing investments are not necessarily an indication of the risk associated with investing in them. For information about the Portfolio’s policy regarding valuation of investments and other significant accounting policies, please refer to Note 2 of the Notes to Financial Statements.

The following table summarizes the inputs used in determining the value the Portfolio’s investments as of December 31, 2009:

ASSETS VALUATION INPUTS

Description	Level 1		Level 2		Level 3		Total
Total Common Stocks*	$	499,159,330	$	—	$	—	$	499,159,330
Right
Diversified Telecommunication Services		146,972		—		—		146,972
Short-Term Investments
Mutual Funds		46,053,953		—		—		46,053,953
Repurchase Agreement		—		19,695,000		—		19,695,000
Total Short-Term Investments		46,053,953		19,695,000		—		65,748,953
TOTAL INVESTMENTS	$	545,360,255	$	19,695,000	$	—	$	565,055,255

* See Portfolio of Investments for additional detailed categorizations.

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

7

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Goldman Sachs Mid Cap Value Portfolio

Statement of Assets and Liabilities

December 31, 2009

Assets
Investments at value (a)(b)	$	545,360,255
Repurchase Agreement		19,695,000
Cash		931
Receivable for investments sold		1,633,152
Receivable for shares sold		50,663
Dividends receivable		646,805
Interest receivable		3
Total assets		567,386,809
Liabilities
Payables for:
Investments purchased		1,874,004
Shares redeemed		45,974
Collateral for securities loaned		46,053,953
Accrued Expenses:
Management fees		312,355
Distribution and service fees - Class B		23,114
Administration fees		3,062
Custodian and accounting fees		4,046
Deferred trustees’ fees		7,518
Other expenses		13,768
Total liabilities		48,337,794
Net Assets	$	519,049,015
Net Assets Represented by
Paid in surplus	$	576,600,529
Accumulated net realized loss		(120,622,274	)
Unrealized appreciation on investments		56,843,754
Undistributed net investment income		6,227,006
Net Assets	$	519,049,015
Net Assets
Class A	$	409,351,872
Class B		109,697,143
Capital Shares Outstanding
Class A		39,337,963
Class B		10,550,579
Net Asset Value, Offering Price and Redemption Price Per Share
Class A	$	10.41
Class B		10.40

(a) Identified cost of investments, excluding repurchase agreement, was $488,516,501.

(b) Includes securities loaned at value of $44,788,397.

Statement of Operations

For the Year Ended December 31, 2009

Investment Income
Dividends (a)	$	9,681,029
Interest (b)		299,720
Total investment income		9,980,749
Expenses
Management fees		3,055,200
Administration fees		33,926
Custodian and accounting fees		32,544
Distribution and service fees - Class B		243,786
Audit and tax services		31,003
Legal		36,351
Trustees’ fees and expenses		22,763
Shareholder reporting		29,274
Insurance		6,482
Miscellaneous		10,840
Total expenses		3,502,169
Less broker commission recapture		(195,993	)
Net expenses		3,306,176
Net investment income		6,674,573
Net Realized and Unrealized Gain (Loss) on Investments
Net realized loss on investments		(47,029,537	)
Net change in unrealized appreciation on investments		167,333,988
Net realized and unrealized gain on investments		120,304,451
Net Increase in Net Assets from Operations	$	126,979,024

(a) Net of foreign withholding taxes of $583.

(b) Includes net income on securities loaned of $298,554.

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

8

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Goldman Sachs Mid Cap Value Portfolio

Statements of Changes in Net Assets

	Year Ended December 31, 2009			Year Ended December 31, 2008
Increase (Decrease) in Net Assets:
Operations
Net investment income	$	6,674,573		$	7,282,399
Net realized loss on investments		(47,029,537	)		(73,681,520	)
Net change in unrealized appreciation (depreciation) on investments		167,333,988			(135,779,302	)
Net increase (decrease) in net assets resulting from operations		126,979,024			(202,178,423	)
Distributions to Shareholders
From net investment income
Class A		(4,893,374	)		(3,729,926	)
Class B		(1,211,267	)		(1,209,963	)
From net realized gains
Class A		—			(28,189,463	)
Class B		—			(13,093,820	)
Net decrease in net assets resulting from distributions		(6,104,641	)		(46,223,172	)
Capital Share Transactions
Proceeds from shares sold
Class A		53,098,873			79,814,056
Class B		1,443,186			10,724,237
Net asset value of shares issued through dividend reinvestment
Class A		4,893,374			31,919,389
Class B		1,211,267			14,303,783
Cost of shares repurchased
Class A		(21,825,246	)		(41,671,191	)
Class B		(16,672,138	)		(49,330,322	)
Net increase in net assets from capital share transactions		22,149,316			45,759,952
Net Increase (Decrease) in Net Assets		143,023,699			(202,641,643	)
Net assets at beginning of period		376,025,316			578,666,959
Net assets at end of period	$	519,049,015		$	376,025,316
Undistributed net investment income at end of period	$	6,227,006		$	6,165,981

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

9

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Goldman Sachs Mid Cap Value Portfolio

Financial Highlights

Selected Per Share Data for the Years Ended:
	Class A
	For the Years Ended December 31,
	2009			2008			2007			2006			2005
Net Asset Value, Beginning of Period	$	7.99		$	13.57		$	14.43		$	12.54		$	11.94
Income (Loss) from Investment Operations:
Net investment income(a)		0.14			0.17			0.18			0.14			0.15
Net realized/unrealized gain (loss) on investments		2.42			(4.65	)		0.39			1.86			1.38
Total from investment operations		2.56			(4.48	)		0.57			2.00			1.53
Less Distributions
Dividends from net investment income		(0.14	)		(0.13	)		(0.10	)		—			(0.11	)
Distributions from net realized capital gains		—			(0.97	)		(1.33	)		(0.11	)		(0.82	)
Total distributions		(0.14	)		(1.10	)		(1.43	)		(0.11	)		(0.93	)
Net Asset Value, End of Period	$	10.41		$	7.99		$	13.57		$	14.43		$	12.54
Total Return		32.67	%		(35.92	)%		3.37	%		16.02	%		12.76	%
Ratio of expenses to average net assets after reimbursement		0.77	%		0.75	%		0.75	%		0.79	%		0.79	%
Ratio of expenses to average net assets before reimbursement and rebates		0.77	%		0.75	%		0.77	%		0.81	%		0.79	%
Ratio of net investment income to average net assets		1.64	%		1.56	%		1.27	%		1.02	%		1.15	%
Portfolio turnover rate		116.0	%		98.5	%		83.6	%		67.2	%		51.4	%
Net assets, end of period (in millions)	$	409.4		$	278.9		$	383.0		$	277.9		$	285.0
	Class B
	For the Years Ended December 31,
	2009			2008			2007			2006			2005
Net Asset Value, Beginning of Period	$	7.97		$	13.53		$	14.40		$	12.55		$	11.95
Income (Loss) from Investment Operations:
Net investment income(a)		0.12			0.14			0.14			0.11			0.11
Net realized/unrealized gain (loss) on investments		2.42			(4.64	)		0.39			1.85			1.39
Total from investment operations		2.54			(4.50	)		0.53			1.96			1.50
Less Distributions
Dividends from net investment income		(0.11	)		(0.09	)		(0.07	)		—			(0.08	)
Distributions from net realized capital gains		—			(0.97	)		(1.33	)		(0.11	)		(0.82	)
Total distributions		(0.11	)		(1.06	)		(1.40	)		(0.11	)		(0.90	)
Net Asset Value, End of Period	$	10.40		$	7.97		$	13.53		$	14.40		$	12.55
Total Return		32.30	%		(36.07	)%		3.10	%		15.69	%		12.54	%
Ratio of expenses to average net assets after reimbursement		1.02	%		1.00	%		1.00	%		1.05	%		1.03	%
Ratio of expenses to average net assets before reimbursement and rebates		1.02	%		1.01	%		1.02	%		1.07	%		1.03	%
Ratio of net investment income to average net assets		1.37	%		1.26	%		0.97	%		0.83	%		0.87	%
Portfolio turnover rate		116.0	%		98.5	%		83.6	%		67.2	%		51.4	%
Net assets, end of period (in millions)	$	109.7		$	97.1		$	195.7		$	192.6		$	137.1

(a) Per share amounts based on average shares outstanding during the period.

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

10

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Goldman Sachs Mid Cap Value Portfolio

Notes to Financial Statements—December 31, 2009

1. Organization

Met Investors Series Trust (the “Trust”) is registered as an open-end management investment company under the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended (the “1940 Act”). The Trust currently offers forty-eight Portfolios (the “Portfolios”), each of which operates as a distinct investment vehicle of the Trust. The portfolio included in this report is Goldman Sachs Mid Cap Value Portfolio (the “Portfolio”), which is diversified. Shares in the Trust are not offered directly to the general public and are currently available only to separate accounts established by certain affiliated life insurance companies.

The Trust is managed by MetLife Advisers, LLC (the “Manager”), an affiliate of MetLife, Inc.

The Trust has registered four classes of shares: Class A, B, C and E Shares. Class A and B Shares are currently offered by the Portfolio. Shares of each Class of the Portfolio represent an equal pro rata interest in the Portfolio and generally give the shareholder the same voting, dividend, liquidation, and other rights. Investment income, realized and unrealized capital gains and losses, the common expenses of the Portfolio and certain Portfolio-level expense reductions, if any, are allocated on a pro rata basis to each Class based on the relative net assets of each Class to the net assets of the Portfolio. Each Class of shares differs in its respective distribution expenses.

2. Significant Accounting Policies

The financial statements have been prepared in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (“GAAP”) which require management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of income and expenses during the reporting period. Actual results could differ from these estimates.

The following is a summary of significant accounting policies consistently followed by the Trust in the preparation of its financial statements.

Valuation - Equity securities for which the primary market is on a domestic exchange (except the NASDAQ) will be valued at the last sale price on the day of valuation or, if there was no sale that day, at the last reported bid price, using prices as of the close of trading. Equity securities traded over-the-counter and quoted on NASDAQ are valued at the NASDAQ Official Closing Price. Equity securities not quoted on NASDAQ that are actively traded in the over-the-counter market, including listed securities for which the primary market is believed to be over-the-counter, will be valued at the most recently quoted bid price provided by the principal market makers. Short positions traded in the OTC market are valued at the last available ask price.

Debt securities (other than short term obligations with a remaining maturity of sixty days or less) are generally valued on the basis of evaluated or composite bid quotations obtained by independent pricing services and/or brokers and dealers selected by the relevant adviser pursuant to authorization of the Board of Trustees (the “Board”). Such quotations take into account appropriate factors such as trading in similar groups of securities, yield, quality, coupon rate, maturity, type of issue, trading characteristics and other data. Short term obligations with a remaining maturity of sixty days or less are valued at amortized cost which approximates fair market value.

Financial futures contracts and options thereon, which are traded on exchanges, are valued at their closing prices as of the close of such exchanges. Exchange traded options are valued at the mean price. Swap agreements and options traded in the over the counter (“OTC”) market are valued based upon quoted fair valuations received daily by the Portfolio from a pricing service or counterparty. Forward currency exchange contracts are valued daily at forward foreign currency exchange rates. Investments in mutual funds are valued at the daily net asset value (“NAV”) of the mutual fund.

The Portfolio has retained a third party pricing service to fair value its equity investments that are traded principally on a foreign exchange or market which closes prior to the Portfolio’s time of valuation. The fair value of each security that is traded principally on an exchange or market outside of the United States generally is calculated by applying a valuation factor provided by the third party pricing service to the last sales price for that security, or, if there is no reported sale during the day, the last reported bid price for that security.

If market values are not readily available, or if available market quotations are not reliable, securities are priced at their fair value as determined by the Manager using procedures approved by the Board. The Portfolio may use fair value pricing if the value of a security has been materially affected by events occurring before the Portfolio’s calculation of NAV but after the close of the primary markets on which the security is traded. The Portfolio may also use fair value pricing if reliable market quotations are unavailable due to infrequent trading or if trading in a particular security was halted during the day and did not resume prior to the Portfolio’s calculation of NAV.

Security Transactions - Security transactions are recorded on a trade date basis. Realized gains and losses on investments and unrealized appreciation and depreciation are determined on the identified cost basis, which is the same basis used for federal income tax purposes. The Portfolio may purchase and sell securities on a “when-issued” or “delayed delivery” basis, with settlement to occur at a later date. The value of the security so purchased is subject to market fluctuations during this period. The Portfolio segregates assets having an aggregate value at least equal to the amount of the when-issued or delayed delivery purchase commitments until payment is made.

11

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Goldman Sachs Mid Cap Value Portfolio

Notes to Financial Statements—December 31, 2009—(Continued)

2. Significant Accounting Policies - continued

Investment Income and Expenses - Interest income is recorded on an accrual basis. Discounts and premiums on securities purchased are amortized over the lives of the respective securities. Dividend income is recorded on the ex-dividend date. Foreign dividend income is recorded on the ex-dividend date or as soon as practicable after the Portfolio has determined the existence of a dividend declaration after exercising reasonable due diligence. Foreign income and foreign capital gains on some foreign securities may be subject to foreign withholding taxes, which are accrued as applicable.

Income Taxes - It is the Portfolio’s policy to comply with the requirements of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”), and regulations thereunder, applicable to regulated investment companies and to distribute, with respect to each taxable year, all of its taxable income to shareholders. Therefore, no federal income tax provision is required. The Portfolio files U.S. Federal and various state tax returns. No income tax returns are currently under examination. The Portfolio’s federal tax returns for the prior three fiscal years remain subject to examination by the Internal Revenue Service.

Dividends and Distributions to Shareholders - The Portfolio records dividends and distributions on the ex-dividend date. Net realized gains from security transactions (if any) are generally distributed annually to shareholders. The timing and characterization of certain income and capital gains distributions are determined in accordance with federal tax regulations that may differ from GAAP. Permanent book and tax basis differences relating to shareholder distributions will result in reclassification between under/over distributed net investment income, accumulated net realized gains/losses and paid in surplus. Book-tax differences are primarily due to futures transactions, foreign currency transactions, certain foreign withholding taxes, passive foreign investment companies (PFIC), partnerships, deferred trustees compensation, capital loss carryforwards and losses deferred due to wash sales, as applicable. These adjustments have no impact on net assets or the results of operations.

Securities Lending - The Portfolio may lend its securities to certain qualified brokers who borrow securities in order to complete certain transactions. By lending its investment securities, the Portfolio attempts to increase its net investment income through the receipt of income on the loan. Any gain or loss in the market price of the securities loaned that might occur and any interest earned or dividends declared during the term of the loan would accrue to the account of the Portfolio.

Upon entering into a securities lending transaction, the Portfolio receives cash or other securities as collateral in an amount equal to or exceeding 102% of the current market value of the loaned securities (105% for foreign equity securities). Any cash received as collateral is generally invested by State Street Bank and Trust Company, acting in its capacity as securities lending agent (the “Agent”), in the State Street Navigator Securities Lending Prime Portfolio, which is a money market fund registered under the 1940 Act. A portion of net income (income after the deduction of expenses and fees of the Navigator Securities Lending Prime Portfolio) on the collateral is rebated to the borrower of the securities and the remainder is split between the Agent and the Portfolio. On loans collateralized by U.S. Treasuries, a fee is received from the borrower and is allocated between the Portfolio and the Agent. Risks of delay in recovery of the securities or even loss of rights in the collateral may occur should the borrower of the securities fail financially. Risks may also arise to the extent that the value of the collateral decreases below the value of the securities loaned.

Repurchase Agreements - The Portfolio may enter into repurchase agreements with selected commercial banks and broker-dealers, under which the Portfolio acquires securities as collateral and agrees to resell the securities at an agreed upon time and at an agreed upon price. The Portfolio accrues interest for the difference between the amount it pays for the securities and the amount it receives upon resale. At the time the Portfolio enters into a repurchase agreement, the value of the collateral securities, including accrued interest, will be equal to or exceed the value of the repurchase agreement and, for repurchase agreements that mature in more than one day, the seller will agree that the value of the collateral securities, including accrued interest, will continue to be at least equal to the value of the repurchase agreement.

Directed Brokerage Agreement - The Trust has entered into a directed brokerage arrangement with State Street Global Markets (“SSGM”). Under this arrangement, the Portfolio directs certain trades to SSGM in return for a recapture credit. SSGM issues a cash rebate to the Portfolio. Amounts paid to the Portfolio are shown separately as an expense reduction on the Statement of Operations of the Portfolio.

3. Investment Management Agreement and Other Transactions with Affiliates

Investment Management Agreement - The Trust has entered into a management agreement with the Manager (the “Management Agreement”) for investment management services in connection with the investment management of the Portfolio. The Manager is subject to the supervision and direction of the Board and has overall responsibility for the general management and administration of the Trust. The Manager has entered into an advisory agreement with Goldman Sachs Asset Management, L.P. (the “Adviser”) for investment advisory services in connection with the investment management of the Portfolio.

Subject to the supervision and direction of the Board, the Manager supervises the Adviser and has full discretion with respect to the retention or renewal of the advisory agreement. The Manager pays the Adviser a fee based on the Portfolio’s average daily net assets.

12

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Goldman Sachs Mid Cap Value Portfolio

Notes to Financial Statements—December 31, 2009—(Continued)

3. Investment Management Agreement and Other Transactions with Affiliates - continued

Under the terms of the Portfolio’s Management Agreement, the Portfolio pays the Manager a monthly fee based upon annual rates applied to the Portfolio’s average daily net assets as follows:

Management Fees earned by the Manager for the period ended December 31, 2009	% per annum		Average Daily Net Assets
$3,055,200	0.75	%	First $200 Million
	0.70	%	Over $200 Million

Transfer Agency Agreement - Metropolitan Life Insurance Company (“MLIC”) serves as the transfer agent for the Trust. MLIC is an affiliate of the Manager. MLIC receives no fees for its services to the Trust under the transfer agency agreement.

Distribution Agreements and Plans - The Trust has distribution agreements with MetLife Investors Distribution Company (“MIDC” or the “Distributor”) in which MIDC serves as the Distributor for the Trust’s Class A and Class B Shares. MIDC is a wholly-owned subsidiary of MetLife Investors Group, Inc., an affiliate of the Manager. The Class B distribution plan provides that the Trust, on behalf of the Portfolio, may pay annually up to 0.50% of the average net assets of the Portfolio attributable to its Class B Shares in respect to activities primarily intended to result in the sale of Class B Shares. However, under the Class B distribution agreement, payments to the Distributor for activities pursuant to the Class B distribution plan are currently limited to payments at an annual rate equal to 0.25% of average daily net assets of the Portfolio attributable to its Class B Shares.

Under the terms of the Class B distribution plan and distribution agreement, the Portfolio is authorized to make payments monthly to the Distributor that may be used to pay or reimburse entities providing distribution and shareholder servicing with respect to the Class B Shares for such entities’ fees or expenses incurred.

During the year ended December 31, 2009 the Portfolio paid brokerage commissions to affiliated brokers/dealers:

Affiliate	Commission
Goldman Sachs & Co.	$	61,612

Deferred Trustee Compensation - Each Trustee of the Trust who is not currently an employee of the Manager or any of its affiliates receives compensation from the Trust for his or her service to the Portfolio. A deferred compensation plan (the “Plan”) is available to the Trustees on a voluntary basis. Deferred amounts remain in the Trust until distributed in accordance with the provisions of the Plan. The value of a participating Trustee’s deferral account is based on theoretical investments of deferred amounts, on the normal payment dates, in certain portfolios of the Trust or Metropolitan Series Fund, Inc. as designated by the participating Trustee. Changes in the value of participants’ deferral accounts are reflected as Trustees’ fees and expenses in the Statement of Operations. The portion of the accrued obligations allocated to the Portfolio, if any, under the Plan are reflected as Deferred Trustees’ fees in the Statement of Assets and Liabilities.

4. Shares of Beneficial Interest

Transactions in shares of beneficial interest for the periods ended noted below were as follows:

	Beginning Shares	Sales	Reinvestments	Redemptions		Net Increase (Decrease) in Shares Outstanding		Ending Shares
Class A
12/31/2009	34,897,498	6,380,780	646,417	(2,586,732	)	4,440,465		39,337,963
12/31/2008	28,220,667	7,702,793	2,574,144	(3,600,106	)	6,676,831		34,897,498
Class B
12/31/2009	12,177,906	177,141	160,009	(1,964,477	)	(1,627,327	)	10,550,579
12/31/2008	14,463,348	877,593	1,154,462	(4,317,497	)	(2,285,442	)	12,177,906

The Portfolio is authorized to issue an unlimited number of shares.

13

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Goldman Sachs Mid Cap Value Portfolio

Notes to Financial Statements—December 31, 2009—(Continued)

5. Investment Transactions

Aggregate cost of purchases and proceeds of sales of investment securities, excluding short-term securities, for the period ended December 31, 2009 were as follows:

Purchases			Sales
U.S. Government	Non-Government		U.S. Government		Non-Government
$—	$	481,389,769	$	—	$	467,881,637

At December 31, 2009, the cost of securities for federal income tax purposes and the unrealized appreciation (depreciation) of investments for federal income tax purposes for the Portfolio were as follows:

Federal Income Tax Cost	Gross Unrealized Appreciation		Gross Unrealized Depreciation			Net Unrealized Appreciation
$515,210,361	$	68,080,192	$	(18,235,298	)	$	49,844,894

6. Securities Lending

As of December 31, 2009, the Portfolio had loaned securities which were collateralized by short term investments. The value of securities loaned and the value of the related collateral were as follows:

Value of Securities	Value of Cash Collateral		Value of Non-Cash Collateral*		Total Collateral
$44,788,397	$	46,053,953	$	—	$	46,053,953

* The Portfolio cannot repledge or resell this collateral. The non-cash collateral is typically comprised of government securities and/or bank letters of credit.

7. Contractual Obligations

The Trust has a variety of indemnification obligations under contracts with its service providers. The Trust’s maximum exposure under these arrangements is unknown. However, the Trust has not had prior claims or losses pursuant to these contracts and expects the risk of loss to be remote.

8. Market, Credit and Counterparty Risk

In the normal course of business, the Portfolio invests in securities and enters into transactions where risks exist due to fluctuations in the market (market risk) or failure of the other party to a transaction to perform (credit risk). The value of securities held by the Portfolio may decline in response to certain events, including those directly involving the companies whose securities are owned by the Portfolio; conditions affecting the general economy; overall market changes; local, regional or global political, social or economic instability; and currency and interest rate and price fluctuations. The Portfolio may be exposed to counterparty risk, or the risk that an entity with which the Portfolio has unsettled or open transactions may default. The potential loss could exceed the value of the financial assets recorded in the financial statements. Financial assets, which potentially expose the Portfolio to credit risk, consist principally of cash due from counterparties and investments. The Portfolio restricts its exposure to credit losses by entering into master agreements with counterparties (approved brokers) with whom it undertakes a significant volume of transactions to include certain safeguards for derivatives and non-standard settlement trades. The credit risk associated with favorable contracts is reduced by a master netting arrangement to the extent that if an event of default occurs, all amounts with the counterparty are terminated and settled on a net basis. The Portfolio’s overall exposure to credit risk on derivative instruments subject to master netting arrangements can change substantially within a short period, as it is affected by each transaction subject to the arrangement.

9. Income Tax Information

The tax character of distributions paid for the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2008 were as follows:

Ordinary Income				Long-Term Capital Gain				Total
2009		2008		2009		2008		2009		2008
$	6,104,641	$	12,522,850	$	—	$	33,700,322	$	6,104,641	$	46,223,172

14

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Goldman Sachs Mid Cap Value Portfolio

Notes to Financial Statements—December 31, 2009—(Continued)

9. Income Tax Information - continued

As of December 31, 2009, the components of distributable earnings (accumulated losses) on a federal income tax basis were as follows:

Undistributed Ordinary Income		Undistributed Long-Term Gain		Net Unrealized Appreciation		Loss Carryforwards			Total
$	6,234,524	$	—	$	49,844,894	$	(113,623,414	)	$	(57,543,996	)

The Portfolio utilizes the provisions of the federal income tax laws that provide for the carryforward of capital losses for eight years, offsetting such losses against any future net realized capital gains. At December 31, 2009, the accumulated capital loss carryforwards and expiration dates by the Portfolio were as follows:

Expiring 12/31/2016		Expiring 12/31/2017		Total
$	66,947,138	$	46,676,276	$113,623,414

10. Recent Accounting Pronouncement

On January 21, 2010, the Financial Accounting Standards Board issued Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) 2010-06, “Improving Disclosures About Fair Value Measurements.” The ASU amends Accounting Standards Codification 820 to add new requirements for disclosures about transfers into and out of Levels 1 and 2. It also clarifies existing fair value disclosures about the level of disaggregation and about inputs and valuation techniques used to measure fair value. Additionally, the ASU amends disclosures about providing purchases, sales, issuances, and settlements on a gross basis relating to Level 3 measurements. The ASU guidance is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2009, and for interim periods within those fiscal years, except for the requirement to provide the Level 3 activity of purchases, sales, issuances, and settlements on a gross basis, which will be effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2010, and for interim periods within those fiscal years. Management is currently evaluating the impact the adoption of ASU 2010-06 will have on the Portfolio’s financial statements.

11. Subsequent Events

Management’s evaluation of the impact of all subsequent events on the Portfolio’s financial statements was completed through February 25, 2010, the date the financial statements were issued, and management has determined that as of that date there were no subsequent events requiring adjustments or disclosure in the Portfolio’s financial statements.

15

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Goldman Sachs Mid Cap Value Portfolio

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

To the Shareholders and Board of Trustees of Met Investors Series Trust:

We have audited the accompanying statement of assets and liabilities, including the portfolio of investments, of the Goldman Sachs Mid Cap Value Portfolio, one of the portfolios constituting Met Investors Series Trust (the “Trust”), as of December 31, 2009, and the related statement of operations for the year then ended, the statements of changes in net assets for each of the two years in the period then ended, and the financial highlights for each of the five years in the period then ended. These financial statements and financial highlights are the responsibility of the Trust’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements and financial highlights based on our audits.

We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements and financial highlights are free of material misstatement. The Trust is not required to have, nor were we engaged to perform, an audit of its internal control over financial reporting. Our audits included consideration of internal control over financial reporting as a basis for designing audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the Trust’s internal control over financial reporting. Accordingly, we express no such opinion. An audit also includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements, assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. Our procedures included confirmation of securities owned as of December 31, 2009, by correspondence with the custodian and brokers; where replies were not received from brokers, we performed other auditing procedures. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.

In our opinion, the financial statements and financial highlights referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of the Goldman Sachs Mid Cap Value Portfolio of Met Investors Series Trust as of December 31, 2009, the results of its operations for the year then ended, the changes in its net assets for each of the two years in the period then ended, and the financial highlights for each of the five years in the period then ended, in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.

Deloitte & Touche LLP

Boston, Massachusetts

February 25, 2010

16

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Trustees and Officers (Unaudited) December 31, 2009

The Trustees and executive officers of the Trust, their ages and their principal occupations during the past five years are set forth below. Unless otherwise indicated, the business address of each is 5 Park Plaza, Suite 1900 Irvine, California 92614. Each Trustee who is deemed an “interested person,” as such term is defined in the 1940 Act, is indicated by an asterisk. Those Trustees who are not “interested persons” as defined in the 1940 Act are referred to as “Independent Trustees.” Additional information about the Trustees is available in the Statement of Additional Information which is available without charge, upon request, by calling (800) 848-3854.

The Trustees
Name and Age	Position(s) Held with Registrant	Term of Office and Length of Time Served	Principal Occupation(s) During Past 5 Years	Number of Portfolios in Fund Complex+ overseen by Trustee	Other Directorships Held by Trustee
Interested Trustees
Elizabeth M. Forget* (43)	President and Trustee	Indefinite; From December 2000 to present	Since May 2007, Senior Vice President, MetLife, Inc.; since December 2000, President of MetLife Advisers, LLC and its predecessor; December 2003 to April 2007, Vice President, MetLife, Inc.	84	Director, Metropolitan Series Fund, Inc. since August 2006.
Independent Trustees
Stephen M. Alderman (50)	Trustee	Indefinite; From December 2000 to present	Since November 1991, Shareholder in the law firm of Garfield and Merel, Ltd.	48	None
Jack R. Borsting (80)	Trustee	Indefinite; From December 2000 to present	Since 2006, Professor and Dean Emeritus, Marshall School of Business, University of Southern California (USC); from 2001 to 2005, Professor of Business Administration and Dean Emeritus.	48	Director, Los Angeles Orthopedic Hospital, Trustee, The Rose Hills Foundation. Member, Army Science Board.
Robert Boulware (53)	Trustee	Indefinite; From March 2008 to present	From 2004 to 2009, Director of Norwood Promotional Products, Inc.; from 2007 to 2008, Director of Wealthpoint Advisors (a business development company); from 2007 to 2009, Director of Holladay Bank; from 1992-2006, President and Chief Executive Officer of ING Fund Distributor, LLC.	48	Since 2005, Director of Gainsco, Inc. (auto insurance).
Daniel A. Doyle (51)	Trustee	Indefinite; From February 2007 to present	From October 2000 to June 2009, Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of ATC Management, Inc. (public utility); since June 2009, independent business consultant.	48	Director, Wisconsin Sports Development Corporation
Susan C. Gause (57)	Trustee	Indefinite; From March 2008 to present	From 2000 to December 2002, Chief Executive Officer of Allianz Dresdner Asset Management; since 2003, private investor.	48	None

17

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Trustees and Officers (Unaudited)—(Continued) December 31, 2009

Name and Age	Position(s) Held with Registrant	Term of Office and Length of Time Served	Principal Occupation(s) During Past 5 Years	Number of Portfolios in Fund Complex+ overseen by Trustee	Other Directorships Held by Trustee
Independent Trustees - continued
Dawn M. Vroegop (43)	Trustee	Indefinite; From December 2000 to present	From September 1999 to September 2003, Managing Director, Dresdner RCM Global Investors.	84	Director, Metropolitan Series Fund, Inc. since May 2009; from 2003 to present, Director and Finance Committee Chair, City College of San Francisco Foundation

The Executive Officers
Name and Age	Position(s) Held with Registrant	Term of Office and Length of Time Served	Principal Occupation(s) During Past 5 Years
Jeffrey L. Bernier (38)	Vice President	From February 2009 to present	Since December 2007, Vice President, Metropolitan Life Insurance Company; since 2008 Senior Vice President of MetLife Advisers, LLC and its predecessor; from July 2004 to December 2007, Director and Senior Investment Analyst of Investment Management Services for John Hancock Financial Services.
Jeffrey A. Tupper (39)	Chief Financial Officer, Treasurer	From August 2002 to present	Since February 2009, Vice President, MetLife Advisers, LLC. Since October 2006, Assistant Vice President, MetLife Group, Inc. Since February 2001, Assistant Vice President of MetLife Investors Insurance Company.
Richard C. Pearson (66)	Vice President and Secretary	From December 2000 to present	Since June 2001, President or Executive Vice President of MetLife Investors Distribution Company; since January 2001, Executive Vice President, General Counsel and Secretary of MetLife Investors Group, Inc. and Vice President, Secretary and Associate General Counsel of its affiliated life insurance companies; since November 2000, Senior Vice President and General Counsel of MetLife Advisers, LLC and its predecessor.
Jeffrey P. Halperin (42)	Chief Compliance Officer	From November 2006 to present	Since March 2006, Vice President, Corporate Ethics and Compliance Department, MetLife, Inc.; from October 2002 to March 2006, Assistant Vice President; from November 2005 to August 2006, Interim Chief Compliance Officer, Met Investors Series Trust; since April 2007, Chief Compliance Officer, Metropolitan Series Funds; from August 2006 to April 2007, Interim Chief Compliance Officer, Metropolitan Series Funds; since August 2006, Chief Compliance Officer, MetLife Advisers, LLC and its predecessor; since November 2006, Chief Compliance Officer, MetLife Investment Advisors Company, LLC.

+ The Fund Complex includes the Trust (48 portfolios) and Metropolitan Series Fund, Inc. (36 portfolios).

* Ms. Forget is an “interested person” of the Trust as a result of her affiliation with the Manager and the Distributor.

Quarterly Portfolio Schedule

The Trust files Form N-Q for the first and third quarters of each fiscal year. The Trust’s Forms N-Q will be available on the Securities and Exchange Commission’s website at http://www.sec.gov. The Trust’s Forms N-Q may be reviewed and copied at the Securities and Exchange Commission’s

18

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Trustees and Officers (Unaudited)—(Continued) December 31, 2009

Public Reference Room in Washington, D.C. and information on the operation of the Public Reference Room may be obtained by calling 1-800-SEC-0330. Once filed, the most recent Form N-Q will be available without charge, upon request, by calling (800) 848-3854.

Proxy Voting Policies and Procedures

A description of the policies and procedures that the Trust uses to determine how to vote proxies relating to portfolio securities is available without charge, upon request, by calling (800) 848-3854 and on the Securities and Exchange Commission’s website at http://www.sec.gov.

Proxy Voting Record

The Trust, on behalf of each of its Portfolios, has filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission its proxy voting record for the 12-month period ending June 30 on Form N-PX. Form N-PX must be filed by the Trust each year by August 31. Once filed, the most recent Form N-PX will be available without charge, upon request, by calling (800) 848-3854 or on the Securities and Exchange Commission’s website at http://www.sec.gov.

19

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Goldman Sachs Mid Cap Value Portfolio

Board of Trustees’ Consideration of Advisory and Sub-Advisory Agreements

At an in-person meeting of the Board of Trustees (the “Board”) of the Met Investors Series Trust (the “Trust”) held on November 10-11, 2009, the Board, including a majority of the Trustees who are not considered to be “interested persons” of the Trust (the “Independent Trustees”) under the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended (the “1940 Act”), approved for an annual period the continuation of the Trust’s advisory agreement (the “Advisory Agreement”) with MetLife Advisers, LLC (the “Adviser”) and the applicable sub-advisory agreements (each a “Sub-Advisory Agreement”, and collectively with the Advisory Agreement, the “Agreements”) between the Adviser and the investment sub-advisers (each a “Sub-Adviser”, and collectively, the “Sub-Advisers”) for each of the series of the Trust, including the Goldman Sachs Mid Cap Value Portfolio (each a “Portfolio,” and collectively, the “Portfolios”).¹

In considering the Agreements, the Board reviewed a variety of materials provided by the Adviser and the Sub-Advisers relating to each Portfolio, the Adviser and each Sub-Adviser, including comparative performance, fee and expense information for an appropriate peer group of similar mutual funds, performance information for relevant benchmark indices and other information regarding the nature, extent and quality of services provided by the Adviser and the Sub-Advisers under their respective Agreements. The Board also took into account information provided to the Board in its meetings throughout the year with respect to the services provided by the Adviser and the Sub-Advisers, including quarterly performance reports prepared by management containing reviews of investment results, and periodic presentations from the Sub-Advisers with respect to the Portfolios they manage. The Independent Trustees also assessed reports provided by independent consultants, who reviewed and provided analyses regarding investment performance, fees and expenses, profitability and other information provided by, or at the direction of, the Adviser and the Sub-Advisers, as more fully discussed below.

The Independent Trustees were separately advised by independent legal counsel throughout the process. Prior to voting, the Independent Trustees also received a memorandum from their independent counsel discussing the legal standards for their consideration of the proposed continuation of the Agreements. The Board met in person with personnel of the Adviser prior to the November meeting for the specific purpose of considering the proposed continuation of the Agreements. The Independent Trustees also discussed the proposed continuation of the Agreements in private sessions with their independent legal counsel at which no representatives of management were present.

In considering whether to approve the renewal of the Advisory Agreement with the Adviser and any applicable Sub-Advisory Agreements with respect to each Portfolio, the Board reviewed and analyzed the factors it deemed relevant, including: (1) the nature, extent and quality of the services to be provided to the Portfolios by the Adviser and the Sub-Advisers; (2) the performance of the Portfolios as compared to a peer group and an appropriate index; (3) the Adviser’s and each of the Sub-Adviser’s personnel and operations; (4) the financial condition of the Adviser and of the Sub-Advisers; (5) the level and method of computing each Portfolio’s advisory and sub-advisory fees; (6) the profitability of the Adviser under the Advisory Agreement and of the Sub-Advisers under the Sub-Advisory Agreements; (7) any “fall-out” benefits to the Adviser, the Sub-Advisers and their affiliates (i.e., ancillary benefits realized by the Adviser, the Sub-Advisers or their affiliates from the Adviser’s or Sub-Advisers’ relationship with the Trust); (8) the anticipated effect of growth in size on each Portfolio’s performance and expenses; (9) fees paid to the Sub-Advisers by comparable institutional and retail accounts; and (10) possible conflicts of interest. The Board also considered the nature, quality, and extent of the services to be provided to the Portfolios by the Adviser’s affiliates, including distribution services.

Nature, extent and quality of services. In considering the nature, extent and quality of the services to be provided by the Adviser to the Portfolios, the Board took into account the extensive responsibilities that the Adviser has as investment manager to the Portfolios, including the provision of investment advice to: (i) MetLife Aggressive Strategy Portfolio, MetLife Balanced Strategy Portfolio, MetLife Defensive Strategy Portfolio, MetLife Growth Strategy Portfolio, and MetLife Moderate Strategy Portfolio (together, the “Asset Allocation Portfolios”), (ii) American Funds Balanced Allocation Portfolio, American Funds Growth Allocation Portfolio, and American Funds Moderate Allocation Portfolio (together, the “American Funds of Funds”), and (iii) the Met/Franklin Templeton Founding Strategy Portfolio, the selection of the Sub-Advisers for the other Portfolios and oversight of the Sub-Advisers’ compliance with fund policies and objectives, review of brokerage matters including with respect to trade allocation and best execution, oversight of general fund compliance with federal and state laws, and the implementation of Board directives as they relate to the Portfolios. The Adviser’s role in coordinating the activities of the Portfolios’ other service providers was also considered. The Board also evaluated the expertise and performance of the investment personnel with respect to the Asset Allocation Portfolios, the American Funds of Funds and the Met/Franklin Templeton Founding Strategy Portfolio and of the personnel overseeing the Sub-Advisers of the other Portfolios, and compliance with each Portfolio’s investment restrictions, tax and other requirements. The Board considered information received from the Trust’s Chief Compliance Officer (“CCO”) regarding the Portfolios’ compliance policies and procedures established pursuant to Rule 38a-1 under the 1940 Act, including the policies and procedures in place relating to proxy voting. The Board also took into account its familiarity with management through Board meetings, discussions and reports during the preceding year.

The Board also recognized the Adviser^’s reputation and long-standing experience in serving as an investment adviser to the Trust, and considered the benefit to shareholders of investing in funds that are part of a family of variable annuity portfolios offering a variety of investments. In addition, the Board reviewed the financial condition of the Adviser and whether it had the financial wherewithal to provide a high level and quality of services to the Portfolios. In its review, the Board also received and took into account information regarding any services and/or payments provided to the Adviser by the Sub-Advisers in connection with marketing activities.

¹ The Met/Templeton International Bond Portfolio recently commenced operations and, therefore, the Agreements with respect to this Portfolio were not up for renewal.

20

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Goldman Sachs Mid Cap Value Portfolio

Board of Trustees’ Consideration of Advisory and Sub-Advisory Agreements—(Continued)

With respect to the services provided by each of the Sub-Advisers, the Board considered information provided to the Board by each Sub-Adviser, including each Sub-Adviser’s Form ADV, as well as information presented throughout the past year. The Board considered the Sub-Adviser’s current level of staffing and its overall resources, as well as its compensation program. The Board reviewed each Sub-Adviser’s history and investment experience, as well as information regarding the qualifications, background and responsibilities of the Sub-Adviser’s investment and compliance personnel who provide services to the Portfolios. The Board also considered, among other things, the Sub-Adviser’s compliance program and any disciplinary history. The Board noted each Sub-Adviser’s regulatory history, including whether it was currently involved in any regulatory actions or investigations as well as material litigation, and any settlements and ameliatory actions undertaken, as appropriate. The Board also noted that the CCO and his staff conduct regular, periodic compliance reviews with each of the Sub-Advisers and present reports to the Independent Trustees regarding the same, which includes evaluating the regulatory compliance systems of the Sub-Advisers and procedures reasonably designed by them to assure compliance with the federal securities laws, including issues related to late trading and market timing, best execution, fair value pricing, and proxy voting procedures, among others. The Board also took into account the financial condition of each Sub-Adviser.

The Board considered each Sub-Adviser’s investment process and philosophy. The Board took into account that each Sub-Adviser’s responsibilities include the development and maintenance of an investment program for the applicable Portfolio which is consistent with the Portfolio’s investment objectives, the selection of investment securities and the placement of orders for the purchase and sale of such securities, as well as the implementation of compliance controls related to performance of these services. The Board also reviewed each Sub-Adviser’s brokerage policies and practices, including with respect to best execution and soft dollars.

Based on its consideration and review of the foregoing information, the Board concluded that the nature, extent and quality of services provided by the Adviser and by each Sub-Adviser were satisfactory and that there was a reasonable basis on which to conclude that each would provide a high quality of investment services to the Portfolios.

Performance. The Board considered the performance of the Portfolios as described in the quarterly reports prepared by management, and as also analyzed in reports prepared by the Independent Trustees’ independent consultant. The Board noted that the Adviser reviews with the Board on a quarterly basis detailed information about the Portfolios’ performance results, portfolio composition and investment strategies. The Board also reviewed and considered a separate report prepared by Lipper Inc. (“Lipper”), an independent third party, which provided a statistical analysis comparing the Portfolios’ investment performance, expenses, and fees to comparable funds underlying variable insurance products (the “Performance Universe”). In addition, the Independent Trustees met separately with a representative of Bobroff Consulting, Inc., an independent consultant (“Bobroff”), at a special board meeting in September 2009, to review the separate reports prepared by such consultant (“Bobroff Report”), which analyzed the report prepared by Lipper, as well as certain of the other factors to be considered by the Board including supplemental alpha and information coefficient analysis. The Board also considered each Portfolio’s more recent performance subsequent to the performance period covered by the Lipper reports, and management’s discussion of the same, including the effect of current market conditions on each Portfolio’s more recent performance.

The Board closely reviewed the Portfolios’ performance records and the Adviser’s and Sub-Advisers’ management styles and long-term performance records with the Portfolios and comparable funds. The Board focused particular attention on Portfolios with less favorable performance records. The Board was mindful of the Adviser’s focus on each Sub-Adviser’s performance and noted that the Adviser has been active in monitoring and responding to any performance issues with respect to the Portfolios. The Board also took into account its discussions with management regarding factors that contributed to the performance of each Portfolio.

Among other data relating specifically to the Goldman Sachs Mid Cap Value Portfolio’s performance, the Board considered that the Portfolio underperformed the median of its Performance Universe and Lipper Index for the one-year period, but outperformed the median of its Performance Universe and Lipper Index for the three- and five-year periods ended July 31, 2009. The Board also considered that the Portfolio outperformed its benchmark, the Russell Midcap Value Index, for the one-, three- and five-year periods ended August 31, 2009. The Board also took into account management’s discussion of the Portfolio’s performance, including the impact of current market conditions on the Sub-Adviser’s investment style and its solid long-term performance. The Board also noted the recent portfolio manager change with respect to the Portfolio. Based on its review, the Board concluded that the Portfolio’s overall performance was satisfactory.

Fees and Expenses. The Board gave substantial consideration to the advisory fees payable under the Advisory Agreement and the sub-advisory fees payable under each of the Sub-Advisory Agreements. In this regard, the Board reviewed the advisory fees payable in the aggregate as well as on a Portfolio-by-Portfolio basis based on information provided by the Adviser. The Independent Trustees, with the assistance of Bobroff, also examined the fees paid by each Portfolio in light of fees paid to other investment managers by comparable funds and the method of computing each Portfolio’s fee, as well as considered the fees charged by the Adviser to manage other comparable funds. The Lipper report included comparisons of the Adviser’s fee schedule with that of its peers based on an asset-based analysis of relative fee structures according to the size of each Portfolio. In addition, the Board considered the Portfolios’ advisory and sub-advisory fees and total expenses as compared to similarly situated investment companies underlying variable insurance products deemed to be comparable to the Portfolios as determined by Lipper. The Board considered each Portfolio’s ranking within a smaller group of peer funds chosen by Lipper (the “Expense Group”), as well as the Portfolio’s ranking within broader groups of funds (the “Expense Universe” and the “Sub-advised Expense Universe”). The Board also considered

21

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Goldman Sachs Mid Cap Value Portfolio

Board of Trustees’ Consideration of Advisory and Sub-Advisory Agreements—(Continued)

each Portfolio’s contractual sub-advisory fees, as applicable, as compared to the Sub-advised Expense Universe as well as a smaller group of funds (the “Sub-advised Expense Group”). In comparing each Portfolio’s actual and contractual management fee to that of comparable funds, the Board noted that such fee includes both advisory and administrative fees.

The Board noted that the sub-advisory fees for the Portfolios are paid by the Adviser, not the Portfolios, out of the advisory fee. It was further noted that the Adviser negotiates such fees at arm’s length. The Board also considered that the Adviser had entered into expense limitation agreements with certain of the Portfolios as noted below, pursuant to which the Adviser has agreed to waive a portion of its advisory fee and/or reimburse certain expenses as a means of limiting a Portfolio’s total annual operating expenses. In addition, the Board noted that the Adviser effected fee reductions in 2009 with respect to several Portfolios. The Board also noted that the Adviser had re-negotiated the securities lending arrangement with State Street Corporation to further maximize the income to the Portfolios from such program.

With respect to each sub-advised Portfolio, the Board also compared the sub-advisory fees paid by the Adviser to fees charged by the Portfolio’s Sub-Adviser to manage other sub-advised portfolios and portfolios not subject to regulation under the 1940 Act, such as separate accounts, as applicable. The Board considered the fee comparisons in light of the differences required to manage different types of accounts.

With respect to the Goldman Sachs Mid Cap Value Portfolio, the Board considered that the Portfolio’s actual management fees were below the median of the Expense Group and Sub-advised Expense Universe, and slightly above the median of the Expense Universe, and total expenses (exclusive of 12b-1 fees) were below the median of the Expense Group, Expense Universe and the Sub-advised Expense Universe. The Board further noted that the Portfolio’s contractual management fees were slightly above the normalized median of the Expense Group at the Portfolio’s current size. The Board also noted that the Portfolio’s contractual sub-advisory fees were above the average of the Sub-advised Expense Group at the Portfolio’s current size. After consideration of all relevant factors, the Board concluded that the advisory and sub-advisory fees are consistent with industry norms and are fair and reasonable in light of the services to be provided.

Profitability. The Board examined the profitability of the Adviser on an aggregate basis with respect to all Portfolios, as well as on a Portfolio-by-Portfolio basis. With respect to the Asset Allocation Portfolios and Met/Franklin Templeton Founding Strategy Portfolio, the Board noted that the advisory fee is in addition to the fees received by the Adviser and its affiliates with regard to the other Portfolios of the Trust or of Metropolitan Series Fund, Inc., in which the Asset Allocation Portfolios and Met/Franklin Templeton Founding Strategy Portfolio may invest. With respect to the other Portfolios, the Board noted that a major component of profitability of the Adviser was the margin between the sub-advisory fees that the Adviser receives from the Trust and the portion of those fees paid to the Sub-Advisers. In this regard, the Board took into account certain comparative information in the Lipper report. The Board also reviewed the Adviser’s unaudited income statements and balance sheet information supplied by the Adviser regarding costs borne by the Adviser’s affiliates which support the operations of the Adviser but are not reflected on the unaudited income statements of the Adviser, as well as considered the profitability of the insurance products, the function of which is supported in part by the Adviser’s revenues under the Advisory Agreement, and other information and analysis prepared by the Adviser. With respect to the American Funds Bond Portfolio, American Funds Growth Portfolio, American Funds Growth-Income Portfolio, American Funds Global Small Capitalization Portfolio and American Funds International Portfolio, the Board noted that the Adviser currently does not receive an advisory fee. The Board also considered that the Distributor, MetLife Investors Distribution Company, receives 12b-1 payments to support the distribution of the products. The Board concluded after extensive discussions with management that the profitability of the Adviser and its affiliates from their relationship with each Portfolio was reasonable in light of all relevant factors.

In considering the profitability to the Sub-Advisers and their affiliates of their relationships with the Portfolios, the Board noted that the fees under the Sub-Advisory Agreements were paid by the Adviser out of the advisory fees that it receives under the Advisory Agreement. The Board also relied on the ability of the Adviser to negotiate the Sub-Advisory Agreements and the fees thereunder at arm’s length. The Board reviewed portfolio specific data with regard to the profitability of the Portfolios to each Sub-Adviser, as available, and analyzed the reasonableness of such profitability finding no indication of excessive profitability. However, the Board placed more reliance on the fact that the Sub-Advisory Agreement was negotiated at arm’s length and that the advisory fee was paid by the Adviser than on Sub-Adviser profitability.

Economies of scale. The Board also considered the effect of the Portfolios’ growth in size on their performances and fees. The Board noted that the fee schedules for all but eleven of the Portfolios contain breakpoints that reduce the fee rate above specified asset levels. The Board noted those Portfolios that did not contain breakpoints in the advisory fee and took into account management’s discussion of the same. The Board noted that those Portfolios with advisory fee schedules containing breakpoints generally reflect the inclusion of breakpoints in the sub-advisory fee schedule for such Portfolios. The Board considered the effective fees under the Advisory Agreement for each Portfolio as a percentage of assets at different asset levels and possible economies of scale that may be realized if the assets of the Portfolio grow. Among other data, the Board examined the effect of each Portfolio’s growth in size on various fee schedules and reviewed the Lipper and Bobroff Reports, which compared fee schedules among peers. The Board also took into account that the Sub-Adviser fees are paid by the Adviser out of the advisory fee. The Board also noted that if the Portfolios’ assets increase over time, the Portfolios may realize other economies of scale if assets increase proportionally more than certain other fixed expenses.

With respect to the Goldman Sachs Mid Cap Value Portfolio, the Board noted that the Portfolio’s advisory fee and sub-advisory fee each contains breakpoints that reduce the advisory fee rate on assets above certain specified asset levels. The Board considered the fact that the Portfolio’s fee levels decline as portfolio assets increase. The Board further considered that the Portfolio’s management fees were below the asset-weighted

22

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Goldman Sachs Mid Cap Value Portfolio

Board of Trustees’ Consideration of Advisory and Sub-Advisory Agreements—(Continued)

average at all asset levels except at the highest asset level. The Board concluded that the advisory fee structure for the Portfolio, including breakpoints, was reasonable and appropriately reflects potential economies of scale.

Other factors. As part of its evaluation of the Adviser’s compensation, the Board considered other benefits that may be realized by the Adviser and its affiliates from their relationship with the Trust. Among them, the Board recognized that an affiliate of the Adviser, MetLife Investors Distribution Company, serves as the Distributor for the Trust, and, as such, receives payments pursuant to Rule 12b-1 from the Portfolios to compensate it for providing shareholder services and selling activities, which could lead to growth in the Trust’s assets and corresponding benefits from such growth, including economies of scale. The Board also considered that affiliates of the Adviser may benefit from certain indirect tax benefits relating to dividend received deductions and foreign tax credits. The Board concluded that ancillary benefits accruing to the Adviser and its affiliates by virtue of the Adviser’s relationship with the Portfolios are fair and reasonable in light of the costs of providing investment management and other services to the Portfolios and the ongoing commitment of the Adviser to the Portfolios.

The Board considered other benefits that may be realized by each Subadviser and its affiliates from their relationship with the Trust, including the opportunity to provide advisory services to additional portfolios of the Trust and reputational benefits. The Board concluded that the benefits accruing to the Subadvisers and their affiliates by virtue of the Subadvisers’ relationships to the Portfolios are fair and reasonable in light of the costs of providing investment advisory services to the Portfolios and the ongoing commitment of the Subadvisers to the Portfolios.

The Board considered any possible conflicts of interest in the form of material benefits or detriments to the Trust resulting from the nature of the Trust’s and the Adviser’s or the Subadvisers’ affiliations. Here, the Board considered possible conflicts of interest that may arise between the Trust and the Adviser or a Subadviser in connection with the services provided to the Trust and the various relationships that they and their affiliates may have with the Trust. The Board considered the procedures for monitoring and managing such potential conflicts.

Conclusion. In considering the renewal of each of the Agreements, the Board, including the Independent Trustees, did not identify any single factor as controlling, and each Trustee may have attributed different weights to various factors. The Board evaluated all information available to them on a Portfolio-by-Portfolio basis, and their determinations were made separately with respect to each Portfolio. Based on all of the above-mentioned considerations, and the recommendations of management, the Board, including a majority of the Independent Trustees, determined that approval of the Advisory Agreement and the Sub-Advisory Agreements was in the best interests of each Portfolio. After full consideration of these and other factors, the Board, including a majority of the Independent Trustees, with the assistance of independent counsel, approved the Advisory Agreement and the Sub-Advisory Agreement with respect to each Portfolio.

23

Simplify your life…

with MetLife eDelivery^® while helping MetLife preserve the planet’s natural resources.

(see details on inside cover)

Met Investors Series Trust Harris Oakmark International Portfolio Annual Report December 31, 2009

• get rid of all that paper?

• access important documents whenever you want?

• conveniently receive valuable information online?

Get it all with MetLife eDelivery!

MetLife’s eDelivery service is your resource for electronic delivery of your variable annuity or variable life prospectuses, semiannual and annual reports, and other information. Available to variable product clients of Metropolitan Life Insurance Company, First MetLife Investors Insurance Company, General American Life Insurance Company, MetLife Investors Insurance Company, MetLife Investors USA Insurance Company, MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut and New England Life Insurance Company.*

Why sign up for MetLife eDelivery?

It’s Free** – No cost to enroll or use the service.

It’s Paperless – We’ll email you when your documents are available.

It’s Easy – Enrollment takes just a few minutes.

How do you sign up?

Just type in www.metlife.esourcelink.net to get to MetLife’s online registration form. You will need your policy/account numbers, which can be found on your statements. The form takes only a few minutes to complete. Please note, for jointly owned contracts, both owners will need to register in order to eliminate paper delivery.

  * Not all MetLife products offer eDelivery at this time. ** Your internet provider may impose fees for this service. L0210086208[0911]

Letter from the President

Letter to Policy Holders

February 1, 2010

2009 can best be described as a year of recovery. The year began with the stock market in a broad decline and the economy mired in a deep recession. However, investors’ sentiment improved dramatically during the year as fiscal and monetary authorities took measures to jump start the economy which helped spark a strong market rally in equities and corporate bonds.

The Barclays Capital U.S. Aggregate Bond Index returned 5.9% during 2009. While this was similar to the 5.2% return experienced in 2008, the two years could not have been more different. In 2008, fear drove investors toward the safety of U.S. Treasury securities and away from the risk of corporate bonds, especially those rated below investment grade. In contrast, investors were more willing to embrace risk in 2009. This produced an enormous recovery in below investment grade bonds; the Barclays Capital U.S. Corporate High Yield Index returned over 58% in 2009 after falling 26% in 2008. The Barclays Capital U.S. Treasury Index returned 13.7% in 2008, but declined 3.6% in 2009.

Stock investors also became less pessimistic in 2009. While the stock market indices are still far from the record levels reached in 2007, investors were rewarded in 2009 as stocks returned 26.5% as measured by the Standard & Poor’s 500 Index, its best return since 2003. Foreign stocks, as measured by the MSCI EAFE Index, returned 31.8% during 2009.

On the following pages, you will find a complete review of your Portfolio and its investment performance.

MetLife is committed to building your financial freedom. We appreciate your trust and will continue to focus our efforts on meeting your investment needs.

Sincerely,

Elizabeth M. Forget

President

Met Investors Series Trust

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Harris Oakmark International Portfolio

Managed by Harris Associates L.P.

Portfolio Manager Commentary*

Performance

For the year ended December 31, 2009, the Harris Oakmark International Portfolio had a return of 55.46%, 55.06% and 55.27% for Class A, B, and E Shares, respectively, versus 31.78% for its benchmark, the MSCI EAFE Index¹.

Market Environment / Conditions

One thing is for certain: the emerging markets have become an important driver of global economic demand. For example, take China’s effect on the automobile industry. It is estimated that China produced 8.3 million cars in 2009 and that total sales will approach 12.6 million, surpassing the number of light trucks and cars sold in the U.S. for the first time ever. In comparison, 20 years ago auto production in China was just 30,000 units. Just a little more than 10 years ago, people feared that the Asian crisis would prompt China to devalue its currency. Today, the pressure is the other way; most are calling on China to revalue its currency. Other BRIC (Brazil, Russia, India, and China) countries have experienced strong growth as well. Undoubtedly, the last decade will become known as the time when the emerging world emerged.

The coldest market for the past two decades has been Japan. The Japanese market peaked in December of 1989 at nearly the 40,000 level. Today, over twenty years later, the market sits just above 10,000. Despite Japan’s continued macro-economic weaknesses, there may be some hope for investors. On a valuation basis, almost two-thirds of the Japanese stock market is trading below its book value whereas the return on those book values (ROE) is increasing. For the first time in decades we are able to find companies that are both low in price and are managed by people concerned with achieving acceptable returns. As such, despite Japan’s obvious negatives and poor past performance, we believe there is opportunity in the Japanese equity market for the long-term investor.

Portfolio Review / Current Positioning

While we have made slight adjustments to portfolio holdings to capitalize on the opportunities at hand, we remain focused on doing what we do best: buying businesses when they are cheap and selling them when they become expensive. Though this is vastly different from the conventional approach of jumping into the hot sector, industry, or country, we believe that our philosophy has served our investors well.

A total of 16 new holdings were added in 2009 that are based mainly in Europe and the U.K. Some of the better-known names among these are Heineken Holding (Netherlands), L’Oreal (France), Nestle (Switzerland), Rolls-Royce Group and Unilever (both United Kingdom). The common factor among these companies, in our view, is that all have solid fundamentals and are trading at a significant discount to fair value. Additionally, we added these holdings because we believe the value of these firms will grow over time and that they are being run by management teams who act in the best interests of shareholders.

We sold out of 5 holdings during the year: Canadian National Railway (Canada), Kone OYJ (Finland), ASML Holding (Netherlands), Johnston Press and Lloyds Banking Group (both United Kingdom).

As active value managers, we believe that the extremes in today’s market provide exploitable opportunities, and we are constantly looking for ways to capitalize on these opportunities in order to add value for our shareholders.

Stock selection accounted for all of the portfolio’s significant outperformance. Holdings in Switzerland were particularly strong, and holdings in Japan, France, and the U.K. also added significant value. In terms of absolute performance, the cumulative returns for holdings in all countries were impressive, as the portfolio enjoyed double- and triple-digit absolute performance for the year.

Our country weightings pulled back overall relative results slightly, as an underweight allocation to Australia was the main detractor. A lack of exposure to Hong Kong, Singapore, and Norway also weighed on relative performance for the period.

Currency hedging was actively utilized throughout the year. The portfolio currently contains hedges on the Euro, Swiss Franc, and Japanese Yen. We believe these currencies have appreciated above the range of their intrinsic values as measured by the purchasing power parity and other economic fundamentals.

Signet Jewelers contributed most to the portfolio’s performance for the year, as the firm’s management continues to deliver on its targeted $100 million expense-reduction plan in the U.S., which it initiated to help offset declining sales. Signet’s differentiated merchandise and exclusive offerings, like the Russell Simmons line or Jane Seymour’s Open Heart Necklace, have helped Signet consistently outperform its peers. Although these exclusive lines are only slightly more profitable than regular offerings, they enable Signet to stand out relative to peers and increase foot traffic and sales.

Daiwa Securities Group was the most significant detractor for the year, as its share price has been hurt by numerous factors including decreased equity and capital market activity given the global financial crisis. Additionally, shares reacted negatively during the most recent quarter to news that the firm had ended its investment banking joint venture with Sumitomo Mitsui Financial Group (SMFG). Daiwa raised a significant amount of new equity to finance its purchase of SMFG’s stake in the joint venture and, while the transaction negatively impacted our assessment of Daiwa’s intrinsic value, we believe that over the past twelve months the share price fell by more than the transaction’s impact to value. Despite these concerns, Daiwa’s balance sheet has remained well capitalized during this uncertain time in the financial markets, and we maintain our belief that Daiwa has a powerful franchise and its stock continues to trade at a significant discount to fair value.

1

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Harris Oakmark International Portfolio

Managed by Harris Associates L.P.

Portfolio Manager Commentary* (continued)

David G. Herro, CFA

Partner and Chief Investment Officer, International Equity

Robert A. Taylor, CFA

Partner, Director of International Research and Portfolio Manager

Harris Associates L.P.

*This commentary may include statements that constitute “forward-looking statements” under the U.S. securities laws. Forward-looking statements include, among other things, projections, estimates, and information about possible or future results related to the Portfolio, market or regulatory developments. The views expressed above are not guarantees of future performance or economic results and involve certain risks, uncertainties and assumptions that could cause actual outcomes and results to differ materially from the views expressed herein. The views expressed above are subject to change at any time based upon economic, market, or other conditions and the subadvisory firm undertakes no obligation to update the views expressed herein. Any discussions of specific securities should not be considered a recommendation to buy or sell those securities. The views expressed above (including any forward-looking statement) may not be relied upon as investment advice or as an indication of the Portfolio’s trading intent. Information about the Portfolio’s holdings, asset allocation or country diversification is historical and is not an indication of future Portfolio composition, which may vary. Direct investment in any index is not possible. The performance of any index mentioned in this commentary has not been adjusted for ongoing management, distribution and operating expenses, and sales charges applicable to mutual fund investments. In addition, the returns do not reflect additional fees charged by separate accounts or variable insurance contracts that an investor in the Portfolio may pay. If these additional fees were reflected, performance would have been lower.

Top Holdings

	Percent of Net Assets
Daiwa Securities Group, Inc.	3.3%
Societe Television Francaise 1	3.3%
Toyota Motor Corp.	3.3%
Compagnie Financiere Richemont S.A.	3.2%
Allianz SE	3.0%
Credit Suisse Group AG	3.0%
Rohm Co., Ltd.	2.8%
SAP AG	2.7%
Signet Jewelers, Ltd.	2.6%
Daimler AG	2.5%

Top Countries

	Percent of Portfolio Market Value
Switzerland	19.1%
Japan	14.6%
United Kingdom	14.2%
United States	12.4%
France	9.8%
Germany	9.1%
Mexico	3.4%
Canada	3.0%
Netherlands	2.6%
Australia	2.5%

2

Portfolio Composition as of December 31, 2009

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Harris Oakmark International Portfolio

Harris Oakmark International Portfolio managed by

Harris Associates L.P. vs. MSCI EAFE Index¹

	Average Annual Return2 (for the year ended 12/31/09)
	1 Year	3 Year	5 Year	Since Inception3
Harris Oakmark International Portfolio—Class A	55.46%	-2.97%	6.21%	7.78%
Class B	55.06%	-3.22%	5.94%	8.45%
Class E	55.27%	-3.11%	6.04%	7.99%
MSCI EAFE Index1	31.78%	-6.04%	3.54%	6.90%

The performance of Class B shares will differ from that of the other classes because of the difference in expenses paid by policyholders investing in the different share classes.

¹The Morgan Stanley Capital International Europe, Australasia and Far East Index (“MSCI EAFE Index”) is an unmanaged free float-adjusted market capitalization index that is designed to measure developed market equity performance, excluding the U.S. and Canada. The index returns shown above were calculated with net dividends: they reflect the reinvestment of dividends after the deduction of the maximum possible withholding taxes.

² “Average Annual Return” is calculated including reinvestment of all income dividends and capital gain distributions.

³Inception of the Class A shares is 1/2/02. Inception of the Class B shares is 10/9/01. Inception of the Class E shares is 4/01/02. Index returns are based on an inception date of 10/9/01.

Past performance does not guarantee future results. The investment return and principal value of an investment in the Portfolio will fluctuate, so that shares, on any given day or when redeemed, may be worth more or less than their original cost. Performance numbers are net of all Portfolio expenses but do not include any insurance, sales, or administration charges of variable annuity or life insurance contracts. If these charges were included, the returns would be lower. The Index does not include fees or expenses and is not available for direct investment.

3

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Harris Oakmark International Portfolio

Understanding Your Portfolio’s Expenses

Shareholder Expense Example

As a shareholder of the Portfolio, you incur ongoing costs, including management fees; distribution and service (12b-1) fees; and other Portfolio expenses. This example is intended to help you understand your ongoing costs (in dollars) (referred to as “expenses”) of investing in the Portfolio and compare these costs with the ongoing costs of investing in other mutual funds. The example is based on an investment of $1,000 invested at the beginning of the period and held for the entire period, July 1, 2009 through December 31, 2009.

Actual Expenses

The first line for each share class of the Portfolio in the table below provides information about actual account values and actual expenses. You may use the information in this line, together with the amount you invested in the particular share class of the Portfolio, to estimate the expenses that you paid over the period. Simply divide your account value by $1,000 (for example, an $8,600 account value divided by $1,000 = 8.6), then multiply the result by the number in the first line under the heading entitled “Expenses Paid During Period” to estimate the expenses you paid on your account during this period.

Hypothetical Example for Comparison Purposes

The second line for each share class of the Portfolio in the table below provides information about hypothetical account values and hypothetical expenses based on the Portfolio’s actual expense ratio and an assumed rate of return of 5% per year before expenses, which is not the Portfolio’s actual return. The hypothetical account values and expenses may not be used to estimate the actual ending account balance or expenses you paid for the period. You may use this information to compare the ongoing costs of investing in the Portfolio and other funds. To do so, compare this 5% hypothetical example with the 5% hypothetical examples that appear in the shareholder reports of the other funds.

Please note that the expenses shown in the table are meant to highlight your ongoing costs only and do not reflect any fees or charges of your variable insurance product or any additional expenses that participants in certain eligible qualified plans may bear relating to the operations of their plan. Therefore, the second line for each share class in the table is useful in comparing ongoing costs only, and will not help you determine the relative total costs of owning different funds. In addition, if these other costs were included, your costs would have been higher.

	Annualized Expense Ratio	Beginning Account Value 7/1/09		Ending Account Value 12/31/09		Expenses Paid During Period* 7/1/09-12/31/09
Class A
Actual	0.81%	$	1,000.00	$	1,302.70	$	4.64
Hypothetical	0.81%		1,000.00		1,021.17		4.08
Class B
Actual	1.06%	$	1,000.00	$	1,300.20	$	6.15
Hypothetical	1.06%		1,000.00		1,019.86		5.40
Class E
Actual	0.96%	$	1,000.00	$	1,301.40	$	5.57
Hypothetical	0.96%		1,000.00		1,020.37		4.89

* Expenses paid are equal to the Portfolio’s annualized expense ratio for the most recent six month period, as shown above, multiplied by the average account value over the period, multiplied by the number of days (184 days) in the most recent fiscal half-year, divided by 365 (to reflect the one-half year period).

4

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Harris Oakmark International Portfolio

PORTFOLIO OF INVESTMENTS

December 31, 2009

(Percentage of Net Assets)

Security Description	Shares	Value
Common Stocks - 96.1%
Australia - 2.8%
Brambles, Ltd.	5,553,200	$	33,619,687
Foster’s Group, Ltd.	3,924,300		19,299,047
			52,918,734
Canada - 3.3%
Cenovus Energy, Inc.(a)	441,700		11,130,840
EnCana Corp.	441,700		14,306,663
Thomson Reuters Corp.(a)	1,167,700		37,881,906
			63,319,409
France - 10.7%
BNP Paribas S.A.	345,510		27,262,590
L’Oreal S.A.	84,600		9,391,724
LVMH Moet Hennessy Louis Vuitton 1 S.A.	197,800		22,207,096
Publicis Groupe S.A(a)	1,133,900		45,993,961
Societe Television Francaise S.A.(a)	3,427,100		63,281,320
Sodexo(a)	658,300		37,594,969
			205,731,660
Germany - 10.0%
Allianz SE	469,500		58,433,898
Bayerische Motoren Werke (BMW) AG	737,700		33,533,490
Daimler AG	895,500		47,838,869
SAP AG	1,106,000		52,157,870
			191,964,127
Ireland - 2.4%
Bank of Ireland Plc*	10,877,147		20,298,659
Experian Plc	2,600,200		25,722,886
			46,021,545
Israel - 0.1%
Orbotech, Ltd.*	265,000		2,483,050
Italy - 1.7%
Bulgari S.p.A.(a)	737,000		6,084,627
Luxottica Group S.p.A.(a)	987,500		25,578,252
			31,662,879
Japan - 16.1%
Canon, Inc.	1,070,400		45,273,101
Daiwa Securities Group, Inc.	12,753,700		63,968,046
Honda Motor Co., Ltd.	417,100		14,109,829
Meitec Corp.(a)	432,800		5,833,893
OMRON Corp.	2,427,000		43,316,260
Rohm Co., Ltd.	827,700		53,775,547
Sumitomo Mitsui Financial Group, Inc.(a)	659,400		18,808,317
Toyota Motor Corp.	1,494,900		62,839,867
			307,924,860

Security Description	Shares	Value
Mexico - 3.7%
Fomento Economico Mexicano, S.A.B de C.V. (ADR)	656,700	$	31,442,796
Grupo Televisa S.A. (ADR)	1,918,200		39,821,832
			71,264,628
Netherlands - 2.8%
Akzo Nobel N.V.	249,700		16,456,673
Heineken Holding N.V.	677,200		28,369,656
Koninklijke Ahold N.V.	741,900		9,841,727
			54,668,056
South Korea - 1.0%
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.	28,300		19,328,419
Spain - 2.3%
Gestevision Telecinco S.A.(a)	3,037,746		44,335,180
Sweden - 2.6%
Assa Abloy AB - Class B(a)	2,287,700		43,805,317
Atlas Copco AB - Class B(a)	487,500		6,323,523
			50,128,840
Switzerland - 21.0%
Adecco S.A.(a)	866,600		47,791,020
Compagnie Financiere Richemont S.A.	1,808,500		60,447,188
Credit Suisse Group AG	1,152,900		56,718,583
Geberit AG(a)	82,900		14,668,267
Givaudan S.A.(a)	40,700		32,355,114
Kuehne & Nagel International AG(a)	277,800		26,843,176
Nestle S.A.	580,500		28,170,997
Novartis AG	793,100		43,161,875
Swatch Group AG	128,200		32,232,135
Tyco International, Ltd.(a)	349,000		12,452,320
UBS AG*	3,113,147		47,770,805
			402,611,480
United Kingdom - 15.6%
BAE Systems Plc	857,900		4,947,448
British Sky Broadcasting Group Plc(a)	3,935,400		35,476,097
Compass Group Plc	2,607,200		18,634,498
Diageo Plc	1,903,700		33,222,946
G4S Plc	6,946,900		29,053,784
GlaxoSmithKline Plc	1,549,800		32,853,018
Reed Elsevier Plc	4,607,400		37,861,813
Rolls-Royce Group Plc	1,213,900		9,479,841
Schroders Plc(a)	1,843,600		39,380,595
Schroders Plc*	255,300		4,390,081
Signet Jewelers, Ltd.*(a)	1,852,092		49,487,898
Unilever Plc	120,200		3,850,241
			298,638,260

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

5

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Harris Oakmark International Portfolio

PORTFOLIO OF INVESTMENTS - continued

December 31, 2009

(Percentage of Net Assets)

Security Description	Shares/Par Amount		Value
Total Common Stocks (Cost $1,696,492,309)			$	1,843,001,127
Short-Term Investments - 13.6%
Mutual Funds - 9.4%
State Street Navigator Securities Lending Prime Portfolio(b)		180,255,013		180,255,013
Repurchase Agreement - 4.2%
Fixed Income Clearing Corp., Repurchase Agreement, dated 12/31/09 at 0.005% to be repurchased at $81,217,045 on 01/04/10 collateralized by $76,355,000 Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp. at 4.375% due 07/17/15 with a value of $82,845,175.	$	81,217,000		81,217,000
Total Short-Term Investments (Cost $261,472,013)				261,472,013
Total Investments - 109.7% (Cost $1,957,964,322)				2,104,473,140
Other Assets and Liabilities (net) - (9.7)%				(185,964,012	)
Net Assets - 100.0%			$	1,918,509,128

* Non-income producing security.

(a) All or a portion of security is on loan.

(b) Represents investment of collateral received from securities lending transactions.

ADR - An American Depositary Receipt is a certificate issued by a custodian bank representing the right to receive securities of the foreign issuer described. Trading on exchanges not located in the United States or Canada significantly influences the value of ADRs.

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

6

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Harris Oakmark International Portfolio

Sector Diversification as of December 31, 2009 (Unaudited)

Top Sectors	Percent of Net Assets
Media	15.9%
Capital Markets	11.1%
Automobiles	8.3%
Textiles, Apparel & Luxury Goods	7.6%
Beverages	5.9%
Professional Services	4.1%
Pharmaceuticals	4.0%
Semiconductors & Semiconductor Equipment	3.8%
Commercial Banks	3.5%
Commercial & Professional Services	3.3%

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

7

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Harris Oakmark International Portfolio

Various inputs are used in determining the value of the Portfolio’s investments, which are as follows:

Level 1— unadjusted quoted prices in active markets for identical investments

Level 2— other significant observable inputs (including, but not limited to: quoted prices for similar investments in markets that are both active or inactive; inputs other than quoted prices that are observable such as interest rates, yield curves, credit risks, default rates, etc.)

Level 3—significant unobservable inputs based on the best information available in the circumstances, to the extent observable inputs are unavailable (including the Portfolio’s own assumptions in determining the fair value of investments)

The inputs or methodology used for valuing investments are not necessarily an indication of the risk associated with investing in them. For information about the Portfolio’s policy regarding valuation of investments and other significant accounting policies, please refer to Note 2 of the Notes to Financial Statements.

The following table summarizes the inputs used in determining the value the Portfolio’s investments as of December 31, 2009:

ASSETS VALUATION INPUTS

Description	Level 1		Level 2		Level 3		Total
Common Stocks
Australia	$	—	$	52,918,734	$	—	$	52,918,734
Canada		63,319,409		—		—		63,319,409
France		—		205,731,660		—		205,731,660
Germany		—		191,964,127		—		191,964,127
Ireland		—		46,021,545		—		46,021,545
Israel		2,483,050		—		—		2,483,050
Italy		—		31,662,879		—		31,662,879
Japan		—		307,924,860		—		307,924,860
Mexico		71,264,628		—		—		71,264,628
Netherlands		—		54,668,056		—		54,668,056
South Korea		—		19,328,419		—		19,328,419
Spain		—		44,335,180		—		44,335,180
Sweden		—		50,128,840		—		50,128,840
Switzerland		12,452,320		390,159,160		—		402,611,480
United Kingdom		49,487,898		249,150,362		—		298,638,260
Total Common Stocks		199,007,305		1,643,993,822		—		1,843,001,127
Short-Term Investments
Mutual Funds		180,255,013		—		—		180,255,013
Repurchase Agreement		—		81,217,000		—		81,217,000
Total Short-Term Investments		180,255,013		81,217,000		—		261,472,013
TOTAL INVESTMENTS	$	379,262,318	$	1,725,210,822	$	—	$	2,104,473,140

	Level 1				Level 2					Level 3				Total
	Asset		Liability		Asset		Liability			Asset		Liability
Forward Contracts*	$	—	$	—	$	5,724,287	$	(5,238,368	)	$	—	$	—	$	485,919

* Derivative instruments such as forwards, futures and swap contracts are valued based on the unrealized appreciation/depreciation on the instrument.

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

8

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Harris Oakmark International Portfolio

Statement of Assets and Liabilities

December 31, 2009

Assets
Investments at value (a)(b)	$	2,023,256,140
Repurchase Agreement		81,217,000
Cash		133,097
Cash denominated in foreign currencies (c)		389
Receivable for investments sold		1,152,509
Receivable for shares sold		684,114
Dividends receivable		1,673,252
Interest receivable		11
Unrealized appreciation on forward foreign currency exchange contracts		5,724,287
Total assets		2,113,840,799
Liabilities
Payables for:
Investments purchased		6,775,951
Shares redeemed		1,499,996
Unrealized depreciation on forward foreign currency exchange contracts		5,238,368
Collateral for securities loaned		180,255,013
Accrued Expenses:
Management fees		1,238,767
Distribution and service fees - Class B		148,913
Distribution and service fees - Class E		16,045
Administration fees		10,598
Custodian and accounting fees		71,908
Deferred trustees’ fees		7,518
Other expenses		68,594
Total liabilities		195,331,671
Net Assets	$	1,918,509,128
Net Assets Represented by
Paid in surplus	$	2,288,463,994
Accumulated net realized loss		(557,400,566	)
Unrealized appreciation on investments and foreign currency transactions		146,960,580
Undistributed net investment income		40,485,120
Net Assets	$	1,918,509,128
Net Assets
Class A	$	1,082,057,353
Class B		710,485,345
Class E		125,966,430
Capital Shares Outstanding
Class A		89,833,790
Class B		59,660,741
Class E		10,535,964
Net Asset Value, Offering Price and Redemption Price Per Share
Class A	$	12.05
Class B		11.91
Class E		11.96

(a) Identified cost of investments, excluding repurchase agreement, was $1,876,747,322.

(b) Includes securities loaned at value of $171,690,026.

(c) Identified cost of cash denominated in foreign currencies was $389.

Statement of Operations

For the Year Ended December 31, 2009

Investment Income
Dividends (a)	$	33,685,935
Interest (b)		2,357,264
Total investment income		36,043,199
Expenses
Management fees		11,830,438
Administration fees		109,983
Custodian and accounting fees		310,915
Distribution and service fees - Class B		1,343,474
Distribution and service fees - Class E		144,848
Audit and tax services		24,531
Legal		36,351
Trustees’ fees and expenses		22,763
Shareholder reporting		200,739
Insurance		22,647
Miscellaneous		20,227
Total expenses		14,066,916
Less management fee waiver		(126,700	)
Net expenses		13,940,216
Net investment income		22,102,983
Net Realized and Unrealized Gain (Loss) on Investments and Foreign Currency Transactions
Net realized gain (loss) on:
Investments		(296,641,117	)
Foreign currency transactions		26,657,269
Net realized loss on investments and foreign currency transactions		(269,983,848	)
Net change in unrealized appreciation (depreciation) on:
Investments		941,447,198
Foreign currency transactions		(7,946,351	)
Net change in unrealized appreciation on investments and foreign currency transactions		933,500,847
Net realized and unrealized gain on investments and foreign currency transactions		663,516,999
Net Increase in Net Assets from Operations	$	685,619,982
(a) Net of foreign withholding taxes of $3,718,475.
(b) Includes net income on securities loaned of $2,359,071.

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

9

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Harris Oakmark International Portfolio

Statements of Changes in Net Assets

	Year Ended December 31, 2009			Year Ended December 31, 2008
Increase (Decrease) in Net Assets:
Operations
Net investment income	$	22,102,983		$	57,629,985
Net realized loss on investments, futures contracts and foreign currency transactions		(269,983,848	)		(195,010,856	)
Net change in unrealized appreciation (depreciation) on investments and foreign currency transactions		933,500,847			(787,241,345	)
Net increase (decrease) in net assets resulting from operations		685,619,982			(924,622,216	)
Distributions to Shareholders
From net investment income
Class A		(67,860,377	)		(24,588,124	)
Class B		(41,341,914	)		(10,662,017	)
Class E		(7,308,464	)		(2,405,114	)
From net realized gains
Class A		—			(210,513,151	)
Class B		—			(111,016,014	)
Class E		—			(23,620,917	)
Net decrease in net assets resulting from distributions		(116,510,755	)		(382,805,337	)
Capital Share Transactions
Proceeds from shares sold
Class A		226,728,889			295,556,962
Class B		118,183,738			69,439,982
Class E		24,820,862			10,113,911
Net asset value of shares issued through dividend reinvestment
Class A		67,860,377			235,101,275
Class B		41,341,914			121,678,031
Class E		7,308,464			26,026,031
Cost of shares repurchased
Class A		(224,356,002	)		(540,397,491	)
Class B		(81,386,985	)		(177,292,291	)
Class E		(22,335,239	)		(61,271,810	)
Net increase (decrease) in net assets from capital share transactions		158,166,018			(21,045,400	)
Net Increase (Decrease) in Net Assets		727,275,245			(1,328,472,953	)
Net assets at beginning of period		1,191,233,883			2,519,706,836
Net assets at end of period	$	1,918,509,128		$	1,191,233,883
Undistributed net investment income at end of period	$	40,485,120		$	108,235,624

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

10

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Harris Oakmark International Portfolio

Financial Highlights

Selected Per Share Data for the Years Ended:
	Class A
	For the Years Ended December 31,
	2009			2008			2007			2006			2005
Net Asset Value, Beginning of Period	$	8.57		$	17.27		$	19.03		$	16.23		$	14.36
Income (Loss) from Investment Operations
Net investment income(a)		0.15			0.40			0.33			0.31			0.21
Net realized/unrealized gain (loss) on investments		4.17			(6.46	)		(0.35	)		4.20			1.87
Total from investment operations		4.32			(6.06	)		(0.02	)		4.51			2.08
Less Distributions
Dividends from net investment income		(0.84	)		(0.28	)		(0.18	)		(0.49	)		(0.02	)
Distributions from net realized capital gains		—			(2.36	)		(1.56	)		(1.22	)		(0.19	)
Total distributions		(0.84	)		(2.64	)		(1.74	)		(1.71	)		(0.21	)
Net Asset Value, End of Period	$	12.05		$	8.57		$	17.27		$	19.03		$	16.23
Total Return		55.46	%		(40.72	)%		(0.86	)%		29.20	%		14.48	%
Ratio of expenses to average net assets after reimbursement		0.83	%		0.85	%		0.86	%		0.97	%		0.94	%
Ratio of expenses to average net assets before reimbursement and rebates		0.84	%		0.85	%		0.86	%		0.98	%		0.96	%
Ratio of net investment income to average net Assets		1.58	%		3.18	%		1.76	%		1.77	%		1.37	%
Portfolio turnover rate		54.7	%		52.7	%		49.6	%		45.9	%		11.5	%
Net assets, end of period (in millions)	$	1,082.1		$	676.3		$	1,458.3		$	1,037.0		$	644.5

	Class B
	For the Years Ended December 31,
	2009			2008			2007			2006			2005
Net Asset Value, Beginning of Period	$	8.47		$	17.09		$	18.87		$	16.11		$	14.27
Income (Loss) from Investment Operations
Net investment income(a)		0.13			0.36			0.30			0.26			0.17
Net realized/unrealized gain (loss) on investments		4.11			(6.39	)		(0.36	)		4.17			1.86
Total from investment operations		4.24			(6.03	)		(0.06	)		4.43			2.03
Less Distributions
Dividends from net investment income		(0.80	)		(0.23	)		(0.16	)		(0.45	)		—
Distributions from net realized capital gains		—			(2.36	)		(1.56	)		(1.22	)		(0.19	)
Total distributions		(0.80	)		(2.59	)		(1.72	)		(1.67	)		(0.19	)
Net Asset Value, End of Period	$	11.91		$	8.47		$	17.09		$	18.87		$	16.11
Total Return		55.06	%		(40.88	)%		(1.12	)%		28.85	%		14.24	%
Ratio of expenses to average net assets after reimbursement		1.08	%		1.10	%		1.10	%		1.22	%		1.19	%
Ratio of expenses to average net assets before reimbursement and rebates		1.09	%		1.10	%		1.10	%		1.23	%		1.20	%
Ratio of net investment income to average net assets		1.30	%		2.93	%		1.60	%		1.49	%		1.11	%
Portfolio turnover rate		54.7	%		52.7	%		49.6	%		45.9	%		11.5	%
Net assets, end of period (in millions)	$	710.5		$	433.4		$	862.6		$	856.2		$	554.3

Please see following page for Financial Highlights footnote legend.

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

11

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Harris Oakmark International Portfolio

Financial Highlights

Selected Per Share Data for the Years Ended:
	Class E
	For the Years Ended December 31,
	2009			2008			2007			2006			2005
Net Asset Value, Beginning of Period	$	8.50		$	17.14		$	18.91		$	16.14		$	14.30
Income (Loss) from Investment Operations
Net investment income(a)		0.13			0.38			0.33			0.27			0.19
Net realized/unrealized gain (loss) on investments		4.14			(6.42	)		(0.37	)		4.18			1.85
Total from investment operations		4.27			(6.04	)		(0.04	)		4.45			2.04
Less Distributions
Dividends from net investment income		(0.81	)		(0.24	)		(0.17	)		(0.46	)		(0.01	)
Distributions from net realized capital gains		—			(2.36	)		(1.56	)		(1.22	)		(0.19	)
Total distributions		(0.81	)		(2.60	)		(1.73	)		(1.68	)		(0.20	)
Net Asset Value, End of Period	$	11.96		$	8.50		$	17.14		$	18.91		$	16.14
Total Return		55.27	%		(40.82	)%		(1.00	)%		28.98	%		14.27	%
Ratio of expenses to average net assets after reimbursement		0.98	%		1.00	%		1.00	%		1.13	%		1.09	%
Ratio of expenses to average net assets before reimbursement and rebates		0.99	%		1.00	%		1.00	%		1.13	%		1.10	%
Ratio of net investment income to average net assets		1.37	%		3.07	%		1.75	%		1.54	%		1.25	%
Portfolio turnover rate		54.7	%		52.7	%		49.6	%		45.9	%		11.5	%
Net assets, end of period (in millions)	$	126.0		$	81.5		$	198.8		$	221.0		$	130.4

(a) Per share amounts based on average shares outstanding during the period.

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

12

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Harris Oakmark International Portfolio

Notes to Financial Statements—December 31, 2009

1. Organization

Met Investors Series Trust (the “Trust”) is registered as an open-end management investment company under the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended (the “1940 Act”). The Trust currently offers forty-eight Portfolios (the “Portfolios”), each of which operates as a distinct investment vehicle of the Trust. The portfolio included in this report is Harris Oakmark International Portfolio (the “Portfolio”), which is diversified. Shares in the Trust are not offered directly to the general public and are currently available only to separate accounts established by certain affiliated life insurance companies.

The Trust is managed by MetLife Advisers, LLC (the “Manager”), an affiliate of MetLife, Inc.

The Trust has registered four classes of shares: Class A, B, C and E Shares. Class A, B and E Shares are currently offered by the Portfolio. Shares of each Class of the Portfolio represent an equal pro rata interest in the Portfolio and generally give the shareholder the same voting, dividend, liquidation, and other rights. Investment income, realized and unrealized capital gains and losses, the common expenses of the Portfolio and certain Portfolio-level expense reductions, if any, are allocated on a pro rata basis to each Class based on the relative net assets of each Class to the net assets of the Portfolio. Each Class of shares differs in its respective distribution expenses.

2. Significant Accounting Policies

The financial statements have been prepared in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (“GAAP”) which require management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of income and expenses during the reporting period. Actual results could differ from these estimates.

The following is a summary of significant accounting policies consistently followed by the Trust in the preparation of its financial statements.

Valuation - Equity securities for which the primary market is on a domestic exchange (except the NASDAQ) will be valued at the last sale price on the day of valuation or, if there was no sale that day, at the last reported bid price, using prices as of the close of trading. Equity securities traded over-the-counter and quoted on NASDAQ are valued at the NASDAQ Official Closing Price. Equity securities not quoted on NASDAQ that are actively traded in the over-the-counter market, including listed securities for which the primary market is believed to be over-the-counter, will be valued at the most recently quoted bid price provided by the principal market makers. Short positions traded in the OTC market are valued at the last available ask price.

Debt securities (other than short term obligations with a remaining maturity of sixty days or less) are generally valued on the basis of evaluated or composite bid quotations obtained by independent pricing services and/or brokers and dealers selected by the relevant adviser pursuant to authorization of the Board of Trustees (the “Board”). Such quotations take into account appropriate factors such as trading in similar groups of securities, yield, quality, coupon rate, maturity, type of issue, trading characteristics and other data. Short term obligations with a remaining maturity of sixty days or less are valued at amortized cost which approximates fair market value.

Financial futures contracts and options thereon, which are traded on exchanges, are valued at their closing prices as of the close of such exchanges. Exchange traded options are valued at the mean price. Swap agreements and options traded in the over the counter (“OTC”) market are valued based upon quoted fair valuations received daily by the Portfolio from a pricing service or counterparty. Forward currency exchange contracts are valued daily at forward foreign currency exchange rates. Investments in mutual funds are valued at the daily net asset value (“NAV”) of the mutual fund.

The Portfolio has retained a third party pricing service to fair value its equity investments that are traded principally on a foreign exchange or market which closes prior to the Portfolio’s time of valuation. The fair value of each security that is traded principally on an exchange or market outside of the United States generally is calculated by applying a valuation factor provided by the third party pricing service to the last sales price for that security, or, if there is no reported sale during the day, the last reported bid price for that security.

If market values are not readily available, or if available market quotations are not reliable, securities are priced at their fair value as determined by the Manager using procedures approved by the Board. The Portfolio may use fair value pricing if the value of a security has been materially affected by events occurring before the Portfolio’s calculation of NAV but after the close of the primary markets on which the security is traded. The Portfolio may also use fair value pricing if reliable market quotations are unavailable due to infrequent trading or if trading in a particular security was halted during the day and did not resume prior to the Portfolio’s calculation of NAV.

Security Transactions - Security transactions are recorded on a trade date basis. Realized gains and losses on investments and unrealized appreciation and depreciation are determined on the identified cost basis, which is the same basis used for federal income tax purposes. The Portfolio may purchase and sell securities on a “when-issued” or “delayed delivery” basis, with settlement to occur at a later date. The value of the security so purchased is subject to market fluctuations during this period. The Portfolio segregates assets having an aggregate value at least equal to the amount of the when-issued or delayed delivery purchase commitments until payment is made.

Investment Income and Expenses - Interest income is recorded on an accrual basis. Discounts and premiums on securities purchased are amortized over the lives of the respective securities. Dividend income is recorded on the ex-dividend date. Foreign dividend income is recorded

13

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Harris Oakmark International Portfolio

Notes to Financial Statements—December 31, 2009—(Continued)

2. Significant Accounting Policies - continued

on the ex-dividend date or as soon as practicable after the Portfolio has determined the existence of a dividend declaration after exercising reasonable due diligence. Foreign income and foreign capital gains on some foreign securities may be subject to foreign withholding taxes, which are accrued as applicable.

Income Taxes - It is the Portfolio’s policy to comply with the requirements of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”), and regulations thereunder, applicable to regulated investment companies and to distribute, with respect to each taxable year, all of its taxable income to shareholders. Therefore, no federal income tax provision is required. The Portfolio files U.S. Federal and various state tax returns. No income tax returns are currently under examination. The Portfolio’s federal tax returns for the prior three fiscal years remain subject to examination by the Internal Revenue Service.

Dividends and Distributions to Shareholders - The Portfolio records dividends and distributions on the ex-dividend date. Net realized gains from security transactions (if any) are generally distributed annually to shareholders. The timing and characterization of certain income and capital gains distributions are determined in accordance with federal tax regulations that may differ from GAAP. Permanent book and tax basis differences relating to shareholder distributions will result in reclassification between under/over distributed net investment income, accumulated net realized gains/losses and paid in surplus. Book-tax differences are primarily due to futures transactions, foreign currency transactions, certain foreign withholding taxes, passive foreign investment companies (PFIC), partnerships, deferred trustees compensation, capital loss carryforwards and losses deferred due to wash sales, as applicable. These adjustments have no impact on net assets or the results of operations.

Securities Lending - The Portfolio may lend its securities to certain qualified brokers who borrow securities in order to complete certain transactions. By lending its investment securities, the Portfolio attempts to increase its net investment income through the receipt of income on the loan. Any gain or loss in the market price of the securities loaned that might occur and any interest earned or dividends declared during the term of the loan would accrue to the account of the Portfolio.

Upon entering into a securities lending transaction, the Portfolio receives cash or other securities as collateral in an amount equal to or exceeding 102% of the current market value of the loaned securities (105% for foreign equity securities). Any cash received as collateral is generally invested by State Street Bank and Trust Company, acting in its capacity as securities lending agent (the “Agent”), in the State Street Navigator Securities Lending Prime Portfolio, which is a money market fund registered under the 1940 Act. A portion of net income (income after the deduction of expenses and fees of the Navigator Securities Lending Prime Portfolio) on the collateral is rebated to the borrower of the securities and the remainder is split between the Agent and the Portfolio. On loans collateralized by U.S. Treasuries, a fee is received from the borrower and is allocated between the Portfolio and the Agent. Risks of delay in recovery of the securities or even loss of rights in the collateral may occur should the borrower of the securities fail financially. Risks may also arise to the extent that the value of the collateral decreases below the value of the securities loaned.

Foreign Currency Translation - The books and records of the Portfolio are maintained in U.S. dollars. Foreign currencies, investments and other assets and liabilities are translated into U.S. dollars on a daily basis using prevailing exchange rates. Purchases and sales of securities are translated at the rates of exchange prevailing when such securities were acquired or sold. Income is translated at rates of exchange prevailing when interest is accrued or dividends are recorded.

The Portfolio does not isolate that portion of operations resulting from changes in foreign exchange rates on investments from the fluctuations arising from changes in market prices of securities held. Such fluctuations are included with the net realized and unrealized gain or loss from investments.

Reported net realized foreign exchange gains or losses arise from activity in forward foreign currency exchange contracts; sales of foreign currencies; currency gains or losses realized between the trade and settlement dates on securities transactions; and the difference between the amounts of dividends, interest, and foreign withholding taxes recorded on the Portfolio’s books and the U.S. dollar equivalent of the amounts actually received or paid. Net unrealized foreign exchange gains or losses arise from changes in the value of assets and liabilities other than investments in securities at fiscal year end; from changes in the exchange rates of foreign currency held; and from changes in the contract value of forward foreign currency exchange contracts.

Repurchase Agreements - The Portfolio may enter into repurchase agreements with selected commercial banks and broker-dealers, under which the Portfolio acquires securities as collateral and agrees to resell the securities at an agreed upon time and at an agreed upon price. The Portfolio accrues interest for the difference between the amount it pays for the securities and the amount it receives upon resale. At the time the Portfolio enters into a repurchase agreement, the value of the collateral securities, including accrued interest, will be equal to or exceed the value of the repurchase agreement and, for repurchase agreements that mature in more than one day, the seller will agree that the value of the collateral securities, including accrued interest, will continue to be at least equal to the value of the repurchase agreement.

3. Investment Management Agreement and Other Transactions with Affiliates

Investment Management Agreement - The Trust has entered into a management agreement with the Manager (the “Management Agreement”) for investment management services in connection with the investment management of the Portfolio. The Manager is subject to the supervision and direction of the Board and has overall responsibility for the general management and administration of the Trust. The Manager has entered

14

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Harris Oakmark International Portfolio

Notes to Financial Statements—December 31, 2009—(Continued)

3. Investment Management Agreement and Other Transactions with Affiliates - continued

into an advisory agreement with Harris Associates L.P. (the “Adviser”) for investment advisory services in connection with the investment management of the Portfolio.

Subject to the supervision and direction of the Board, the Manager supervises the Adviser and has full discretion with respect to the retention or renewal of the advisory agreement. The Manager pays the Adviser a fee based on the Portfolio’s average daily net assets.

Under the terms of the Portfolio’s Management Agreement, the Portfolio pays the Manager a monthly fee based upon annual rates applied to the Portfolio’s average daily net assets as follows:

Management Fees earned by the Manager for the period ended December 31, 2009	% per annum		Average Daily Net Assets
$11,830,438	0.85	%	First $100 Million
	0.80	%	$100 Million to $1 Billion
	0.75	%	Over $1 Billion

Effective January 1, 2009, the Adviser reduced the advisory fee it charges to the Manager for managing the Portfolio. This fee change reduced the advisory fee charged on the Portfolio’s average daily net assets in excess of $1 billion. In connection with this change in the advisory fee, the Manager agreed, at certain asset levels, to waive a portion of the management fee chargeable to the Portfolio.

The expenses reimbursed for the year ended December 31, 2009 are shown as expenses reimbursed in the Statement of Operations of the Portfolio.

Transfer Agency Agreement - Metropolitan Life Insurance Company (“MLIC”) serves as the transfer agent for the Trust. MLIC is an affiliate of the Manager. MLIC receives no fees for its services to the Trust under the transfer agency agreement.

Distribution Agreements and Plans - The Trust has distribution agreements with MetLife Investors Distribution Company (“MIDC” or the “Distributor”) in which MIDC serves as the Distributor for the Trust’s Class A, Class B and Class E Shares. MIDC is a wholly-owned subsidiary of MetLife Investors Group, Inc., an affiliate of the Manager. The Class B and Class E distribution plans provide that the Trust, on behalf of the Portfolio, may pay annually up to 0.50% and 0.25%, respectively, of the average net assets of the Portfolio attributable to its Class B and Class E Shares in respect to activities primarily intended to result in the sale of Class B and Class E Shares. However, under the Class B and Class E distribution agreements, payments to the Distributor for activities pursuant to the Class B and Class E distribution plans are currently limited to payments at an annual rate equal to 0.25% and 0.15% of average daily net assets of the Portfolio attributable to its Class B and Class E Shares, respectively.

Under the terms of the Class B and Class E distribution plans and distribution agreements, the Portfolio is authorized to make payments monthly to the Distributor that may be used to pay or reimburse entities providing distribution and shareholder servicing with respect to the Class B and Class E Shares for such entities’ fees or expenses incurred.

Deferred Trustee Compensation - Each Trustee of the Trust who is not currently an employee of the Manager or any of its affiliates receives compensation from the Trust for his or her service to the Portfolio. A deferred compensation plan (the “Plan”) is available to the Trustees on a voluntary basis. Deferred amounts remain in the Trust until distributed in accordance with the provisions of the Plan. The value of a participating Trustee’s deferral account is based on theoretical investments of deferred amounts, on the normal payment dates, in certain portfolios of the Trust or Metropolitan Series Fund, Inc. as designated by the participating Trustee. Changes in the value of participants’ deferral accounts are reflected as Trustees’ fees and expenses in the Statement of Operations. The portion of the accrued obligations allocated to the Portfolio, if any, under the Plan are reflected as Deferred Trustees’ fees in the Statement of Assets and Liabilities.

15

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Harris Oakmark International Portfolio

Notes to Financial Statements—December 31, 2009—(Continued)

4. Shares of Beneficial Interest

Transactions in shares of beneficial interest for the periods ended noted below were as follows:

	Beginning Shares	Sales	Reinvestments	Redemptions		Net Increase (Decrease) in Shares Outstanding		Ending Shares
Class A
12/31/2009	78,942,227	25,272,307	8,579,062	(22,959,806	)	10,891,563		89,833,790
12/31/2008	84,463,465	22,934,252	17,337,852	(45,793,342	)	(5,521,238	)	78,942,227
Class B
12/31/2009	51,179,378	11,712,539	5,279,938	(8,511,114	)	8,481,363		59,660,741
12/31/2008	50,482,950	5,705,608	9,060,166	(14,069,346	)	696,428		51,179,378
Class E
12/31/2009	9,585,377	2,415,780	929,830	(2,395,023	)	950,587		10,535,964
12/31/2008	11,598,308	853,760	1,932,148	(4,798,839	)	(2,012,931	)	9,585,377

The Portfolio is authorized to issue an unlimited number of shares.

5. Investment Transactions

Aggregate cost of purchases and proceeds of sales of investment securities, excluding short-term securities, for the period ended December 31, 2009 were as follows:

Purchases			Sales
U.S. Government	Non-Government		U.S. Government		Non-Government
$—	$	832,703,770	$	—	$	795,742,491

At December 31, 2009, the cost of securities for federal income tax purposes and the unrealized appreciation (depreciation) of investments for federal income tax purposes for the Portfolio were as follows:

Federal Income Tax Cost	Gross Unrealized Appreciation		Gross Unrealized Depreciation			Net Unrealized Appreciation
$2,005,986,462	$	240,802,198	$	(142,315,520	)	$	98,486,678

6. Investments in Derivative Instruments

Forward Foreign Currency Exchange Contracts - The Portfolio may enter into forward foreign currency exchange contracts to hedge its portfolio holdings against future movements in certain foreign currency exchange rates. A forward currency contract is a commitment to purchase or sell a foreign currency at a future date at a set price. Forward currency contracts are valued at the forward rate and are marked-to-market daily. The change in market value is recorded by the Portfolio as an unrealized gain or loss. When the contract is closed, the Portfolio recognizes a realized gain or loss equal to the difference between the value of the contract at the time it was opened and the value at the time it was closed.

The use of forward foreign currency exchange contracts does not eliminate fluctuations in the underlying prices of the securities of the Portfolio, but it does establish a rate of exchange that can be achieved in the future. Although forward foreign currency exchange contracts to sell limit the risk of loss due to a decline in the value of the currency holdings, they also limit any potential gain that might result should the value of the currency increase. In addition, the Portfolio could be exposed to risks if the counterparties to the contracts are unable to meet the terms of the contracts.

At December 31, 2009, the Portfolio had following derivatives, grouped into appropriate risk categories:

	Asset Derivatives & Liability Derivatives—Fair Value
Risk Exposure
Foreign Exchange	Unrealized appreciation on forward currency contracts	$	5,724,287	Unrealized depreciation on forward currency contract	$	(5,238,368	)

16

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Harris Oakmark International Portfolio

Notes to Financial Statements—December 31, 2009—(Continued)

6. Investments in Derivative Instruments - continued

Year end balances are indicative of activity throughout the year.

Transactions in derivative instruments during the year ended December 31, 2009, were as follows:

Risk Exposure
Location Statement of Operations—Net Realized Gain (Loss)	Foreign Exchange
Foreign currency transactions	$	24,053,799
Location Statement of Operations—Net Change in Unrealized Gain (Loss)	Foreign Exchange
Foreign currency transactions	$	(7,789,152	)

For the year ended December 31, 2009, the average per contract outstanding for each derivative type was as follows:

Average Notional Amounts or Contract Amount(a)	Foreign Exchange Contracts
Foreign Currency Transaction	$	168,808,443

(a) Amount Represents the average notional amount or contract amount.

7. Securities Lending

As of December 31, 2009, the Portfolio had loaned securities which were collateralized by short-term investments. The value of securities loaned and the value of the related collateral were as follows:

Value of Securities	Value of Cash Collateral		Value of Non-Cash Collateral*		Total Collateral
$171,690,026	$	180,255,013	$	—	$	180,255,013

* The Portfolio cannot repledge or resell this collateral. The non-cash collateral is typically comprised of government securities and/or bank letters of credit.

8. Forward Foreign Currency Exchange Contracts

Forward Foreign Currency Exchange Contracts to Sell:

Settlement Date	Counterparty	Contracts to Deliver		Value at December 31, 2009		In Exchange for U.S.$		Net Unrealized Appreciation/ (Depreciation)
3/3/2010	State Street Bank and Trust Co.	30,000,000	CHF	$	28,979,527	$	26,002,167	$	(2,977,360	)
6/4/2010	State Street Bank and Trust Co.	66,000,000	CHF		63,808,921		62,393,647		(1,415,274	)
9/24/2010	State Street Bank and Trust Co.	21,500,000	CHF		20,821,740		21,092,907		271,167
10/25/2010	State Street Bank and Trust Co.	36,600,000	CHF		35,468,792		36,556,132		1,087,340
9/15/2010	State Street Bank and Trust Co.	57,000,000	EUR		81,619,556		83,277,000		1,657,444
10/25/2010	State Street Bank and Trust Co.	16,900,000	EUR		24,193,310		25,342,902		1,149,592
3/3/2010	State Street Bank and Trust Co.	2,230,000,000	JPY		23,962,448		23,116,714		(845,734	)
9/7/2010	State Street Bank and Trust Co.	1,900,000,000	JPY		20,465,911		20,609,610		143,699
11/16/2010	State Street Bank and Trust Co.	650,000,000	JPY		7,015,424		7,217,611		202,187
11/29/2010	State Street Bank and Trust Co.	1,890,000,000	JPY		20,407,651		21,620,509		1,212,858
								$	485,919

CHF - Swiss Franc

EUR - Euro Dollar

JPY - Japanese Yen

17

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Harris Oakmark International Portfolio

Notes to Financial Statements—December 31, 2009—(Continued)

9. Contractual Obligations

The Trust has a variety of indemnification obligations under contracts with its service providers. The Trust’s maximum exposure under these arrangements is unknown. However, the Trust has not had prior claims or losses pursuant to these contracts and expects the risk of loss to be remote.

10. Market, Credit and Counterparty Risk

In the normal course of business, the Portfolio invests in securities and enters into transactions where risks exist due to fluctuations in the market (market risk) or failure of the other party to a transaction to perform (credit risk). The value of securities held by the Portfolio may decline in response to certain events, including those directly involving the companies whose securities are owned by the Portfolio; conditions affecting the general economy; overall market changes; local, regional or global political, social or economic instability; and currency and interest rate and price fluctuations. The Portfolio may be exposed to counterparty risk, or the risk that an entity with which the Portfolio has unsettled or open transactions may default. The potential loss could exceed the value of the financial assets recorded in the financial statements. Financial assets, which potentially expose the Portfolio to credit risk, consist principally of cash due from counterparties and investments. The Portfolio restricts its exposure to credit losses by entering into master agreements with counterparties (approved brokers) with whom it undertakes a significant volume of transactions to include certain safeguards for derivatives and non-standard settlement trades. The credit risk associated with favorable contracts is reduced by a master netting arrangement to the extent that if an event of default occurs, all amounts with the counterparty are terminated and settled on a net basis. The Portfolio’s overall exposure to credit risk on derivative instruments subject to master netting arrangements can change substantially within a short period, as it is affected by each transaction subject to the arrangement.

11. Income Tax Information

The tax character of distributions paid for the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2008 were as follows:

Ordinary Income				Long-Term Capital Gain				Total
2009		2008		2009		2008		2009		2008
$	116,510,755	$	77,794,274	$	—	$	305,011,063	$	116,510,755	$	382,805,337

As of December 31, 2009, the components of distributable earnings (accumulated losses) on a federal income tax basis were as follows:

Undistributed Ordinary Income	Undistributed Long-Term Gain		Net Unrealized Appreciation		Loss Carryforwards			Total
$40,978,794	$	—	$	98,452,284	$	(509,378,426	)	$	(369,947,348	)

The Portfolio utilizes the provisions of the federal income tax laws that provide for the carryforward of capital losses for eight years, offsetting such losses against any future net realized capital gains. At December 31, 2009, the accumulated capital loss carryforwards and expiration dates by the Portfolio were as follows:

Expiring 12/31/2011			Expiring 12/31/2016		Expiring 12/31/2017		Total
$	4,044,771	*	$	211,525,343	$	293,808,312	$	509,378,426

* The Portfolio acquired capital losses in the merger with Mondrian International Stock Portfolio, a series of Travelers Series Trust, on May 1, 2006.

12. Recent Accounting Pronouncement

On January 21, 2010, the Financial Accounting Standards Board issued Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) 2010-06, “Improving Disclosures About Fair Value Measurements.” The ASU amends Accounting Standards Codification 820 to add new requirements for disclosures about transfers into and out of Levels 1 and 2. It also clarifies existing fair value disclosures about the level of disaggregation and about inputs and valuation techniques used to measure fair value. Additionally, the ASU amends disclosures about providing purchases, sales, issuances, and settlements on a gross basis relating to Level 3 measurements. The ASU guidance is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2009, and for interim periods within those fiscal years, except for the requirement to provide the Level 3 activity of purchases, sales, issuances, and settlements on a gross basis, which will be effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2010, and for interim periods within those fiscal years. Management is currently evaluating the impact the adoption of ASU 2010-06 will have on the Portfolio’s financial statements.

18

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Harris Oakmark International Portfolio

Notes to Financial Statements—December 31, 2009—(Continued)

13. Subsequent Events

Management’s evaluation of the impact of all subsequent events on the Portfolio’s financial statements was completed through February 26, 2010, the date the financial statements were issued, and management has determined that as of that date there were no subsequent events requiring adjustments or disclosure in the Portfolio’s financial statements.

19

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Harris Oakmark International Portfolio

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

To the Shareholders and Board of Trustees of Met Investors Series Trust:

We have audited the accompanying statement of assets and liabilities, including the portfolio of investments, of the Harris Oakmark International Portfolio, one of the portfolios constituting Met Investors Series Trust (the “Trust”), as of December 31, 2009, and the related statement of operations for the year then ended, the statements of changes in net assets for each of the two years in the period then ended, and the financial highlights for each of the five years in the period then ended. These financial statements and financial highlights are the responsibility of the Trust’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements and financial highlights based on our audits.

We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements and financial highlights are free of material misstatement. The Trust is not required to have, nor were we engaged to perform, an audit of its internal control over financial reporting. Our audits included consideration of internal control over financial reporting as a basis for designing audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the Trust’s internal control over financial reporting. Accordingly, we express no such opinion. An audit also includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements, assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. Our procedures included confirmation of securities owned as of December 31, 2009, by correspondence with the custodian and brokers; where replies were not received from brokers, we performed other auditing procedures. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.

In our opinion, the financial statements and financial highlights referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of the Harris Oakmark International Portfolio of the Met Investors Series Trust as of December 31, 2009, the results of its operations for the year then ended, the changes in its net assets for each of the two years in the period then ended, and the financial highlights for each of the five years in the period then ended, in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.

Deloitte & Touche LLP

Boston, Massachusetts

February 26, 2010

20

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Trustees and Officers (Unaudited) December 31, 2009

The Trustees and executive officers of the Trust, their ages and their principal occupations during the past five years are set forth below. Unless otherwise indicated, the business address of each is 5 Park Plaza, Suite 1900 Irvine, California 92614. Each Trustee who is deemed an “interested person,” as such term is defined in the 1940 Act, is indicated by an asterisk. Those Trustees who are not “interested persons” as defined in the 1940 Act are referred to as “Independent Trustees.” Additional information about the Trustees is available in the Statement of Additional Information which is available without charge, upon request, by calling (800) 848-3854.

The Trustees
Name and Age	Position(s) Held with Registrant	Term of Office and Length of Time Served	Principal Occupation(s) During Past 5 Years	Number of Portfolios in Fund Complex+ overseen by Trustee	Other Directorships Held by Trustee
Interested Trustees
Elizabeth M. Forget* (43)	President and Trustee	Indefinite; From December 2000 to present	Since May 2007, Senior Vice President, MetLife, Inc.; since December 2000, President of MetLife Advisers, LLC and its predecessor; December 2003 to April 2007, Vice President, MetLife, Inc.	84	Director, Metropolitan Series Fund, Inc. since August 2006.
Independent Trustees
Stephen M. Alderman (50)	Trustee	Indefinite; From December 2000 to present	Since November 1991, Shareholder in the law firm of Garfield and Merel, Ltd.	48	None
Jack R. Borsting (80)	Trustee	Indefinite; From December 2000 to present	Since 2006, Professor and Dean Emeritus, Marshall School of Business, University of Southern California (USC); from 2001 to 2005, Professor of Business Administration and Dean Emeritus.	48	Director, Los Angeles Orthopedic Hospital, Trustee, The Rose Hills Foundation. Member, Army Science Board.
Robert Boulware (53)	Trustee	Indefinite; From March 2008 to present	From 2004 to 2009, Director of Norwood Promotional Products, Inc.; from 2007 to 2008, Director of Wealthpoint Advisors (a business development company); from 2007 to 2009, Director of Holladay Bank; from 1992-2006, President and Chief Executive Officer of ING Fund Distributor, LLC.	48	Since 2005, Director of Gainsco, Inc. (auto insurance).
Daniel A. Doyle (51)	Trustee	Indefinite; From February 2007 to present	From October 2000 to June 2009, Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of ATC Management, Inc. (public utility); since June 2009, independent business consultant.	48	Director, Wisconsin Sports Development Corporation
Susan C. Gause (57)	Trustee	Indefinite; From March 2008 to present	From 2000 to December 2002, Chief Executive Officer of Allianz Dresdner Asset Management; since 2003, private investor.	48	None

21

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Trustees and Officers (Unaudited)—(Continued) December 31, 2009

Name and Age	Position(s) Held with Registrant	Term of Office and Length of Time Served	Principal Occupation(s) During Past 5 Years	Number of Portfolios in Fund Complex+ overseen by Trustee	Other Directorships Held by Trustee
Independent Trustees - continued
Dawn M. Vroegop (43)	Trustee	Indefinite; From December 2000 to present	From September 1999 to September 2003, Managing Director, Dresdner RCM Global Investors.	84	Director, Metropolitan Series Fund, Inc. since May 2009; from 2003 to present, Director and Finance Committee Chair, City College of San Francisco Foundation

The Executive Officers
Name and Age	Position(s) Held with Registrant	Term of Office and Length of Time Served	Principal Occupation(s) During Past 5 Years
Jeffrey L. Bernier (38)	Vice President	From February 2009 to present	Since December 2007, Vice President, Metropolitan Life Insurance Company; since 2008 Senior Vice President of MetLife Advisers, LLC and its predecessor; from July 2004 to December 2007, Director and Senior Investment Analyst of Investment Management Services for John Hancock Financial Services.
Jeffrey A. Tupper (39)	Chief Financial Officer, Treasurer	From August 2002 to present	Since February 2009, Vice President, MetLife Advisers, LLC. Since October 2006, Assistant Vice President, MetLife Group, Inc. Since February 2001, Assistant Vice President of MetLife Investors Insurance Company.
Richard C. Pearson (66)	Vice President and Secretary	From December 2000 to present	Since June 2001, President or Executive Vice President of MetLife Investors Distribution Company; since January 2001, Executive Vice President, General Counsel and Secretary of MetLife Investors Group, Inc. and Vice President, Secretary and Associate General Counsel of its affiliated life insurance companies; since November 2000, Senior Vice President and General Counsel of MetLife Advisers, LLC and its predecessor.
Jeffrey P. Halperin (42)	Chief Compliance Officer	From November 2006 to present	Since March 2006, Vice President, Corporate Ethics and Compliance Department, MetLife, Inc.; from October 2002 to March 2006, Assistant Vice President; from November 2005 to August 2006, Interim Chief Compliance Officer, Met Investors Series Trust; since April 2007, Chief Compliance Officer, Metropolitan Series Funds; from August 2006 to April 2007, Interim Chief Compliance Officer, Metropolitan Series Funds; since August 2006, Chief Compliance Officer, MetLife Advisers, LLC and its predecessor; since November 2006, Chief Compliance Officer, MetLife Investment Advisors Company, LLC.

+ The Fund Complex includes the Trust (48 portfolios) and Metropolitan Series Fund, Inc. (36 portfolios).

* Ms. Forget is an “interested person” of the Trust as a result of her affiliation with the Manager and the Distributor.

Quarterly Portfolio Schedule

The Trust files Form N-Q for the first and third quarters of each fiscal year. The Trust’s Forms N-Q will be available on the Securities and Exchange Commission’s website at http://www.sec.gov. The Trust’s Forms N-Q may be reviewed and copied at the Securities and Exchange Commission’s

22

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Trustees and Officers (Unaudited)—(Continued) December 31, 2009

Public Reference Room in Washington, D.C. and information on the operation of the Public Reference Room may be obtained by calling 1-800-SEC-0330. Once filed, the most recent Form N-Q will be available without charge, upon request, by calling (800) 848-3854.

Proxy Voting Policies and Procedures

A description of the policies and procedures that the Trust uses to determine how to vote proxies relating to portfolio securities is available without charge, upon request, by calling (800) 848-3854 and on the Securities and Exchange Commission’s website at http://www.sec.gov.

Proxy Voting Record

The Trust, on behalf of each of its Portfolios, has filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission its proxy voting record for the 12-month period ending June 30 on Form N-PX. Form N-PX must be filed by the Trust each year by August 31. Once filed, the most recent Form N-PX will be available without charge, upon request, by calling (800) 848-3854 or on the Securities and Exchange Commission’s website at http://www.sec.gov.

23

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Harris Oakmark International Portfolio

Board of Trustees’ Consideration of Advisory and Sub-Advisory Agreements

At an in-person meeting of the Board of Trustees (the “Board”) of the Met Investors Series Trust (the “Trust”) held on November 10-11, 2009, the Board, including a majority of the Trustees who are not considered to be “interested persons” of the Trust (the “Independent Trustees”) under the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended (the “1940 Act”), approved for an annual period the continuation of the Trust’s advisory agreement (the “Advisory Agreement”) with MetLife Advisers, LLC (the “Adviser”) and the applicable sub-advisory agreements (each a “Sub-Advisory Agreement”, and collectively with the Advisory Agreement, the “Agreements”) between the Adviser and the investment sub-advisers (each a “Sub-Adviser”, and collectively, the “Sub-Advisers”) for each of the series of the Trust, including the Harris Oakmark International Portfolio (each a “Portfolio,” and collectively, the “Portfolios”).¹

In considering the Agreements, the Board reviewed a variety of materials provided by the Adviser and the Sub-Advisers relating to each Portfolio, the Adviser and each Sub-Adviser, including comparative performance, fee and expense information for an appropriate peer group of similar mutual funds, performance information for relevant benchmark indices and other information regarding the nature, extent and quality of services provided by the Adviser and the Sub-Advisers under their respective Agreements. The Board also took into account information provided to the Board in its meetings throughout the year with respect to the services provided by the Adviser and the Sub-Advisers, including quarterly performance reports prepared by management containing reviews of investment results, and periodic presentations from the Sub-Advisers with respect to the Portfolios they manage. The Independent Trustees also assessed reports provided by independent consultants, who reviewed and provided analyses regarding investment performance, fees and expenses, profitability and other information provided by, or at the direction of, the Adviser and the Sub-Advisers, as more fully discussed below.

The Independent Trustees were separately advised by independent legal counsel throughout the process. Prior to voting, the Independent Trustees also received a memorandum from their independent counsel discussing the legal standards for their consideration of the proposed continuation of the Agreements. The Board met in person with personnel of the Adviser prior to the November meeting for the specific purpose of considering the proposed continuation of the Agreements. The Independent Trustees also discussed the proposed continuation of the Agreements in private sessions with their independent legal counsel at which no representatives of management were present.

In considering whether to approve the renewal of the Advisory Agreement with the Adviser and any applicable Sub-Advisory Agreements with respect to each Portfolio, the Board reviewed and analyzed the factors it deemed relevant, including: (1) the nature, extent and quality of the services to be provided to the Portfolios by the Adviser and the Sub-Advisers; (2) the performance of the Portfolios as compared to a peer group and an appropriate index; (3) the Adviser’s and each of the Sub-Adviser’s personnel and operations; (4) the financial condition of the Adviser and of the Sub-Advisers; (5) the level and method of computing each Portfolio’s advisory and sub-advisory fees; (6) the profitability of the Adviser under the Advisory Agreement and of the Sub-Advisers under the Sub-Advisory Agreements; (7) any “fall-out” benefits to the Adviser, the Sub-Advisers and their affiliates (i.e., ancillary benefits realized by the Adviser, the Sub-Advisers or their affiliates from the Adviser’s or Sub-Advisers’ relationship with the Trust); (8) the anticipated effect of growth in size on each Portfolio’s performance and expenses; (9) fees paid to the Sub-Advisers by comparable institutional and retail accounts; and (10) possible conflicts of interest. The Board also considered the nature, quality, and extent of the services to be provided to the Portfolios by the Adviser’s affiliates, including distribution services.

Nature, extent and quality of services. In considering the nature, extent and quality of the services to be provided by the Adviser to the Portfolios, the Board took into account the extensive responsibilities that the Adviser has as investment manager to the Portfolios, including the provision of investment advice to: (i) MetLife Aggressive Strategy Portfolio, MetLife Balanced Strategy Portfolio, MetLife Defensive Strategy Portfolio, MetLife Growth Strategy Portfolio, and MetLife Moderate Strategy Portfolio (together, the “Asset Allocation Portfolios”), (ii) American Funds Balanced Allocation Portfolio, American Funds Growth Allocation Portfolio, and American Funds Moderate Allocation Portfolio (together, the “American Funds of Funds”), and (iii) the Met/Franklin Templeton Founding Strategy Portfolio, the selection of the Sub-Advisers for the other Portfolios and oversight of the Sub-Advisers’ compliance with fund policies and objectives, review of brokerage matters including with respect to trade allocation and best execution, oversight of general fund compliance with federal and state laws, and the implementation of Board directives as they relate to the Portfolios. The Adviser’s role in coordinating the activities of the Portfolios’ other service providers was also considered. The Board also evaluated the expertise and performance of the investment personnel with respect to the Asset Allocation Portfolios, the American Funds of Funds and the Met/Franklin Templeton Founding Strategy Portfolio and of the personnel overseeing the Sub-Advisers of the other Portfolios, and compliance with each Portfolio’s investment restrictions, tax and other requirements. The Board considered information received from the Trust’s Chief Compliance Officer (“CCO”) regarding the Portfolios’ compliance policies and procedures established pursuant to Rule 38a-1 under the 1940 Act, including the policies and procedures in place relating to proxy voting. The Board also took into account its familiarity with management through Board meetings, discussions and reports during the preceding year.

The Board also recognized the Adviser^’s reputation and long-standing experience in serving as an investment adviser to the Trust, and considered the benefit to shareholders of investing in funds that are part of a family of variable annuity portfolios offering a variety of investments. In addition, the Board reviewed the financial condition of the Adviser and whether it had the financial wherewithal to provide a high level and quality of services to the Portfolios. In its review, the Board also received and took into account information regarding any services and/or payments provided to the Adviser by the Sub-Advisers in connection with marketing activities.

¹ The Met/Templeton International Bond Portfolio recently commenced operations and, therefore, the Agreements with respect to this Portfolio were not up for renewal.

24

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Harris Oakmark International Portfolio

Board of Trustees’ Consideration of Advisory and Sub-Advisory Agreements—(Continued)

With respect to the services provided by each of the Sub-Advisers, the Board considered information provided to the Board by each Sub-Adviser, including each Sub-Adviser’s Form ADV, as well as information presented throughout the past year. The Board considered the Sub-Adviser’s current level of staffing and its overall resources, as well as its compensation program. The Board reviewed each Sub-Adviser’s history and investment experience, as well as information regarding the qualifications, background and responsibilities of the Sub-Adviser’s investment and compliance personnel who provide services to the Portfolios. The Board also considered, among other things, the Sub-Adviser’s compliance program and any disciplinary history. The Board noted each Sub-Adviser’s regulatory history, including whether it was currently involved in any regulatory actions or investigations as well as material litigation, and any settlements and ameliatory actions undertaken, as appropriate. The Board also noted that the CCO and his staff conduct regular, periodic compliance reviews with each of the Sub-Advisers and present reports to the Independent Trustees regarding the same, which includes evaluating the regulatory compliance systems of the Sub-Advisers and procedures reasonably designed by them to assure compliance with the federal securities laws, including issues related to late trading and market timing, best execution, fair value pricing, and proxy voting procedures, among others. The Board also took into account the financial condition of each Sub-Adviser.

The Board considered each Sub-Adviser’s investment process and philosophy. The Board took into account that each Sub-Adviser’s responsibilities include the development and maintenance of an investment program for the applicable Portfolio which is consistent with the Portfolio’s investment objectives, the selection of investment securities and the placement of orders for the purchase and sale of such securities, as well as the implementation of compliance controls related to performance of these services. The Board also reviewed each Sub-Adviser’s brokerage policies and practices, including with respect to best execution and soft dollars.

Based on its consideration and review of the foregoing information, the Board concluded that the nature, extent and quality of services provided by the Adviser and by each Sub-Adviser were satisfactory and that there was a reasonable basis on which to conclude that each would provide a high quality of investment services to the Portfolios.

Performance. The Board considered the performance of the Portfolios as described in the quarterly reports prepared by management, and as also analyzed in reports prepared by the Independent Trustees’ independent consultant. The Board noted that the Adviser reviews with the Board on a quarterly basis detailed information about the Portfolios’ performance results, portfolio composition and investment strategies. The Board also reviewed and considered a separate report prepared by Lipper Inc. (“Lipper”), an independent third party, which provided a statistical analysis comparing the Portfolios’ investment performance, expenses, and fees to comparable funds underlying variable insurance products (the “Performance Universe”). In addition, the Independent Trustees met separately with a representative of Bobroff Consulting, Inc., an independent consultant (“Bobroff”), at a special board meeting in September 2009, to review the separate reports prepared by such consultant (“Bobroff Report”), which analyzed the report prepared by Lipper, as well as certain of the other factors to be considered by the Board including supplemental alpha and information coefficient analysis. The Board also considered each Portfolio’s more recent performance subsequent to the performance period covered by the Lipper reports, and management’s discussion of the same, including the effect of current market conditions on each Portfolio’s more recent performance.

The Board closely reviewed the Portfolios’ performance records and the Adviser’s and Sub-Advisers’ management styles and long-term performance records with the Portfolios and comparable funds. The Board focused particular attention on Portfolios with less favorable performance records. The Board was mindful of the Adviser’s focus on each Sub-Adviser’s performance and noted that the Adviser has been active in monitoring and responding to any performance issues with respect to the Portfolios. The Board also took into account its discussions with management regarding factors that contributed to the performance of each Portfolio.

Among other data relating specifically to the Harris Oakmark International Portfolio’s performance, the Board considered that the Portfolio outperformed both the median of its Performance Universe and its Lipper Index for the one-, three- and five-year periods ended July 31, 2009. The Board further considered that the Portfolio outperformed its benchmark, the MSCI EAFE Index, for the one-, three- and five- year periods ended August 31, 2009. Based on its review, the Board concluded that the Portfolio’s performance was satisfactory.

Fees and Expenses. The Board gave substantial consideration to the advisory fees payable under the Advisory Agreement and the sub-advisory fees payable under each of the Sub-Advisory Agreements. In this regard, the Board reviewed the advisory fees payable in the aggregate as well as on a Portfolio-by-Portfolio basis based on information provided by the Adviser. The Independent Trustees, with the assistance of Bobroff, also examined the fees paid by each Portfolio in light of fees paid to other investment managers by comparable funds and the method of computing each Portfolio’s fee, as well as considered the fees charged by the Adviser to manage other comparable funds. The Lipper report included comparisons of the Adviser’s fee schedule with that of its peers based on an asset-based analysis of relative fee structures according to the size of each Portfolio. In addition, the Board considered the Portfolios’ advisory and sub-advisory fees and total expenses as compared to similarly situated investment companies underlying variable insurance products deemed to be comparable to the Portfolios as determined by Lipper. The Board considered each Portfolio’s ranking within a smaller group of peer funds chosen by Lipper (the “Expense Group”), as well as the Portfolio’s ranking within broader groups of funds (the “Expense Universe” and the “Sub-advised Expense Universe”). The Board also considered each Portfolio’s contractual sub-advisory fees, as applicable, as compared to the Sub-advised Expense Universe as well as a smaller group of funds (the “Sub-advised Expense Group”). In comparing each Portfolio’s actual and contractual management fee to that of comparable funds, the Board noted that such fee includes both advisory and administrative fees.

25

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Harris Oakmark International Portfolio

Board of Trustees’ Consideration of Advisory and Sub-Advisory Agreements—(Continued)

The Board noted that the sub-advisory fees for the Portfolios are paid by the Adviser, not the Portfolios, out of the advisory fee. It was further noted that the Adviser negotiates such fees at arm’s length. The Board also considered that the Adviser had entered into expense limitation agreements with certain of the Portfolios as noted below, pursuant to which the Adviser has agreed to waive a portion of its advisory fee and/or reimburse certain expenses as a means of limiting a Portfolio’s total annual operating expenses. In addition, the Board noted that the Adviser effected fee reductions in 2009 with respect to several Portfolios. The Board also noted that the Adviser had re-negotiated the securities lending arrangement with State Street Corporation to further maximize the income to the Portfolios from such program.

With respect to each sub-advised Portfolio, the Board also compared the sub-advisory fees paid by the Adviser to fees charged by the Portfolio’s Sub-Adviser to manage other sub-advised portfolios and portfolios not subject to regulation under the 1940 Act, such as separate accounts, as applicable. The Board considered the fee comparisons in light of the differences required to manage different types of accounts.

With respect to the Harris Oakmark International Portfolio, the Board considered that the Portfolio’s actual management fees and total expenses (exclusive of 12b-1 fees) were both below the median of the Expense Group, the Expense Universe and the Sub-advised Expense Universe. The Board further noted that the Portfolio’s contractual management fees were above the normalized median of the Expense Group at the Portfolio’s current size. The Board also noted that the Portfolio’s contractual sub-advisory fees were above the average of the Sub-advised Expense Group at the Portfolio’s current size. The Board also noted that during the past year the Adviser had negotiated a reduction to the Portfolio’s sub-advisory fee schedule through the implementation of an additional breakpoint, effective January 1, 2009. The Board also noted that effective January 1, 2009, the Adviser began waiving an additional portion of its advisory fee on assets over $1 billion in order for shareholders to benefit from the additional breakpoint being implemented at the sub-advisory fee level. After consideration of all relevant factors, the Board concluded that the advisory and sub-advisory fees are consistent with industry norms and are fair and reasonable in light of the services to be provided.

Profitability. The Board examined the profitability of the Adviser on an aggregate basis with respect to all Portfolios, as well as on a Portfolio-by-Portfolio basis. With respect to the Asset Allocation Portfolios and Met/Franklin Templeton Founding Strategy Portfolio, the Board noted that the advisory fee is in addition to the fees received by the Adviser and its affiliates with regard to the other Portfolios of the Trust or of Metropolitan Series Fund, Inc., in which the Asset Allocation Portfolios and Met/Franklin Templeton Founding Strategy Portfolio may invest. With respect to the other Portfolios, the Board noted that a major component of profitability of the Adviser was the margin between the sub-advisory fees that the Adviser receives from the Trust and the portion of those fees paid to the Sub-Advisers. In this regard, the Board took into account certain comparative information in the Lipper report. The Board also reviewed the Adviser’s unaudited income statements and balance sheet information supplied by the Adviser regarding costs borne by the Adviser’s affiliates which support the operations of the Adviser but are not reflected on the unaudited income statements of the Adviser, as well as considered the profitability of the insurance products, the function of which is supported in part by the Adviser’s revenues under the Advisory Agreement, and other information and analysis prepared by the Adviser. With respect to the American Funds Bond Portfolio, American Funds Growth Portfolio, American Funds Growth-Income Portfolio, American Funds Global Small Capitalization Portfolio and American Funds International Portfolio, the Board noted that the Adviser currently does not receive an advisory fee. The Board also considered that the Distributor, MetLife Investors Distribution Company, receives 12b-1 payments to support the distribution of the products. The Board concluded after extensive discussions with management that the profitability of the Adviser and its affiliates from their relationship with each Portfolio was reasonable in light of all relevant factors.

In considering the profitability to the Sub-Advisers and their affiliates of their relationships with the Portfolios, the Board noted that the fees under the Sub-Advisory Agreements were paid by the Adviser out of the advisory fees that it receives under the Advisory Agreement. The Board also relied on the ability of the Adviser to negotiate the Sub-Advisory Agreements and the fees thereunder at arm’s length. The Board reviewed portfolio specific data with regard to the profitability of the Portfolios to each Sub-Adviser, as available, and analyzed the reasonableness of such profitability finding no indication of excessive profitability. However, the Board placed more reliance on the fact that the Sub-Advisory Agreement was negotiated at arm’s length and that the advisory fee was paid by the Adviser than on Sub-Adviser profitability.

Economies of scale. The Board also considered the effect of the Portfolios’ growth in size on their performances and fees. The Board noted that the fee schedules for all but eleven of the Portfolios contain breakpoints that reduce the fee rate above specified asset levels. The Board noted those Portfolios that did not contain breakpoints in the advisory fee and took into account management’s discussion of the same. The Board noted that those Portfolios with advisory fee schedules containing breakpoints generally reflect the inclusion of breakpoints in the sub-advisory fee schedule for such Portfolios. The Board considered the effective fees under the Advisory Agreement for each Portfolio as a percentage of assets at different asset levels and possible economies of scale that may be realized if the assets of the Portfolio grow. Among other data, the Board examined the effect of each Portfolio’s growth in size on various fee schedules and reviewed the Lipper and Bobroff Reports, which compared fee schedules among peers. The Board also took into account that the Sub-Adviser fees are paid by the Adviser out of the advisory fee. The Board also noted that if the Portfolios’ assets increase over time, the Portfolios may realize other economies of scale if assets increase proportionally more than certain other fixed expenses.

With respect to the Harris Oakmark International Portfolio, the Board noted that the Portfolio’s advisory fee and sub-advisory fee each contains breakpoints that reduce the advisory fee rate on assets above certain specified asset levels. The Board considered the fact that the Portfolio’s fee levels decline as portfolio assets increase. The Board noted that the Portfolio’s management fees are above the asset-weighted average of comparable funds at all asset levels. The Board concluded that the advisory fee structure for the Portfolio, including breakpoints, was reasonable and appropriately reflects potential economies of scale.

26

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Harris Oakmark International Portfolio

Board of Trustees’ Consideration of Advisory and Sub-Advisory Agreements—(Continued)

Other factors. As part of its evaluation of the Adviser’s compensation, the Board considered other benefits that may be realized by the Adviser and its affiliates from their relationship with the Trust. Among them, the Board recognized that an affiliate of the Adviser, MetLife Investors Distribution Company, serves as the Distributor for the Trust, and, as such, receives payments pursuant to Rule 12b-1 from the Portfolios to compensate it for providing shareholder services and selling activities, which could lead to growth in the Trust’s assets and corresponding benefits from such growth, including economies of scale. The Board also considered that affiliates of the Adviser may benefit from certain indirect tax benefits relating to dividend received deductions and foreign tax credits. The Board concluded that ancillary benefits accruing to the Adviser and its affiliates by virtue of the Adviser’s relationship with the Portfolios are fair and reasonable in light of the costs of providing investment management and other services to the Portfolios and the ongoing commitment of the Adviser to the Portfolios.

The Board considered other benefits that may be realized by each Subadviser and its affiliates from their relationship with the Trust, including the opportunity to provide advisory services to additional portfolios of the Trust and reputational benefits. The Board concluded that the benefits accruing to the Subadvisers and their affiliates by virtue of the Subadvisers’ relationships to the Portfolios are fair and reasonable in light of the costs of providing investment advisory services to the Portfolios and the ongoing commitment of the Subadvisers to the Portfolios.

The Board considered any possible conflicts of interest in the form of material benefits or detriments to the Trust resulting from the nature of the Trust’s and the Adviser’s or the Subadvisers’ affiliations. Here, the Board considered possible conflicts of interest that may arise between the Trust and the Adviser or a Subadviser in connection with the services provided to the Trust and the various relationships that they and their affiliates may have with the Trust. The Board considered the procedures for monitoring and managing such potential conflicts.

Conclusion. In considering the renewal of each of the Agreements, the Board, including the Independent Trustees, did not identify any single factor as controlling, and each Trustee may have attributed different weights to various factors. The Board evaluated all information available to them on a Portfolio-by-Portfolio basis, and their determinations were made separately with respect to each Portfolio. Based on all of the above-mentioned considerations, and the recommendations of management, the Board, including a majority of the Independent Trustees, determined that approval of the Advisory Agreement and the Sub-Advisory Agreements was in the best interests of each Portfolio. After full consideration of these and other factors, the Board, including a majority of the Independent Trustees, with the assistance of independent counsel, approved the Advisory Agreement and the Sub-Advisory Agreement with respect to each Portfolio.

27

Simplify your life…

with MetLife eDelivery^® while helping MetLife preserve the planet’s natural resources.

(see details on inside cover)

Met Investors Series Trust Janus Forty Portfolio Annual Report December 31, 2009

• get rid of all that paper?

• access important documents whenever you want?

• conveniently receive valuable information online?

Get it all with MetLife eDelivery!

MetLife’s eDelivery service is your resource for electronic delivery of your variable annuity or variable life prospectuses, semiannual and annual reports, and other information. Available to variable product clients of Metropolitan Life Insurance Company, First MetLife Investors Insurance Company, General American Life Insurance Company, MetLife Investors Insurance Company, MetLife Investors USA Insurance Company, MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut and New England Life Insurance Company.*

Why sign up for MetLife eDelivery?

It’s Free** – No cost to enroll or use the service.

It’s Paperless – We’ll email you when your documents are available.

It’s Easy – Enrollment takes just a few minutes.

How do you sign up?

Just type in www.metlife.esourcelink.net to get to MetLife’s online registration form. You will need your policy/account numbers, which can be found on your statements. The form takes only a few minutes to complete. Please note, for jointly owned contracts, both owners will need to register in order to eliminate paper delivery.

  * Not all MetLife products offer eDelivery at this time. ** Your internet provider may impose fees for this service. L0210086208[0911]

Letter from the President

Letter to Policy Holders

February 1, 2010

2009 can best be described as a year of recovery. The year began with the stock market in a broad decline and the economy mired in a deep recession. However, investors’ sentiment improved dramatically during the year as fiscal and monetary authorities took measures to jump start the economy which helped spark a strong market rally in equities and corporate bonds.

The Barclays Capital U.S. Aggregate Bond Index returned 5.9% during 2009. While this was similar to the 5.2% return experienced in 2008, the two years could not have been more different. In 2008, fear drove investors toward the safety of U.S. Treasury securities and away from the risk of corporate bonds, especially those rated below investment grade. In contrast, investors were more willing to embrace risk in 2009. This produced an enormous recovery in below investment grade bonds; the Barclays Capital U.S. Corporate High Yield Index returned over 58% in 2009 after falling 26% in 2008. The Barclays Capital U.S. Treasury Index returned 13.7% in 2008, but declined 3.6% in 2009.

Stock investors also became less pessimistic in 2009. While the stock market indices are still far from the record levels reached in 2007, investors were rewarded in 2009 as stocks returned 26.5% as measured by the Standard & Poor’s 500 Index, its best return since 2003. Foreign stocks, as measured by the MSCI EAFE Index, returned 31.8% during 2009.

On the following pages, you will find a complete review of your Portfolio and its investment performance.

MetLife is committed to building your financial freedom. We appreciate your trust and will continue to focus our efforts on meeting your investment needs.

Sincerely,

Elizabeth M. Forget

President

Met Investors Series Trust

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Janus Forty Portfolio

Managed by Janus Capital Management LLC

Portfolio Manager Commentary*

Performance

For the year ended December 31, 2009, the Janus Forty Portfolio had a return of 43.21%, 42.85% and 43.00% for Class A, B and E Shares, respectively, versus 37.21% and 26.46% for its benchmarks, the Russell 1000 Growth Index¹ and S&P 500 Index², respectively.

Market Environment / Conditions

Equity markets began the period in the midst of a significant sell-off, a continuation from the credit crisis that hit all capital markets severely in late 2008. Most indices touched the low point for the period in mid-March as evidence of an above-average contraction in the U.S. economy continued to unfold. Amid signs of stabilization in the economy and global financial system, markets rebounded strongly for much of the period. Despite a brief and slight pullback in October, broad indices finished the period significantly higher. For the year, mid cap stocks easily outpaced small and large cap stocks, which performed similarly. Growth-style indices also outperformed value indices, as information technology was easily the best performing sector within the Russell 1000 Growth Index followed distantly by materials. Consumer staples and utilities were relative laggards. Commodities generally were strongly higher during the year led by industrial metals and crude oil; natural gas finished the period with modest losses. Gold futures also touched record highs in December.

We continue to focus on businesses we believe have multiyear opportunities to grow market share and improve margins. Overall, we have been favoring higher quality, less cyclical names in the Portfolio. These are companies we view as having clean balance sheets and strong cash flows and being typically less economically sensitive.

Portfolio Review / Current Positioning

Holdings within information technology and consumer staples were the largest contributors to relative results. Apple Inc. topped the individual list. The company has been a winning position for the Portfolio for much of the year. It has been gaining market share in the PC market during a period of soft economic growth. Its iPhone and other portable devices have been market leaders as well. We believe Apple is still early in its market share gains, particularly in the high-end PC market. We also think its iPhone will remain a dominant device in the smart phone wireless market, an area we think will continue to expand.

Mobile device maker, Research In Motion Ltd. (RIM) benefited from continued strength in the smart phone market. We think the company will remain a dominant player in the growing smart phone market. In our view, RIM offers wireless carriers a compelling cost benefit while giving consumers attractive phones and applications.

Global brewer Anheuser-Busch InBev (ABI) performed well for the Portfolio for much of 2009. It has benefited from asset sales, cost cutting measures and strong earnings. We think the company will continue to make operating improvements. We like its dominant global presence in a market that has favorable pricing trends in our view. We believe there is a multiyear opportunity for the beer industry to see more rational pricing, making it an attractive industry to us. ABI is well positioned in our opinion given its dominant market share in the U.S. and Brazil, two of the most profitable beer markets in the world.

In terms of detractors, our selections within health care and an underweight in consumer discretionary provided the largest drag on relative results in 2009. Biopharmaceutical company Gilead Sciences Inc. was the largest individual detractor during 2009 amid uncertainty surrounding health-care reform. Despite this uncertainty, we believe Gilead has a strong differentiated drug franchise with its HIV-fighting drug Truvada. We also think the market for this drug is large and growing given indications of increased effectiveness when used earlier in treatment.

Wells Fargo & Co. was weak early in the year amid concerns over its capital needs. We liked Wells Fargo given our belief that it would be a survivor of the credit crisis. However, we decided to exit the position because of the potential for problems with parts of its loan portfolio and the possible need for additional capital. We felt there were better opportunities within the financials sector.

First Solar, Inc. also declined during the period. The company designs and manufactures solar modules using a thin film semiconductor technology. We were attracted to the low cost manufacturer, but recent long-term contracts it signed clouds its sales prospects and profitability in our view. We sold this position given the lack of transparency.

In terms of positioning, we were overweight financials and health care while underweight consumer-related sectors and industrials. We believe the U.S. economy continues to face challenges, despite economic data continuing to point to a recovery. While a collapse of the financial system has been averted, the foundations for a recovery in the U.S. are lacking in our view. Unemployment and underemployment remain big concerns. Banks still seem reluctant to lend and falling commercial real-estate values appear to be a drag on lending growth. We believe the developing world, particularly East Asia, South America and the Middle East, is showing strong growth in corporate and consumer spending. In addition, strong government and private-sector balance sheets seem capable of driving continued growth despite weakness in the U.S. and Western Europe. That said, we are concerned that many stock valuations at year end reflected optimistic assumptions about the economic environment.

We favor companies that we think have a distinct competitive advantage or “moat” and whose performance is more likely to be driven by company-specific fundaments than the macroeconomic environment. Many of the Portfolio’s holdings have taken advantage of dislocations in the financial markets and real economy to improve their competitive positions. We believe that positions them well to drive market share and profitability gains in most any economic environment.

1

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Janus Forty Portfolio

Managed by Janus Capital Management LLC

Portfolio Manager Commentary* (continued)

Ron Sachs, CFA

Portfolio Manager

Janus Capital Management LLC

*This commentary may include statements that constitute “forward-looking statements” under the U.S. securities laws. Forward-looking statements include, among other things, projections, estimates, and information about possible or future results related to the Portfolio, market or regulatory developments. The views expressed above are not guarantees of future performance or economic results and involve certain risks, uncertainties and assumptions that could cause actual outcomes and results to differ materially from the views expressed herein. The views expressed above are subject to change at any time based upon economic, market, or other conditions and the subadvisory firm undertakes no obligation to update the views expressed herein. Any discussions of specific securities should not be considered a recommendation to buy or sell those securities. The views expressed above (including any forward-looking statement) may not be relied upon as investment advice or as an indication of the Portfolio’s trading intent. Information about the Portfolio’s holdings, asset allocation or country diversification is historical and is not an indication of future Portfolio composition, which may vary. Direct investment in any index is not possible. The performance of any index mentioned in this commentary has not been adjusted for ongoing management, distribution and operating expenses, and sales charges applicable to mutual fund investments. In addition, the returns do not reflect additional fees charged by separate accounts or variable insurance contracts that an investor in the Portfolio may pay. If these additional fees were reflected, performance would have been lower.

Portfolio Composition as of December 31, 2009

Top Holdings

	Percent of Net Assets
Apple, Inc.	9.0%
Celgene Corp.	8.1%
Research In Motion, Ltd.	5.5%
Oracle Corp.	5.2%
Cisco Systems, Inc.	5.1%
Gilead Sciences, Inc.	5.0%
Anheuser-Busch InBev N.V.	4.7%
Google, Inc. - Class A	4.0%
CVS Caremark Corp.	3.7%
News Corp. - Class A	3.1%

Top Sectors

	Percent of Portfolio Market Value
Non-Cyclical	22.7%
Technology	18.6%
Communications	17.5%
Financials	13.3%
Short-Term Investments	12.1%
Basic Materials	4.8%
Cyclical	4.1%
Industrials	4.1%
Energy	2.8%

2

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Janus Forty Portfolio

Janus Forty Portfolio managed by Janus Capital Management LLC vs.
Russell 1000 Growth Index¹ and
S&P 500 Index²

	Average Annual Return3 (for the year ended 12/31/09)
	1 Year	3 Year	5 Year	10 Year	Since Inception4
Janus Forty Portfolio—Class A	43.21%	2.80%	5.77%	-1.56%	—
Class B	42.85%	—	—	—	0.47%
Class E	43.00%	—	—	—	0.57%
Russell 1000 Growth Index1	37.21%	-1.89%	1.63%	-3.99%	—
S&P 500 Index2	26.46%	-5.63%	0.42%	-0.95%	—

The performance of Class A shares will differ from that of the other classes of shares because of the difference in expenses paid by policyholders investing in the different share classes.

¹The Russell 1000 Growth Index is an unmanaged measure the performance of the largest capitalized U.S. companies, with the Russell 1000 companies, that have higher price-to-book ratios and higher forecasted growth values.

²The S&P 500 Index is an unmanaged index consisting of 500 stocks chosen for market size, liquidity, and industry group representation. It is a market-weighted index (stock price times number of shares outstanding), with each stock’s weight in the Index proportionate to its market value.

³“Average Annual Return” is calculated including reinvestment of all income dividends and capital gains distributions.

⁴Inception of Class A shares is 03/19/1982. Inception of Class B and Class E shares is 04/28/2007.

Past performance does not guarantee future results. The investment return and principal value of an investment in the Portfolio will fluctuate, so that shares, on any given day or when redeemed, may be worth more or less than their original cost. Performance numbers are net of all Portfolio expenses but do not include any insurance, sales, or administration charges of variable annuity or life insurance contracts. If these charges were included, the returns would be lower. The Indexes do not include fees or expenses and are not available for direct investment.

3

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Janus Forty Portfolio

Understanding Your Portfolio’s Expenses

Shareholder Expense Example

As a shareholder of the Portfolio, you incur ongoing costs, including management fees; distribution and service (12b-1) fees; and other Portfolio expenses. This example is intended to help you understand your ongoing costs (in dollars) (referred to as “expenses”) of investing in the Portfolio and compare these costs with the ongoing costs of investing in other mutual funds. The example is based on an investment of $1,000 invested at the beginning of the period and held for the entire period, July 1, 2009 through December 31, 2009.

Actual Expenses

The first line for each share class of the Portfolio in the table below provides information about actual account values and actual expenses. You may use the information in this line, together with the amount you invested in the particular share class of the Portfolio, to estimate the expenses that you paid over the period. Simply divide your account value by $1,000 (for example, an $8,600 account value divided by $1,000 = 8.6), then multiply the result by the number in the first line under the heading entitled “Expenses Paid During Period” to estimate the expenses you paid on your account during this period.

Hypothetical Example for Comparison Purposes

The second line for each share class of the Portfolio in the table below provides information about hypothetical account values and hypothetical expenses based on the Portfolio’s actual expense ratio and an assumed rate of return of 5% per year before expenses, which is not the Portfolio’s actual return. The hypothetical account values and expenses may not be used to estimate the actual ending account balance or expenses you paid for the period. You may use this information to compare the ongoing costs of investing in the Portfolio and other funds. To do so, compare this 5% hypothetical example with the 5% hypothetical examples that appear in the shareholder reports of the other funds.

Please note that the expenses shown in the table are meant to highlight your ongoing costs only and do not reflect any fees or charges of your variable insurance product or any additional expenses that participants in certain eligible qualified plans may bear relating to the operations of their plan. Therefore, the second line for each share class in the table is useful in comparing ongoing costs only, and will not help you determine the relative total costs of owning different funds. In addition, if these other costs were included, your costs would have been higher.

	Annualized Expense Ratio	Beginning Account Value 7/1/09		Ending Account Value 12/31/09		Expenses Paid During Period* 7/1/09-12/31/09
Class A
Actual	0.68%	$	1,000.00	$	1,194.80	$	3.71
Hypothetical	0.68%		1,000.00		1,021.83		3.41
Class B
Actual	0.93%	$	1,000.00	$	1,193.50	$	5.14
Hypothetical	0.93%		1,000.00		1,020.52		4.74
Class E
Actual	0.83%	$	1,000.00	$	1,194.10	$	4.65
Hypothetical	0.83%		1,000.00		1,020.97		4.28

* Expenses paid are equal to the Portfolio’s annualized expense ratio for the most recent six month period, as shown above, multiplied by the average account value over the period, multiplied by the number of days (184 days) in the most recent fiscal half-year, divided by 365 (to reflect the one-half year period).

4

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Janus Forty Portfolio

PORTFOLIO OF INVESTMENTS

December 31, 2009

(Percentage of Net Assets)

Security Description	Shares	Value
Common Stocks - 91.8%
Aerospace & Defense - 2.4%
Precision Castparts Corp.(a)	363,325	$	40,092,914
Air Freight & Logistics - 1.3%
United Parcel Service, Inc. - Class B	360,140		20,661,232
Beverages - 4.7%
Anheuser-Busch InBev N.V.	1,477,364		76,318,696
Biotechnology - 13.9%
Celgene Corp.*	2,379,342		132,481,763
Gilead Sciences, Inc.*	1,903,040		82,363,571
Vertex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.*(a)	301,870		12,935,129
			227,780,463
Capital Markets - 1.8%
Charles Schwab Corp. (The)(a)	130,531		2,456,593
Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. (The)	163,100		27,537,804
			29,994,397
Chemicals - 3.5%
Israel Chemicals, Ltd.	1,288,727		16,814,147
Monsanto Co.	503,675		41,175,431
Syngenta AG	1		280
			57,989,858
Commercial Banks - 1.6%
Standard Chartered Plc	1,063,162		26,643,259
Communications Equipment - 10.7%
Cisco Systems, Inc.*	3,517,645		84,212,421
Research In Motion, Ltd.*(a)	1,339,451		90,466,521
			174,678,942
Computers & Peripherals - 9.0%
Apple, Inc.*	700,205		147,645,226
Diversified Financial Services - 6.9%
Bank of America Corp.(a)	2,492,285		37,533,812
CME Group, Inc.(a)	102,230		34,344,168
JPMorgan Chase & Co.	971,410		40,478,655
			112,356,635
Diversified Telecommunication Services - 1.3%
Time Warner Telecom, Inc. - Class A*(a)	1,232,655		21,127,707
Electronic Equipment, Instruments & Components - 1.6%
Amphenol Corp. - Class A(a)	212,114		9,795,425
Corning, Inc.	879,030		16,974,069
			26,769,494
Food & Staples Retailing - 3.7%
CVS Caremark Corp.	1,862,952		60,005,684
Health Care Equipment & Supplies - 2.1%
Alcon, Inc.	213,100		35,022,985
Household Products - 2.0%
Colgate-Palmolive Co.	198,900		16,339,635
Reckitt Benckiser Group Plc	313,764		17,011,148
			33,350,783
Insurance - 1.6%
ACE, Ltd.	507,680		25,587,072

Security Description	Shares/Par Amount		Value
Internet Software & Services - 5.2%
Google, Inc. - Class A*		106,530	$	66,046,469
Yahoo!, Inc.*(a)		1,122,652		18,838,101
				84,884,570
Media - 3.1%
News Corp. - Class A		3,684,520		50,441,079
Metals & Mining - 1.6%
Vale S.A. (ADR)(a)		884,395		25,673,987
Multiline Retail - 0.8%
Kohl’s Corp.*(a)		238,060		12,838,576
Oil, Gas & Consumable Fuels - 3.0%
Petroleo Brasileiro S.A. (ADR)		1,071,043		48,805,866
Pharmaceuticals - 1.3%
Roche Holdings AG		129,372		21,983,830
Real Estate Management & Development - 0.7%
Hang Lung Properties, Ltd.		3,109,000		12,145,968
Software - 5.2%
Oracle Corp.		3,442,120		84,469,625
Wireless Telecommunication Services - 2.8%
America Movil S.A.B. de C.V. (ADR)		232,085		10,903,353
Crown Castle International Corp.*(a)		906,383		35,385,192
				46,288,545
Total Common Stocks (Cost $1,195,950,281)				1,503,557,393
Convertible Preferred Stock - 1.5%
Diversified Financial Services - 1.5%
Bank of America Corp. 10.000%* (Cost - $24,495,450)		1,633,030		24,364,808
Short-Term Investments - 12.9%
Mutual Funds - 5.7%
State Street Navigator Securities Lending Prime Portfolio(b)		93,679,554		93,679,554
Repurchase Agreements - 7.2%
Fixed Income Clearing Corp., Repurchase Agreement, dated 12/31/09 at 0.005% to be repurchased at $81,185,676 on 01/04/10 collateralized by $82,295,000 Federal National Mortgage Association at 3.000% due 05/12/14 with a value of $82,809,344.	$	81,185,631		81,185,631
Fixed Income Clearing Corp., Repurchase Agreement, dated 12/31/09 at 0.005% to be repurchased at $28,743,264 on 01/04/10 collateralized by $29,245,000 Federal Farm Credit Bank at 2.840% due 05/19/14 with a value of $29,318,113.		28,743,248		28,743,248
Fixed Income Clearing Corp., Repurchase Agreement, dated 12/31/09 at 0.005% to be repurchased at $3,214,322 on 01/04/10 collateralized by $3,255,000 Federal National Mortgage Association at 3.125% due 09/29/14 with a value of $3,283,481.		3,214,320		3,214,320

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

5

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Janus Forty Portfolio

PORTFOLIO OF INVESTMENTS - continued

December 31, 2009

(Percentage of Net Assets)

Security Description	Par Amount		Value
Repurchase Agreements - continued
Fixed Income Clearing Corp., Repurchase Agreement, dated 12/31/09 at 0.005% to be repurchased at $2,118,685 on 01/04/10 collateralized by $1,955,000 Federal National Mortgage Association at 5.000% due 04/15/15 with a value of $2,161,057.	$	2,118,683	$	2,118,683
Fixed Income Clearing Corp., Repurchase Agreement, dated 12/31/09 at 0.005% to be repurchased at $1,404,118 on 01/04/10 collateralized by $1,320,000 Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp. at 4.375% due 07/17/15 with a value of $1,432,200.		1,404,118		1,404,118
Total Short-Term Investments (Cost $210,345,554)				210,345,554
Total Investments - 106.2% (Cost $1,430,791,285)				1,738,267,755
Other Assets and Liabilities (net) - (6.2)%				(100,889,147	)
Net Assets - 100.0%			$	1,637,378,608

* Non-income producing security.

(a) All or a portion of security is on loan.

(b) Represents investment of collateral received from securities lending transactions.

ADR - An American Depositary Receipt is a certificate issued by a custodian bank representing the right to receive securities of the foreign issuer described. Trading on exchanges not located in the United States or Canada significantly influences the value of ADRs.

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

6

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Janus Forty Portfolio

Various inputs are used in determining the value of the Portfolio’s investments, which are as follows:

Level 1—unadjusted quoted prices in active markets for identical investments

Level 2—other significant observable inputs (including, but not limited to: quoted prices for similar investments in markets that are both active or inactive; inputs other than quoted prices that are observable such as interest rates, yield curves, credit risks, default rates, etc.)

Level 3—significant unobservable inputs based on the best information available in the circumstances, to the extent observable inputs are unavailable (including the Portfolio’s own assumptions in determining the fair value of investments)

The inputs or methodology used for valuing investments are not necessarily an indication of the risk associated with investing in them. For information about the Portfolio’s policy regarding valuation of investments and other significant accounting policies, please refer to Note 2 of the Notes to Financial Statements.

The following table summarizes the inputs used in determining the value the Portfolio’s investments as of December 31, 2009:

ASSETS VALUATION INPUTS

Description	Level 1		Level 2		Level 3		Total
Common Stocks
Aerospace & Defense	$	40,092,914	$	—	$	—	$	40,092,914
Air Freight & Logistics		20,661,232		—		—		20,661,232
Beverages		—		76,318,696		—		76,318,696
Biotechnology		227,780,463		—		—		227,780,463
Capital Markets		29,994,397		—		—		29,994,397
Chemicals		41,175,431		16,814,427		—		57,989,858
Commercial Banks		—		26,643,259		—		26,643,259
Communications Equipment		174,678,942		—		—		174,678,942
Computers & Peripherals		147,645,226		—		—		147,645,226
Diversified Financial Services		112,356,635		—		—		112,356,635
Diversified Telecommunication Services		21,127,707		—		—		21,127,707
Electronic Equipment, Instruments & Components		26,769,494		—		—		26,769,494
Food & Staples Retailing		60,005,684		—		—		60,005,684
Health Care Equipment & Supplies		35,022,985		—		—		35,022,985
Household Products		16,339,635		17,011,148		—		33,350,783
Insurance		25,587,072		—		—		25,587,072
Internet Software & Services		84,884,570		—		—		84,884,570
Media		50,441,079		—		—		50,441,079
Metals & Mining		25,673,987		—		—		25,673,987
Multiline Retail		12,838,576		—		—		12,838,576
Oil, Gas & Consumable Fuels		48,805,866		—		—		48,805,866
Pharmaceuticals		—		21,983,830		—		21,983,830
Real Estate Management & Development		—		12,145,968		—		12,145,968
Software		84,469,625		—		—		84,469,625
Wireless Telecommunication Services		46,288,545		—		—		46,288,545
Total Common Stocks		1,332,640,065		170,917,328		—		1,503,557,393
Convertible Preferred Stock
Diversified Financial Services		24,364,808		—		—		24,364,808
Short-Term Investments
Mutual Funds		93,679,554		—		—		93,679,554
Repurchase Agreements		—		116,666,000		—		116,666,000
Total Short-Term Investments		93,679,554		116,666,000		—		210,345,554
TOTAL INVESTMENTS	$	1,450,684,427	$	287,583,328	$	—	$	1,738,267,755

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

7

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Janus Forty Portfolio

Statement of Assets and Liabilities

December 31, 2009

Assets
Investments at value (a)(b)	$	1,621,601,755
Repurchase Agreements		116,666,000
Cash		240
Cash denominated in foreign currencies (c)		2,008,418
Receivable for shares sold		482,136
Dividends receivable		615,075
Interest receivable		16
Total assets		1,741,373,640
Liabilities
Payables for:
Investments purchased		7,743,147
Shares redeemed		1,504,076
Collateral for securities loaned		93,679,554
Accrued Expenses:
Management fees		864,522
Distribution and service fees - Class B		64,955
Distribution and service fees - Class E		6,381
Administration fees		8,781
Custodian and accounting fees		15,366
Deferred trustees’ fees		7,518
Other expenses		100,732
Total liabilities		103,995,032
Net Assets	$	1,637,378,608
Net Assets Represented by
Paid in surplus	$	1,570,147,529
Accumulated net realized loss		(253,636,930	)
Unrealized appreciation on investments and foreign currency transactions		307,480,694
Undistributed net investment income		13,387,315
Net Assets	$	1,637,378,608
Net Assets
Class A	$	1,271,779,938
Class B		314,838,523
Class E		50,760,147
Capital Shares Outstanding
Class A		19,638,543
Class B		5,064,351
Class E		802,556
Net Asset Value, Offering Price and Redemption Price Per Share
Class A	$	64.76
Class B		62.17
Class E		63.25

(a) Identified cost of investments, excluding repurchase agreements, was $1,314,125,285.

(b) Includes securities loaned at value of $91,640,714.

(c) Identified cost of cash denominated in foreign currencies was $2,009,361.

Statement of Operations

For the Year Ended December 31, 2009

Investment Income
Dividends (a)	$	9,421,718
Interest (b)		424,802
Total investment income		9,846,520
Expenses
Management fees		7,871,059
Administration fees		90,378
Custodian and accounting fees		162,014
Distribution and service fees - Class B		546,485
Distribution and service fees - Class E		58,057
Audit and tax services		34,627
Legal		36,350
Trustees’ fees and expenses		22,763
Shareholder reporting		152,821
Insurance		471
Miscellaneous		14,394
Total expenses		8,989,419
Less broker commission recapture		(19,265	)
Net expenses		8,970,154
Net investment income		876,366
Net Realized and Unrealized Gain (Loss) on Investments and Foreign Currency Transactions
Net realized gain (loss) on:
Investments		(5,267,266	)
Foreign currency transactions		114,257
Net realized loss on investments and foreign currency transactions		(5,153,009	)
Net change in unrealized appreciation (depreciation) on:
Investments		443,466,344
Foreign currency transactions		(115,354	)
Net change in unrealized appreciation on investments and foreign currency transactions		443,350,990
Net realized and unrealized gain on investments and foreign currency transactions		438,197,981
Net Increase in Net Assets from Operations	$	439,074,347

(a) Net of foreign withholding taxes of $366,785.

(b) Includes net income on securities loaned of $416,045.

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

8

MET INVESTORS SERIES TRUST

Janus Forty Portfolio

Statements of Changes in Net Assets

	Year Ended December 31, 2009			Year Ended December 31, 2008
Increase (Decrease) in Net Assets:
Operations
Net investment income (loss)	$	876,366		$	(174,693	)
Net realized gain (loss) on investments and foreign currency transactions		(5,153,009	)		20,473,212
Net change in unrealized appreciation (depreciation) on investments and foreign currency transactions		443,350,990			(579,555,381	)
Net increase (decrease) in net assets resulting from operations		439,074,347			(559,256,862	)
Distributions to Shareholders
From net investment income
Class A		—			(57,849,419	)
Class B		—			(5,956,735	)
Class E		—			(1,765,046	)
From net realized gains
Class A		—			(25,037,267