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

                                    FORM 10-K

                        FOR ANNUAL AND TRANSITION REPORT
                     PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(D) OF THE
                         SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

(Mark One)
[ X ]   Annual Report  pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities
        Exchange Act of 1934 for the fiscal year ended October 31, 1998.
                          
                                      or
[   ]   Transition Report pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the
        Securities Exchange Act of 1934 For the transition period from
        _________ to __________

                           Commission File No. 0-27498

                             CFM TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
             (Ex act name of registrant as specified in its charter)

             PENNSYLVANIA                              23-2786977
             ------------                              ----------
  (State or other jurisdiction of                   (I.R.S. Employer
   incorporation or organization)                 Identification Number)

             1336 ENTERPRISE DRIVE, WEST CHESTER, PENNSYLVANIA 19380
               (Address of principal executive offices) (Zip Code)

       REGISTRANT'S TELEPHONE NUMBER, INCLUDING AREA CODE: (610) 696-8300

        SECURITIES REGISTERED PURSUANT TO SECTION 12(B) OF THE ACT: NONE

           SECURITIES REGISTERED PURSUANT TO SECTION 12(G) OF THE ACT:

                           COMMON STOCK, NO PAR VALUE
                                 Title of Class

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

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

     The number of outstanding shares of the Registrant's Common Stock, no par
value per share, on January 15, 1999 was 7,855,166.

     The aggregate market value of the voting stock held by non-affiliates of
the Registrant (computed by reference to the closing price of such stock on The
Nasdaq Stock Market on January 15, 1999 of $10.9375) was approximately
$70,596,000. In making such calculation, Registrant is not making a
determination of the affiliate or non-affiliate status of any holders of shares
of Common Stock.

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE:

     Portions of the Proxy Statement for the Annual Meeting of Shareholders to
be held on March 4, 1999 are incorporated herein by reference in Part III, Items
10,11,12 and 13.


<PAGE>

                                TABLE OF CONTENTS

ITEM NO.                                                                  PAGE
--------                                                                  ----

                                     PART I
1.   Business............................................................... 3
2.   Properties.............................................................30
3.   Legal Proceedings......................................................31
4.   Submission of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders....................32
     Executive Officers of the Registrant...................................32
     
                                     PART II
5.   Markets for Registrant's Common Equity and Related Stockholder
     Matters................................................................35
6.   Selected Financial Data................................................35
7.   Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and
       Results of Operations................................................37
7a.  Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk.............47
8.   Financial Statements and Supplementary Data............................48
9.   Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and
       Financial Disclosure ................................................48
    
                                    PART III
10.  Directors and Executive Officers of the Registrant ....................48
11.  Executive Compensation ................................................48
12.  Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and
     Management ............................................................48
13.  Certain Relationships and Related Transactions ........................49

                                     PART IV
14.  Exhibits, Financial Statement Schedules and Reports
     on Form 8-K ...........................................................49

Signatures  ...............................................................E-1
Exhibits Index  ...........................................................E-2

<PAGE>


                                     PART I

ITEM 1.  BUSINESS

      CFM Technologies, Inc. and subsidiaries ("CFM" or the "Company") designs,
manufactures and markets advanced wet processing equipment for sale to the
worldwide semiconductor and flat panel display ("FPD") industries. The Company
believes that its patented Full-Flow(TM) enclosed processing and
Direct-Displacement(TM) drying technologies enable it to provide wet processing
systems that address a variety of limitations inherent in conventional systems,
including wet benches and spray tools, resulting in significantly lower cost of
ownership ("COO") for the Company's Full-Flow systems. The Company's customers
include: United Microelectronics Corporation (UMC), LG International (America)
and related entities ("LG"), Motorola, National Semiconductor, Samsung,
SGS-Thomson, Siemens, Texas Instruments, Tower Semiconductor, Anam Semiconductor
Company, Hewlett Packard and International Business Machines ("IBM").


INDUSTRY BACKGROUND

Market Overview

      Over the past two decades, increasing demand for integrated circuits
("ICs") has resulted primarily from the growth of the personal computer and data
communication markets, as well as the emergence of new markets such as wireless
communications, mobile computing and multimedia and the addition of
microprocessor control to many common consumer products such as automobiles,
kitchen appliances and audio/video equipment. In large part, this demand has
been driven by the semiconductor industry's ability to provide increasingly
complex, higher performance ICs while steadily reducing the cost per function
along with lower power consumption. These improvements in the ratio of price to
performance have been driven by advancements in semiconductor process
technology, which have enabled the cost-effective production of high density ICs
with linewidths well below 0.5 micron.

      As demand for ICs has grown, semiconductor and FPD manufacturers have
increased capacity by expanding and updating existing fabrication facilities
("fabs") and constructing new fabs. This expansion has historically exhibited
strong cyclical characteristics, and continues to do so. For example, in 1997 a
significant overcapacity situation developed in the semiconductor device market,
especially in dynamic random access memory ("DRAM") chips. This, together with
the Asian financial crisis, led to a reduction in the semiconductor capital
equipment demand as semiconductor manufacturers cancelled or postponed capacity
expansions. This situation continued into 1998 and recent industry analyst
forecasts estimate total spending for semiconductor equipment worldwide will be
down approximately 29% to $28.9 billion during 1998.



                                       3
<PAGE>


      The increasing complexity of ICs has resulted in an increase in both the
number and cost of process tools (such as steppers, etchers, furnaces and wet
processors) required to manufacture semiconductors. In a typical fab in the
1980s, the cost of equipment represented approximately 50-55% of the total
facility costs.

      Today, the total cost of an advanced fab can substantially exceed $1
billion, of which equipment costs can account for over 80%. Semiconductor
manufacturers place great pressure on process equipment manufacturers to
decrease the COO of their products. The principal elements of COO are yield,
throughput, capital costs and direct costs. Yield is primarily determined by
contamination levels and process uniformity.

      Throughput is primarily a function of the time required to complete a
process cycle, the number of wafers processed in a single batch and the handling
time between process steps. Capital costs include the cost of acquisition and
installation of the process equipment. Direct costs primarily include
consumables used in the manufacturing process and costs of cleanroom space
occupied by the equipment. Semiconductor device manufacturers must also address
environmental costs such as water usage and costs related to the control and
disposal of chemical waste and atmospheric emissions associated with operating a
fab. Measuring and maintaining an acceptable level of COO becomes increasingly
challenging as manufacturing processes become more complex and process
tolerances narrow.

      The market for FPDs has grown significantly in recent years as the result
of the increasing popularity of portable computers and other electronic devices
which utilize screens and other types of displays to provide information in
digital format and graphical displays to the end user. As consumers demand
increasingly smaller and lighter electronic devices with improved functionality,
the demand for FPDs continues to increase due to inherent advantages over
cathode ray tubes ("CRTs") with respect to size, weight and power consumption.
As the cost of FPDs declines and performance improves, the uses of FPDs are
expected to increase. Computer applications accounted for over half of the total
number of FPDs sold in 1995. According to Display Search, Inc., a market
research company, the overall market for FPDs is projected to increase from $4.7
billion in 1995 to $23 billion in 2002.

Wet Processing in Semiconductor Manufacturing

      The manufacture of semiconductors requires a large number of complex
process steps during which layers of electrically insulating or conducting
materials are created or deposited on the surface of a silicon wafer. Before and
after many of these steps, it is necessary to clean, etch, strip or otherwise
condition the surface of the wafer in order to remove unwanted material or
surface contamination in preparation for a subsequent process step. SEMATECH, a
consortium of semiconductor manufacturers, has estimated that over 300
fabrication steps are required to manufacture advanced logic ICs, and that
approximately 55 of these steps are accomplished by wet processing.


                                       4
<PAGE>

      The following table identifies the typical wet processing steps in
semiconductor manufacturing:

  CRITICAL CLEANING       CRITICAL ETCHING
    APPLICATIONS            APPLICATIONS         PHOTORESIST STRIP APPLICATIONS
Initial wafer clean       Silicon oxide etch     Concentrated acid
Pre-diffusion clean       Polysilicon etch       chemistry resist
Pre-oxidation clean       Silicon nitride etch     strip/post-ash clean
Pre-thin film                                    Solvent chemistry resist
  deposition clean                                 strip/post-ash clean
Post-CMP clean                                     (back-end)
                                              

      The above wet processing steps have traditionally been accomplished using
wet benches and spray tools. Advanced wet benches utilize a succession of open
chemical baths and extensive robotic automation to move wafers from one chemical
or rinse bath to the next. Spray tools subject wafers to sequential spray
applications of chemicals as the wafers are spun inside an enclosed chamber. The
Company believes that these conventional wet processing methods are subject to a
number of inherent limitations, including:

      Particle Contamination. Submicron ICs are extremely sensitive to small
amounts of particle contamination which can result in poor device performance or
even failure. As device geometries become smaller, the reduction of particle
contamination has become an increasingly critical factor in maximizing yield.
Open-bath wet benches are exposed to the cleanroom environment and therefore are
susceptible to external contamination. Since particles tend to reside on the
surfaces of liquids due to surface tension, the movement of wafers in and out of
liquids can result in the transfer of particles to the wafer surfaces through a
"skimming" effect. The tendency to add particles from air-liquid transitions is
inherent in wet benches due to multiple immersions and withdrawals and in spray
processing where each spray droplet striking the wafer surface can act as a
separate miniature immersion and withdrawal.

      Watermark Defects and Native Oxide Growth. Both wet benches and spray
tools subject the surface of wafers or substrates to repeated wetting and
evaporative drying, creating watermark defects on the surface that can
significantly impact device performance and interfere with subsequent process
steps.

      Process Control Limitations. Process liquids in wet benches and spray
tools are subject to evaporation and absorption of atmospheric gases. As a
result, it is difficult to achieve precise repeatability of process results.
Additionally, wafers and FPD substrates in a wet bench must be robotically
transferred from bath to bath through the cleanroom atmosphere. This gap in
processing during transport adds variability due to the effects of wafer and
substrate exposure to the cleanroom atmosphere.

      Large Physical Size. The cost of cleanroom space is a significant
component in the overall COO calculation for a specific piece of equipment. Wet
benches configured for the multiple-step wet processes required by many
manufacturers can be up to 30 feet in length.



                                       5

<PAGE>

     Increases in process complexity or in wafer or FPD substrate size will
likely require even larger wet benches.

     Environmental Impact. Due to the large volume of the open baths which
comprise a wet bench and the need for multiple wet processing steps to
manufacture increasingly complex ICs, wet benches typically consume large
quantities of water during processing. Water costs represent a significant
portion of the total cost of cleaning. Additionally, in many wet bench
processes, large amounts of chemicals are utilized. The open nature of the baths
in a typical wet bench necessitates expensive ventilation and air filtration
systems in order to remediate chemical fume emissions. As a result,
municipalities and environmental authorities are increasingly concerned by water
consumption and chemical fume emissions by fabs. Due to the continuing reduction
of semiconductor device geometries and the escalating cost of leading edge fabs,
the Company believes that semiconductor and FPD manufacturers are becoming
increasingly sensitive to the foregoing limitations inherent in conventional wet
processing methods.


THE CFM SOLUTION

      The Company's systems are based on its proprietary Full-Flow wet
processing technology and are used to perform various cleaning, stripping and
etching process steps in the manufacture of semiconductors and FPDs. In the
Company's Full-Flow wet processing system, up to 100 wafers or 50 FPD substrates
automatically load into a fully-enclosed, flow-optimized vessel that has a lower
fluid inlet and an upper fluid outlet. The Full-Flow system process chamber is
fabricated to conform to the size of silicon wafers or FPD substrates used by
the customer. Once a selected process is begun, the vessel is completely filled
with fluid at all times, with fluids flowing through the vessel one directly
after another without exposing the wafers or substrates to air.

      The Company believes that its patented Full-Flow enclosed processing and
Direct-Displacement drying technologies result in superior process performance
and lower COO by offering the following advantages over conventional wet
processing systems:

      Reduced Particle Contamination. Full-Flow processing takes place in a
fully-enclosed processing vessel which isolates the wafers or substrates from
the external cleanroom environment and associated contaminants. Additionally,
particle contamination through particle skimming is substantially reduced. Since
a Full-Flow system is capable of directly displacing one chemical or rinse step
with the next without draining the vessel, it can eliminate the air-liquid
interfaces (where particles tend to reside) that normally occur in wet benches
and spray tools. The wafers or substrates are kept completely immersed in fluid
until they are ready to be dried using the Company's patented in situ
Direct-Displacement drying technology.

      Substantial Elimination of Watermark Defects and Native Oxide Growth. The
formation of watermarks is substantially eliminated through the prevention of
water evaporation from the wafer or substrate surface. Once the chemical
treatment of the wafers or substrates is completed, drying is accomplished using
CFM's patented Direct-Displacement drying technology.


                                       6
<PAGE>

With this technique, the final rinse water is directly displaced with highly
purified isopropyl alcohol ("IPA") vapor and substantially all water is forced
off the surface of the wafer before it is exposed to an air environment.
Additionally, native oxide growth is suppressed by degassifying the water
immediately before it enters the vessel. Since the vessel itself is totally
enclosed, the ultra pure water in the vessel is not able to absorb oxygen,
carbon dioxide and other gases from the cleanroom environment. As a result, the
gas content of the water at the surface of the wafers or substrates is much
lower than that typically found in a wet bench or spray tool.

      Tight Process Control. Process precision and repeatability result in large
part from the ability to control accurately the physical and chemical properties
of the processing liquids as well as transitions between process steps.

      Full-Flow processing is performed in a completely enclosed vessel, thereby
substantially reducing variability of the processing liquids such as water and
chemical evaporation and absorption of atmospheric gases. Additionally, because
one process liquid directly displaces the previous one, there is no exposure to
the cleanroom atmosphere between process steps.

      Cleanroom Space Savings. The Full-Flow system has been designed to consume
a minimum amount of cleanroom space. System support modules can be located
outside the cleanroom and away from the vessel module. In many fabs, this means
that these support modules can be located in the basement, further reducing the
amount of square footage that is required on the main floor of the fab where
floor space is most expensive. A dual vessel Full-Flow system capable of
processing 100 8-inch wafers in each of two vessels requires approximately 13
linear feet of cleanroom wall space and makes no direct usage of cleanroom floor
space when flush-mounted. This is significantly less than the space requirements
of a wet bench with a similar processing capacity, which the Company believes
can require up to 350 square feet of total cleanroom floor space and
approximately 35 linear feet of cleanroom wall space.

      Environmental Advantages. The Company believes that the Full-Flow system
utilizes less than one-half of the water required by traditional wet bench
systems performing similar processing steps. Additionally, most of the water in
wet bench systems flows around the wafer carrier rather than across the surface
of the wafers. In the Company's flow-optimized Full-Flow systems, substantially
less water is lost as bypass flow. The fully-enclosed Full-Flow system also
reduces the amount of process chemicals consumed and the equipment and related
costs of remediation of chemical fume emissions associated with traditional wet
processing.


STRATEGY

      The Company's objective is to become a leading supplier of advanced wet
processing equipment to the worldwide semiconductor and FPD industries. The
Company intends to achieve this objective by focusing on the following key
elements of its strategy.


                                       7

<PAGE>

      Increase Current Market Share. The Company seeks to continue to expand its
share of the semiconductor critical cleaning and etching wet processing market
through significant expansion of its sales and marketing and customer
satisfaction efforts. Significant effort has been expended to increase the
Company's responsiveness to customer needs. Feedback from the customer community
has been positive with regard to these efforts. The Company also intends to
continually improve its existing Full-Flow platform in order to offer enhanced
technical capabilities and lower COO benefits for currently served critical wet
processing applications. The high throughput version of the Full-Flow platform
that was recently introduced for resist stripping and post-ash cleaning has met
with positive response from customers due to significant cost of ownership
advantages. In 1998, the Company also delivered its first production tool for
processing 300mm wafers, which are expected to be the next standard wafer size.

      Broaden Semiconductor Market Penetration. The Company intends to leverage
its Full-Flow platform to address additional wet processing applications in the
semiconductor manufacturing process where it believes its proprietary technology
can provide important benefits over competing wet processing technologies. By
basing new process applications on this platform, the Company is able to focus
primarily on the development and optimization of each application's process
recipes. The Company believes this approach significantly reduces the time and
cost associated with entering new wet processing market segments. An additional
semiconductor wet processing application identified by the Company is
solvent-based cleaning, in which CFM's fully-enclosed Full-Flow processing
vessel would provide the important benefit of controlling chemical fume
emissions.

      Further Penetrate FPD Market. The Company believes that its Full-Flow
platform is particularly well suited for Indium Tin Oxide ("ITO") etching and
photoresist stripping applications in the manufacture of FPD's due to its
advanced capabilities, its significantly lower use of water and chemicals
relative to comparable wet bench processes, its ability to successfully process
very large substrates and its substantially smaller footprint which saves
increasingly valuable cleanroom floor space. The Company believes that the FPD
market represents an opportunity for increasing sales of its systems.

      Focus on Customer Satisfaction. The Company believes that its commitment
to customer satisfaction has been a critical factor in its success to date. To
ensure a high level of customer satisfaction, the Company provides comprehensive
customer service and support, thorough customer training and ongoing process
consultation. The Company has already developed a comprehensive customer service
and support organization, and has invested in this area by locating direct sales
and service staff in Europe in 1996 and in East Asia in 1997. The Company also
intends to continue to increase the utilization of its applications laboratory
to design and test new processes and equipment features. Finally, the Company
has provided a Full-Flow system completely dedicated to training the Company's
customers and employees at its West Chester headquarters.

      Continue Commitment to Worldwide Markets. The Company believes that its
long-term success is substantially dependent on its ability to compete on a
worldwide basis. As such, the Company intends to continue to focus on expanding
its sales activities in each of the primary worldwide markets for semiconductor
and FPD capital equipment.



                                       8
<PAGE>

To date, the Company has achieved considerable success in selling to customers
outside the United States, with international sales accounting for over 60% of
total sales in 1996 and 1997 and 46% of total sales in 1998.


PRODUCTS

     The Company's systems are based on its proprietary wet processing
technology and are used to perform various cleaning and etching process steps in
the manufacture of semiconductors and FPDs.

     The Full-Flow Product Platform. The Company's proprietary
Direct-Displacement drying technology is embodied in its Full-Flow platform,
which principally consists of a fully-enclosed processing vessel incorporating
megasonic technology and associated systems software, hardware and control
electronics. Megasonic technology utilizes high frequency sonic energy to
enhance particle removal from the surface of semiconductor wafers and FPD
substrates during wet processing, enabling a quicker process cycle and a
significant reduction in the quantity of process chemicals used. The Company
believes that its Full-Flow platform offers significant improvements in process
performance and a lower COO relative to competing technologies. Conventional wet
bench processes used for many wet processing applications rely on a succession
of open chemical baths and extensive robotic automation to move semiconductor
wafers or FPD substrates from one chemical bath to the next, which exposes them
to contamination.

     In the Company's Full-Flow system, wafers or FPD substrates are loaded
automatically into a fully-enclosed flow-optimized processing vessel that has a
lower fluid inlet and an upper fluid outlet. They are completely isolated from
cleanroom air and accompanying contaminants as a succession of process fluids
are introduced into the processing vessel one directly after another, flowing
over the wafers or FPD substrates to complete the desired process application.
Once processing is completed, wafers or FPD substrates are dried in situ using
the Company's patented Direct-Displacement drying process. With this technique,
the final rinse water is directly displaced with highly purified IPA vapor and
substantially all water is forced off the surface of the wafers or substrates
before they are exposed to an air environment.

     This process substantially eliminates evaporative drying defects such as
watermarks, inhibits native oxide growth and significantly reduces particle
contamination. In competing technologies, wafers or substrates are exposed to
intermediate evaporative drying within the cleanroom atmosphere prior to the
completion of the final drying process. The optimized flow characteristics of
the Full-Flow processing vessel and the advanced process control and monitoring
capabilities of the Full-Flow platform provide process uniformity and
repeatability. Also, the Company's Full-Flow systems can be flush-mounted in the
cleanroom wall, with the majority of the floor space needed by the system
components located outside the cleanroom environment. Due to this flush-mounting
and the Full-Flow system's comparatively smaller size, it requires significantly
less expensive cleanroom floor space than competing wet bench systems. The
Company's Full-Flow systems are based on a modular design and can be configured
to accomplish a broad range of wet processing applications using a variety of
process and support modules offered by the Company. By basing new process
applications on its proprietary Full-Flow platform, the Company can focus
primarily on the development and optimization of each application's process
recipes.


                                       9
<PAGE>

     The Company believes this approach significantly reduces the time and cost
associated with developing new products to address additional market
opportunities.

     The following tables list the Company's product offerings:

                      CFM FULL-FLOW PLATFORM CONFIGURATIONS

FULL-FLOW MARKETS          CONFIGURATION     CAPACITY      LIST PRICE RANGE
-----------------          -------------     --------      ----------------

Semiconductor ..........   Single vessel     50 wafer      $1.2 - $1.5 million
                           Single vessel    100 wafer      $1.4 - $1.7 million
                           Dual vessel       50 wafer      $1.8 - $2.3 million
                           Dual vessel      100 wafer      $2.2 - $2.7 million
Flat panel display .....   Single vessel     40 panel      $2.0 - $2.8 million
                           Dual vessel       80 panel      $2.5 - $4.1 million

Automation options and custom system configurations are provided at additional
cost.

Semiconductor Manufacturing Applications

      The Company first introduced its Full-Flow systems for use in
semiconductor manufacturing research and development facilities in 1988, and
shipped its first system for use in semiconductor production lines in 1990. To
date, the Company has sold over 130 Full-Flow systems to more than 30
manufacturers. Full-Flow systems can currently be configured with either one or
two vessels, each of which can be designed to accommodate 100mm, 150mm, 200mm or
300mm wafers.

      A flush-mounted Full-Flow system configured with dual processing vessels
requires approximately 39 square feet of cleanroom floor space and approximately
13 linear feet of cleanroom wall space. The Company believes that a competing
wet bench system with similar capabilities can require up to 350 square feet of
total cleanroom floor space and approximately 35 linear feet of cleanroom wall
space. Additionally, the Company believes that its Full-Flow systems can
typically achieve substantial reductions in the usage of water and chemicals
when compared to wet benches performing similar applications.

      SEMATECH has estimated that over 300 fabrication steps may be required to
manufacture advanced logic ICs and that approximately 55 of these steps require
wet processing. The following table identifies the typical wet processing steps
in semiconductor manufacturing and indicates those which the Company's Full-Flow
systems currently perform (in bold).



                                       10

<PAGE>


  CRITICAL CLEANING        CRITICAL ETCHING          PHOTORESIST STRIP
     APPLICATIONS            APPLICATIONS               APPLICATIONS
     ------------            ------------               ------------
                                               
INITIAL WAFER CLEAN      SILICON OXIDE ETCH     CONCENTRATED ACID CHEMISTRY
PRE-DIFFUSION CLEAN      POLYSILICON ETCH         RESIST
PRE-OXIDATION CLEAN      Silicon nitride etch   STRIP/POST-ASH CLEAN(FRONT-END)
PRE-THIN FILMS                                  Solvent chemistry resist
 DEPOSITION CLEAN                                 strip/post-ash clean(back end)
Post-CMP clean                                 
                                              
      For classification purposes, the process to fabricate a semiconductor
device (without testing or packaging) is divided into two major phases referred
to as "front-end" and "back-end." Front-end steps are those that are performed
to fabricate individual components within an IC such as transistors. Back-end
steps are those that involve the creation of metal patterns on the wafers in
order to connect these individual components and create the IC. For a
high-performance logic IC, approximately 60% of the wet processing steps are
front-end and the balance are back-end.

      Critical Cleaning Applications. Critical cleans are those wet processing
steps that are performed in the front-end to remove surface contamination prior
to performing highly sensitive fabrication steps such as gate oxidation or
diffusion. The Company believes that approximately 40% of the wet processing
operations in the front-end fall into this category. To date, most of the
Company's Full-Flow systems have been purchased by semiconductor manufacturers
for use in these applications.

      Critical Etching Applications. Wet processing is also commonly used in the
front-end to etch the surface of the wafer to remove silicon dioxide or other
surface material. It is generally important to tightly control the exact amount
of material removed and the uniformity of the etch. The Company believes that
approximately 20% of the wet processing steps in the front-end involve etching.
These etching steps are often performed as part of a wet clean rather than as
stand-alone operations, and as such, most of the Full-Flow systems sold by the
Company to date are also performing critical etching applications.

      Photoresist Strip Applications. Photoresist stripping operations involve
the removal of either virgin or ashed photoresist from the surface of wafers
after a patterning step has been completed. Resist stripping is performed in
both the front-end and the back-end, and the Company believes that this process
represents approximately 40% of all wet processing operations. Front-end cleans
and resist strips are generally performed with aqueous chemistries. However,
back-end cleans and resist strips must be accomplished with different
chemistries that often utilize solvents, since front-end water-based chemistries
are incompatible with the metal present on wafers in the back-end.

      In both cases, resist stripping operations are driven as much by cost as
by process performance. Production shipments of the Company's enhanced
throughput Full-Flow system, the Full-Flow 8100, capable of processing up to 100
8-inch (200mm) inch wafers per vessel, began in April 1996. For a nominally
higher system sales price, this system provides all the advantages of Full-Flow
technology with double the throughput of its predecessor.


                                       11
<PAGE>

       Since the Full-Flow system already utilizes the chemistries required for
front-end stripping, the Company believes that the throughput and other COO
advantages provided by this enhanced system make it attractive for use in
front-end resist strip applications. In 1996 and 1997, the Company delivered
such systems for use in front-end applications including resist stripping. Early
in fiscal 1998, the Company announced the Full-Flow 8150, capable of processing
150 eight inch wafers in a single enclosed vessel. A dual vessel version is
expected to be available for shipment late in fiscal 1999. These systems have
the same footprint and water and chemical consumption as a Full-Flow 8100,
offering customers a significant increase in productivity with little or no
increase in direct operating costs.

      Future Applications. Approximately 40% of semiconductor wet processing
operations are performed in the back-end and are comprised primarily of
solvent-based cleans and solvent-based resist strips. The Company believes that
its Full-Flow systems offer a range of attractive benefits for many of these
applications, especially as process requirements become more demanding and
regulatory restrictions on the release of chemical fumes become more stringent.
Furthermore, the Company believes that its proprietary Direct-Displacement
drying method is well suited for drying wafers with complex topographies that
often exist in the back-end.

FPD Manufacturing Applications.

      The Company believes that its Full-Flow platform is suited for ITO etching
and photoresist stripping applications in the manufacture of FPD's due to its
advanced capabilities, its significantly lower use of water and chemicals
relative to comparable wet bench processes, its ability to successfully process
very large substrates and its substantially smaller footprint which saves
increasingly valuable cleanroom floor space. Additionally, the Company has sold
fifteen FPD systems to four manufacturers.

      As a result of the rapidly increasing demand for FPDs, the Company
developed a high-throughput FPD processing system based on it Full-Flow
platform. This Full-Flow FPD system, which was first shipped in April 1996, has
been designed to process up to 50 FPD substrates per vessel. The system is
available in a dual vessel configuration capable of processing up to 100
substrates simultaneously.


CUSTOMERS

      The Company sells its systems to leading semiconductor manufacturers
located in the United States, Europe and East Asia. Sales to IBM, Anam
Semiconductor Company, Siemens, National Semiconductor and Hewlett-Packard
accounted for approximately 19.6%, 14.8%, 13.3%, 10.4% and 10.3% of net sales in
fiscal 1998. Sales to LG and Siemens accounted for approximately 21.3%
and 11.3%, respectively, of net sales in fiscal 1997.

      The Company expects a significant portion of its future sales to remain
concentrated within a limited number of customers. The Company's results of
operations could be materially adversely affected by any loss of business from,
the cancellation, reduction or delay (including due to market, economic or
competitive conditions in the semiconductor or FPD industries) of orders by, or
decreases in prices of systems sold to, any of its major customers. The
Company's arrangements with its customers are generally on a purchase order
basis and not pursuant to long term contracts. While the Company actively
pursues new customers, there can be no assurance that the Company will be
successful in its efforts, and any significant weakening in customer demand
would have a material adverse effect on the Company. See Part II, Item 7-
"Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations Overview" and Note 13 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial
Statements, included elsewhere in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.


                                       12
<PAGE>

SALES AND MARKETING

     The Company sells its systems through a combination of a direct sales force
and East Asian sales agents. The Company's field service personnel support its
sales force.

     In North America, the Company utilizes a direct sales force. In addition to
the direct sales force at the Company's headquarters in West Chester,
Pennsylvania, the Company has direct sales personnel located in Georgia, Texas,
California and Arizona. The Company employs a direct salesperson in France and
also supports the European market through its North American direct sales force.
The Company covers the Asian market with a director of sales and marketing for
Asian sales and a direct salesperson based in Singapore. The Company signed
agreements with PKL Ltd. in 1996, which markets in Korea, Innotech Corporation
("Innotech") in 1992, the Company's agent in Japan, Ampoc Far East Company
Limited ("AMPOC") in 1996, a sales agent in Taiwan, Silicon International Ltd
("Silicon International") in 1997, the Company's sales distributor in the
Peoples Republic of China, and Aneric Enterprise Pte Ltd. ("Aneric") in 1997,
the Company's sales agent in other areas of southeast Asia. See Part III, Item
13 - "Certain Relationships and Related Transactions."

     Although the Company believes that it has good relationships with its sales
agents and distributors, there can be no assurance that these relationships will
continue. In the event of a termination of any of the Company's existing agency
or distribution arrangements, the Company's strategy of worldwide expansion and
its results of operations could be adversely affected.


CUSTOMER SATISFACTION

     The Company believes that high quality customer support, customer training
and process consultation are key elements in the creation of customer
satisfaction. The Company also believes that product reliability, as it is
perceived by the individual customer technician, manager and executive, is
strongly correlated with customer satisfaction and the resulting decisions to
select the Company's technology and its products for broad application within
that individual customer's area of personal authority. The Company has made
substantial investments in its customer support, customer training, customer
communication and reliability engineering and testing programs and intends to
continue to make such investments in the future.

     The Company's customer satisfaction organization is headquartered in West
Chester, Pennsylvania, with additional employees and consultants located in
Arizona, California, Colorado, Texas, Vermont, France, Germany, Taiwan and the
United Kingdom. PKL Ltd., Innotech, AMPOC, Silicon International Ltd and Aneric
Enterprise Pte. Ltd. provide service to customers located in Korea, Japan,
Taiwan the Peoples Republic of China and Southeast Asia, respectively.



                                       14
<PAGE>

     The Company's support personnel generally have prior technical backgrounds
in the mechanical, electronic or chemical processing industries and prior
experience or training in semiconductor manufacturing processes. These field
personnel are supported by the Company's manufacturing and engineering personnel
during system installation and initial process validation. Field support
personnel also perform warranty and after-warranty service and sales support.
The Company's products are typically sold with a 12 month warranty covering all
parts and labor, which commences upon completion of installation and final
acceptance.


BACKLOG

      The Company manages its production forecast using both backlog and
projected system orders. The Company includes in backlog only customer purchase
orders which have been accepted by the Company and for which shipment dates have
been assigned within the following 12 months. Orders are generally subject to
delay without penalty, but may contain cancellation penalties. As of October 31,
1998, the Company's backlog was approximately $8.8 million. The backlog is for
sales of systems to semiconductor manufacturers. At October 31, 1997, the
Company's backlog was approximately $21.8 million, approximately one-half of
which was subsequently postponed or cancelled as a result of the industry
over-capacity situation which developed during 1998. It has been the experience
of the Company that neither the backlog nor the pattern of receipt of orders is
necessarily indicative of future orders or revenues.


RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT AND ENGINEERING

      CFM utilizes its applications and component testing laboratories in West
Chester, Pennsylvania to test new equipment and processes, design new features
and train customer and Company personnel. By basing new applications on its
proprietary Full-Flow platform, the Company can reduce substantially the time
and cost required to develop new process applications by focusing primarily on
the optimization of each application's process recipe. The Company is currently
focusing its research, development and engineering efforts on equipment to
support additional wet process applications, to extend the productivity of the
current platform, to improve system reliability and to extend the Full-Flow
platform to larger substrate sizes. In early 1998 the Company introduced the
8150, which increases system throughput by 50% over the Full-Flow 8100. In April
1998, the Company completed development, process demonstration and has shipped
the first 300mm Full-Flow system, largely based on the 8100 platform. See
"--Forward Looking Statements and Risk Factors--Dependence Upon Product
Development."

      The markets in which the Company and its customers compete are
characterized by rapidly changing technology, evolving industry standards and
continuous improvements in products and services. Because of continual changes
in these markets, the Company believes that its future success will depend, in
part, upon its ability to continue to improve its systems and its process
technologies and to develop new system applications which compete effectively on
the basis of COO, including yield, throughput, capital and direct costs and
system performance. In addition, the Company must adapt its systems and
processes to technological changes in order to support the standards required by
emerging target markets.



                                       14
<PAGE>

      The success of new system introductions is dependent on a number of
factors, including timely completion of designs, ultimate system performance
achieved by those designs and market acceptance. There can be no assurance that
the Company will be able to improve its existing systems and process
technologies or develop new system applications. The Company's research,
development and engineering expenses for the 1996, 1997 and 1998 fiscal years
were $4.4 million, $9.3 million and $11.5 million, respectively, representing
10.0%, 12.3% and 34.7% of net sales, respectively. Research, development and
engineering expenses were net of reimbursements of $1,592,000, $890,000 and $0,
respectively, for the 1996, 1997 and 1998 fiscal years.


COMPETITION

      The Company faces substantial competition in its market segments from both
established competitors and potential new entrants. The Company believes that
the primary competitive factors in the markets in which it competes are customer
satisfaction, yield, throughput, capital and direct costs, system performance,
size of installed base and breadth of product line. The Company believes that it
competes favorably with respect to each of these factors. The Company also faces
the challenge posed by semiconductor and FPD manufacturers' commitment to
competing technologies.

       Most of the Company's competitors have been in business longer than the
Company, offer traditional wet processing technology, and have broader product
lines, more experience with high volume manufacturing, broader name recognition,
substantially larger installed bases and significantly greater financial,
technical and marketing resources than the Company. In the semiconductor wet
processing market, the Company competes primarily with Dainippon Screen, FSI
International, SCP Global Technologies, STEAG Microtech, Inc., S.E.S. Co., Ltd.,
SubMicron Systems, Semitool, Tokyo Electron Limited and Verteq. In the FPD wet
processing market, the Company competes primarily with Dainippon Screen, Shimada
and Shibaura. There can be no assurance that these competitors will not also
develop enhancements to or future generations of competitive products that will
offer price or performance features that are superior to the Company's systems
or that the Company's products will gain market acceptance.

      The Company believes that in order to remain competitive, it must invest
significant financial resources in developing new product features and
enhancements and in maintaining customer satisfaction worldwide. In marketing
its products, the Company will face competition from suppliers employing new
technologies in order to extend the capabilities of competitive products beyond
their current limits or increase their productivity. Once a manufacturer has
selected a particular vendor's capital equipment, the Company believes that the
manufacturer generally relies upon that equipment for a specific production line
application and frequently will attempt to consolidate related capital equipment
requirements with the same vendor, to the degree that such consolidation is
possible. In addition, increased competitive pressure could lead to intensified
price-based competition, resulting in lower prices and margins, which would
materially adversely affect the Company's business and results of operations.


                                       15
<PAGE>

MANUFACTURING

      The Company's manufacturing operations are based in West Chester,
Pennsylvania and consist of procurement, assembly and test engineering. During
fiscal 1996, the Company completed an expansion of its manufacturing operations,
which resulted in a 150% increase in production capacity. An additional
temporary expansion took place in fiscal 1997 in a separate building within the
same industrial park in West Chester and resulted in a further 50% increase in
production capacity. In June 1998, operations in this temporary expansion area
were consolidated with the Company's other manufacturing operations.

      The Company entered into a non-cancellable agreement to lease a 60,000
square foot production facility in Exton, Pennsylvania in fiscal 1997, which
will more than double current production capacity. The facility was
substantially completed as of October 31, 1998 and monthly rentals began in
October 1998. Occupancy of the new production facility is planned for the second
quarter of fiscal 1999.

      The Company's Full-Flow systems are based upon a common set of modules,
enabling the Company to reduce manufacturing costs by using a large number of
common subassemblies and components. Many of the major subassemblies are
purchased complete from outside sources. The Company focuses its manufacturing
efforts on carefully documented assembly and integration activities which the
Company has determined to be critical to the successful operation of its
products.

      In 1994, as a result of adoption of SEMATECH measurement and improvement
methodologies, the Company began a concerted effort to meet the requirements of
ISO 9001, the international standard for quality systems. In February 1997, the
Company received ISO 9001 certification.

     Certain of the Company's components and subassemblies are obtained from
sole suppliers or limited groups of suppliers, which are often small,
independent companies. Moreover, the Company believes that certain of these
components and subassemblies can only be obtained from its current suppliers.
The Company generally acquires such components on a purchase order basis and has
supply contracts of up to one year in duration. The Company's reliance on
outside vendors generally, and on sole suppliers in particular, involves several
risks, including a potential inability to obtain an adequate supply of required
components and reduced control over pricing, timely delivery and quality of
components. The Company has experienced and continues to experience some
reliability and quality problems with certain key components and subassemblies
provided by single source suppliers. Because the manufacture of certain of these
components and subassemblies is a complex process and can require long lead
times, there can be no assurance that delays or shortages caused by suppliers
will not occur. Historically the Company has not experienced any significant
delays in manufacturing due to an inability to obtain components, and the
Company is not currently aware of any specific problems regarding the
availability of components which might significantly delay the manufacturing of
its systems in the future. However, any inability to obtain adequate or timely
deliveries or any other circumstance that would require the Company to seek
alternative sources of supply or, if possible, to manufacture such components
internally could delay the Company's ability to ship its systems and could have
a material adverse effect on the Company. See "-Forward Looking Statements-Sole
or Limited Sources of Supply."


                                       16
<PAGE>


REGULATORY MATTERS

      The Company is subject to a variety of federal, state and local laws,
rules and regulations relating to the use, storage, discharge and disposal of
hazardous chemicals used in its research, development and engineering
activities. The Company believes that it is currently in compliance in all
material respects with such laws, rules and regulations. However, failure to so
comply could result in substantial liability to the Company, suspension or
cessation of the Company's operations, restrictions on the Company's ability to
expand at its present location or requirements for the acquisition of additional
equipment or other significant expense. To date, the cost of compliance with
environmental rules and regulations has not had a material effect on the
Company's operations.


INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY

      The Company relies on a combination of patent, copyright, trademark, and
trade secret laws, nondisclosure agreements, and other forms of intellectual
property protection to protect its proprietary technology. The Company currently
holds twelve patents in the United States, eight patents in Japan, one patent in
Korea, one patent in Singapore, and fourteen patents in various European
countries. The Company also has multiple patent applications pending in the
United States and various foreign jurisdictions.

      The technology covered in the existing patents includes the Company's
Full-Flow process and Direct-Displacement drying technologies upon which the
Company's current product offerings are based. While the Company recognizes that
these patents have significant value, the Company also believes that the
innovative skills, technical expertise and know-how of its personnel in applying
the art reflected in these patents would be difficult, costly, and time
consuming to reproduce.

      In the United States, the Company has asserted its U.S. Patent No.
4,911,761 (the " `761 patent") for Direct-Displacement drying against
defendants in two actions alleging infringement, inducement of infringement, and
contributory infringement of the patent. The Company also is both a defendant
and a counterclaim plaintiff in a third litigation where the plaintiff seeks a
declaratory judgment of non-infringement and that the `761 patent is invalid
and the Company has counterclaimed alleging infringement, inducement of
infringement, and contributory infringement of both the `761 patent and U.S.
Patent Nos. 4,778,532 (the "`532 patent") and 4,917,123 (the "`123 patent").

      On July 10, 1995, the Company filed an action against STEAG Microtech,
Inc., ("STEAG"), entitled CFMT, INC. AND CFM TECHNOLOGIES, INC. V. STEAG
MICROTECH, INC., Civil Action No. 95-CV442, in the United States District Court
for the District of Delaware. The Company sought damages and a permanent
injunction to prevent further infringement. STEAG Microtech, Inc., denied
infringement and asserted, among other things, that the `761 patent is
invalid and unenforceable. On December 12, 1997, following a two-week trial, the
jury returned a verdict that STEAG Microtech, Inc. willfully infringed the
`761 patent and that the patent was not invalid. The jury awarded the
Company damages of $3,105,000, which amount may be increased as a result of a
final accounting and interest and pending appeal, has not been paid.


                                       17
<PAGE>


      The District Court subsequently upheld the jury's verdict and entered
final judgment and a permanent injunction in the Company's favor. STEAG
Microtech, Inc. has appealed the verdict and various rulings to the Court of
Appeals for the Federal Circuit. The Company filed a cross appeal on the grounds
that the District Court erred in denying the Company's request for enhancement
of damages pursuant to 35 U.S.C. ss.ss. 284 and 285. The parties are currently
briefing the issues on appeal.

      On  September 11,  1995, the Company  brought an action against  YieldUP
International Corp.  ("YieldUP"),  entitled CFMT, INC. AND CFM TECHNOLOGIES,
INC. V.  YIELDUP  INTERNATIONAL  CORP.,  Civil Action  No. 95-549-RRM,  in the
United States  District Court for the District of Delaware.  The Company seeks
damages and a permanent  injunction  to prevent  further  infringement  of its
patant.  YieldUP  has  denied  infringement  and  has  asserted,  among  other
things, that the subject patent is invalid and unenforceable.

      On October 14, 1997, the District Court issued a decision granting summary
judgment in favor of YieldUP on the grounds that the process used in YieldUP's
processing equipment does not infringe the `761 patent. The District Court
subsequently granted the Company's request for reargument of the decision, and
the Company and YieldUP have submitted additional briefs on the issue. The
District Court has not issued a decision on the reargued summary judgment
motion.

      In March 1997, Dainippon Screen Mfg. Co. Ltd. and DNS Electronics LLC
(collectively "DNS") filed an action against the Company entitled DAINIPPON
SCREEN MANUFACTURING CO., LTD. AND DNS ELECTRONICS, LLC V. CFMT, INC. AND CFM
TECHNOLOGIES, INC., Civil Action No. 97-20270 JW in the United States District
Court for the Northern District of California. In this action, DNS requested the
Court to declare that DNS does not infringe the `761 patent and that the
patent is invalid and unenforceable. DNS sought monetary damages and injunctive
relief for alleged violations of the Lanham Act, unfair competition, tortious
interference with prospective economic advantage, and unfair advertising. The
Court dismissed this action on the grounds of lack of personal jurisdiction and
absence of an indispensable party. DNS appealed this ruling, and the appellate
court reversed the district court decision as to the patent causes of action on
April 29, 1998. This portion of the case has been returned to the United States
District Court for the Northern District of California, and the causes of action
relating to the Lanham Act, unfair competition, tortious interference with
prospective economic advantage, and unfair advertising have been dismissed. The
Company has answered the complaint brought by DNS and has counterclaimed,
alleging infringement by DNS of the `532, `123, and `761 patents. Discovery is
presently ongoing with a claims construction hearing set for September 10, 1999,
and trial currently set to begin May 1, 2000.

      There can be no assurance that when the foregoing proceedings are
completed any of the claims of the patents in suit will be found to encompass
use of the competitors' products or that the subject patents will not be found
to be unenforceable or invalid. A finding of invalidity or unenforceability
could result in the Company's competitors being able to develop products using
the Company's proprietary technology, which in turn could have a material
adverse effect on the Company. Further, there can be no assurance that any
rights granted under any of the Company's patents will provide adequate
protection to the Company, or that the Company will have sufficient resources to
continue to prosecute its rights in the current actions or others.

      Furthermore,  in Europe,  STEAG Microtech,  Inc. has filed nullification
proceedings  against the Company's  drying patents in Germany  (DE68921757.8),
the UK (EP428,784),  France (EP428,784),  The Netherlands (23184), and Ireland
(66389).   The  Company  is   proceeding  to  defend  these   patents.   These
proceedings  could result in the  nullification  of the subject patents in the
respective countries.


                                       18
<PAGE>

      The Company announced on January 4, 1999, that it filed a lawsuit in
Federal Court in Wilmington, Delaware charging patent infringement of the `123
and `532 patents against YieldUP. The Company is seeking a permanent injunction
preventing YieldUP from using, making or selling equipment that violates these
patents and requests damages for past infringement.

      Although there are no other pending lawsuits against the Company regarding
infringement of any existing patents or other intellectual property rights or
any claims that the Company is infringing intellectual property rights of
others, there can be no assurance that such infringement claims will not be
asserted by parties in the future. Also, there can be no assurance in the event
of any such claims of infringement that the Company will be able to obtain
licenses on reasonable terms.

      The Company's involvement in any patent dispute or other intellectual
property dispute or action to protect trade secrets and know-how could result in
a material adverse effect on the Company's business. Adverse determinations in
the pending litigation or any other litigation in which the Company may become
involved could subject the Company to expenses in defending its intellectual
property rights and significant liabilities to third parties, require the
Company to grant licenses to or seek licenses from third parties, and prevent
the Company from manufacturing and selling its products. Any of these situations
could have a material adverse effect on the Company.


EMPLOYEES

      As of October 31, 1998, the Company had 283 employees, of which 278 were
full-time and the balance part-time employees. There were 75 employees in
manufacturing operations, 70 in research, development and engineering, 25 in
sales and marketing, 79 in customer satisfaction and field support and 34 in
general administrative and finance positions. Of the 278 total full-time
employees, 8 were located in Asia and 15 were located in Europe.

      While the Company has generally been able to find qualified candidates to
fill new positions, personnel shortages occasioned by the strong economy and low
unemployment continue to make it more difficult to recruit qualified candidates
for certain positions in design, field support, testing and process engineering.
Once replacement personnel are recruited, the Company then faces the task of
training and integrating these new employees. There can be no assurance that the
Company will be successful in retaining or recruiting, training and integrating
the necessary key personnel following the end of the current downturn in the
semiconductor equipment sector, and any failure to expand these areas in an
efficient manner could have a material effect on the Company's results of
operations. None of the Company's employees is represented by a labor union and
the Company has never experienced a work stoppage, slowdown or strike. The
Company considers its relationships with its employees to be good.


FORWARD LOOKING STATEMENTS AND RISK FACTORS

      Statements in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, including those concerning
the Company's expectations of future sales, gross profits, research, development
and engineering expenses, selling, general and administrative expenses, product
introductions and cash requirements, include certain forward-looking statements.
As such, actual results may vary materially from such expectations.



                                       19
<PAGE>

      Factors which could cause actual results to differ from expectations
include variations in the level of orders which can be affected by general
economic conditions and growth rates in the semiconductor and FPD manufacturing
industries and in the markets served by the Company's customers, the
international economic and political climates, difficulties or delays in product
functionality or performance, the delivery performance of sole source vendors,
the timing of future product releases, failure to respond adequately to either
changes in technology or customer preferences, changes in pricing by the Company
or its competitors, ability to manage growth, risk of nonpayment of accounts
receivable, changes in budgeted costs or failure to realize a successful outcome
in pending patent litigation, all of which constitute significant risks. For a
description of additional risks, see below. There can be no assurance that the
Company's results of operations will not be adversely affected by one or more of
these factors.


Fluctuations in Operating Results

      The Company incurred a net loss of approximately $11.8 million in fiscal
1998 due primarily to a decline in sales. The Company has derived substantially
all of its net sales from the sale of a limited number of wet processing systems
which typically have list prices, before automation options and custom
configurations, ranging from $1.2 million to $2.7 million per system. Systems
with automation options and custom configurations can be priced in excess of
$4.1 million per system. At the Company's current revenue level, each sale or
failure to make a sale can have a material effect on the Company. A
cancellation, rescheduling or delay in a shipment near the end of a particular
quarter may cause net sales in that quarter to fall significantly below the
Company's expectations and thus may materially adversely affect the Company's
operating results for such quarter. Other factors which may lead to fluctuations
in the Company's quarterly and annual operating results include: market
acceptance of the Company's systems and its customers' products; the number of
systems being manufactured during any particular period; the geographic mix of
sales; the mix of sales by distribution channel; the timing of announcement and
introduction of new systems by the Company and its competitors; a downturn in
the market for personal computers or other products incorporating semiconductors
and FPDs; variations in the types of systems sold; product discounts and changes
in pricing; delays in deliveries from suppliers; delays in orders due to
customers' financial difficulties; and volatility in the semiconductor and FPD
industries and the markets served by the Company's customers.

      Also, customers may face competing capital budget considerations, thus
making the timing of customer orders uneven and difficult to predict. The
economic crisis in Asia has had and may continue to have a material effect on
the Company's operating results. Many of the factors listed above are beyond the
control of the Company.

      In addition, continued investments in research, development and
engineering and the development of a worldwide sales, marketing and customer
satisfaction organization will result in significantly higher fixed costs. There
can be no assurance that the Company will be able to achieve a rate of growth or
level of sales in any future period commensurate with its level of expenses. The
impact of these and other factors on the Company's operating results in any
future period cannot be forecast with any degree of certainty. Due to the
foregoing factors, the Company has experienced and it is likely that in some
future quarter or quarters the Company will continue to experience operating
results may be below the expectations of analysts and investors. In such event,
the price of the Company's Common Stock would likely be materially adversely
affected. See Item 7 and "Business-Industry Background and Part II, Item 7".


                                       20
<PAGE>

Acceptance by Customers of New Technology

      The Company's products all rely upon proprietary technology to accomplish
wet chemical processing during semiconductor or FPD manufacturing, which
technology is significantly different from the technological approaches in
current usage for these processes. Most of the Company's competitors make use of
established technology with competitive product variations. The semiconductor
industry is especially resistant to the introduction of changes in process or
approach in a manufacturing cycle which is quite long (up to twelve weeks),
consists of many separate process events (up to 300 or more) and suffers from
limited control measurement points during the overall fabrication process.
Accordingly, managers of semiconductor fabs have exhibited a strong resistance
to changing equipment and have been reluctant to embrace new technology,
including the Company's Full-Flow systems. Because a substantial investment is
required by semiconductor manufacturers to install and integrate capital
equipment into a semiconductor production line, these manufacturers will tend to
choose semiconductor equipment suppliers based on past relationships, product
compatibility and proven operating performance. Once a manufacturer has selected
a particular vendor's capital equipment, the Company believes that the
manufacturer generally relies upon that equipment for a specific production line
application and frequently will attempt to consolidate related capital equipment
purchases with the same vendor, to the degree that such consolidation is
possible. Many semiconductor and FPD manufacturers continue to extract marginal
improvements from existing wet processing technology in order to address issues
such as increases in feature density, reductions in line width and planned
increases in wafer size. There can be no assurance that the Company's products
will achieve broad market acceptance. See "Business-Industry Background" and
"Business-Products."


Customer Concentration

      Historically, relatively few customers have accounted for a substantial
portion of the Company's net sales. Sales to IBM, Anam Semiconductor Company,
National Semiconductor, Siemens and Hewlett-Packard accounted for approximately
19.6%, 14.8%, 13.3%, 10.4% and 10.3% of net sales in fiscal 1998. The Company
expects a significant portion of its future sales to remain concentrated within
a limited number of customers. The Company's arrangements with its customers are
generally on a purchase order basis and not pursuant to long-term contracts.
There can be no assurance that the Company will be able to retain its major
customers or that such customers will not cancel or reschedule orders or that
canceled orders will be replaced by other sales. A cancellation, reduction or
delay in orders from any of the Company's significant customers, including
cancellations, reductions or delays due to market, economic or competitive
conditions in the semiconductor or FPD industries, or the loss of any such
customers, could have a material adverse effect upon the Company's results of
operations. See "Business-Customers."


                                       21
<PAGE>


Sole or Limited Sources of Supply

      The Company relies to a substantial extent on outside vendors to
manufacture and supply many of the components and subassemblies used in the
Company's systems. Certain of these components and subassemblies are obtained
from a sole supplier or a limited group of suppliers, many of which are small,
independent companies. Moreover, the Company believes that certain of these
components and subassemblies can only be obtained from its current suppliers.
The Company's reliance on outside vendors generally and a sole or a limited
group of suppliers in particular, involves several risks, including a potential
inability to obtain an adequate supply of required components and reduced
control over pricing, timely delivery and quality of components. The Company has
experienced and continues to experience some reliability and quality problems
with certain key components and subassemblies provided by single source
suppliers. Because the manufacture of certain of these components and
subassemblies is a complex process and requires long lead times, there can be no
assurance that delays or shortages caused by suppliers will not occur. The
process of obtaining and qualifying replacement suppliers could be lengthy, and
no assurance can be given that any additional sources would be available to the
Company on a timely basis. Any inability to obtain adequate or timely deliveries
of components and subassemblies which conform to the Company's reliability and
quality requirements or any other circumstance that would require the Company to
seek alternate sources of supply or, if possible, to manufacture such components
internally could delay the Company's ability to ship its systems and could have
a material adverse effect on the Company. See "Business-Manufacturing."


Dependence on Limited Product Offerings

      To date, the Company's net sales have consisted primarily of sales to the
semiconductor industry, although the Company has developed and is now selling a
version of its Full-Flow system for use in FPD manufacturing.

      The ability of the Company to diversify its operations through the
introduction and sale of system enhancements with new applications is dependent
upon the success of the Company's continuing research, development and
engineering activities, as well as its marketing efforts. The Company's
continued sales growth will depend upon achieving market acceptance of its
Full-Flow systems and future products.

      There can be no assurance that the Company will be able to develop,
introduce or market new systems or system enhancements in a timely or
cost-effective manner or that any such systems or enhancements will achieve
market acceptance. See "Business-Products."


                                       22
<PAGE>

Dependence on Product Development

      The markets in which the Company and its customers compete are
characterized by rapidly changing technology, evolving industry standards and
continuous improvements in products and services. In order to remain competitive
in the future, the Company will need to develop and commercialize additional
cleaning and etching processes based on its Full-Flow platform. Further, the
Company will need to develop new products which are capable of supporting
customers' increasingly complex process requirements and which compete
effectively on the basis of overall COO, including process performance and
capital productivity. The market for FPD manufacturing equipment presents an
additional challenge as the technology is at an earlier stage and subject to
more rapid evolution.

      The success of new system introductions is dependent on a number of
factors, including timely completion of new system designs, system performance
and market acceptance, and may be adversely affected by manufacturing
inefficiencies associated with the start up of such new introductions and the
challenge of producing systems in volume which meet customer requirements.
Because it is generally not possible to predict the time required and costs
involved in reaching certain research, development and engineering objectives,
actual development costs could exceed budgeted amounts and estimated product
development schedules may require extension. Any delays or additional
development costs could have a material adverse effect on the Company's business
and results of operations. There can be no assurance that the Company will
successfully develop and introduce new products or enhancements to its existing
products on a timely basis or in a manner which satisfies potential customers or
achieves widespread market acceptance.

      Because of the large number of components in, and the complexity of, the
Company's systems, significant delays can occur between the introduction of
systems or system enhancements and the commencement of commercial shipments. The
Company has from time to time experienced delays in the introduction of, and
certain technical and manufacturing difficulties with, certain of its systems
and enhancements, and may experience such delays and technical and manufacturing
difficulties in future introductions or volume production of new systems or
enhancements. The Company's inability to overcome such difficulties, to meet the
technical specifications of any new systems or enhancements, or to manufacture
and ship these systems or enhancements in volume and in a timely manner, would
materially adversely affect the Company's business and results of operations, as
well as its customer relationships. In addition, the Company from time to time
incurs unanticipated costs to ensure the functionality and reliability of its
products early in their life cycles, which costs can be substantial. If new
products or enhancements experience reliability or quality problems, the Company
could encounter a number of difficulties, including reduced orders, higher
manufacturing costs, delays in collection of accounts receivable and additional
service and warranty expenses, all of which could materially adversely affect
the Company's business and results of operations. See "Business-Products and
Business-Research, Development and Engineering."


Management of Growth

      The Company has previously undergone periods of rapid growth. It is
possible that a recovery in the semiconductor capital equipment sector could be
marked with another period of rapid growth. To accommodate this growth, the
Company would face the task of identifying, recruiting, training and integrating
new employees quickly enough to keep pace with such rapid growth, should it
occur. Many of the positions which are critical to supporting such growth
require experience with semiconductor and FPD capital equipment and recruitment
of such experienced personnel can be quite difficult. Another period of rapid
growth may also strain the Company's management, manufacturing, financial and
other resources. Any failure to expand these areas in an efficient manner in
response to such growth, should it occur, could have a material adverse effect
on the Company. See "Business-Employees".



                                       23
<PAGE>

Dependence upon Personnel

           The success of the Company depends to a large extent upon the efforts
of key managerial and technical employees. The loss of services of any of these
persons could have a material adverse effect on the Company. The Company has not
entered into written employment agreements with any of its executive officers
other than its chief financial officer and Vice President - Engineering, nor
does the Company maintain key man life insurance on any of its personnel. In
addition, the success of the Company will also depend upon its ability to
attract and retain qualified employees, particularly highly skilled design and
process engineers involved in the manufacture of existing systems, the
development of new applications and systems and the installation, training and
maintenance related to those systems already installed at customer sites. There
can be no assurance that the Company will be successful in retaining or
recruiting, training and integrating the necessary personnel to support its
anticipated growth, which could have a material adverse effect on the Company's
results of operations. See "Business-Employees," and "Executive Officers of the
Registrant."

Lengthy Sales Cycle

     Sales of the Company's systems depend upon the decision of a prospective
customer to increase manufacturing capacity. These decisions typically involve
significant capital commitments or a change in process approach, which may
require the approval of a customer's senior management. The amount of time from
the initial contact with the customer to the first order is typically one to two
years. The Company's ability to obtain orders from potential customers has
depended in the past and may continue to depend in the future upon customers
purchasing a new system in order to evaluate Full-Flow and Direct-Displacement
drying technologies as an alternative to existing wet processing technologies.
For many potential customers, decisions to undertake such evaluations occur
infrequently. The Company often experiences delays in finalizing further system
sales while the customer evaluates and receives approvals for the purchase of
additional systems. Such delays may include the time necessary to plan, design
or complete a new or expanded fab. Due to these factors, the Company's systems
typically have a lengthy sales cycle during which the Company may expend
substantial funds and management effort.

     There can be no assurance that any of these expenditures or efforts on the
part of the Company will result in sales. See "Business-Products" and
"Business-Competition."


                                       24
<PAGE>

Volatility of the Semiconductor Industry

     The Company's business depends, in significant part, upon capital
expenditures by manufacturers of semiconductor devices, which in turn depend
upon the current and anticipated market demand for such devices and the products
utilizing such devices. The semiconductor industry has been highly volatile and
historically has experienced periods of oversupply, resulting in significantly
reduced demand for capital equipment, including wet processing systems. The
industry's present over capacity situation began during the period between 1995
and 1997 when a significant number of new or expanded fabs were brought into
production, creating a significant over-supply of capacity and declining prices
for devices, especially DRAM.

     These events have caused certain semiconductor manufacturers to postpone or
cancel equipment deliveries to previously planned expansions or new fab
construction projects which, in turn, has resulted, according to industry
analyst in a 29% decline in the worldwide sales of semiconductor capital
equipment. In addition, certain market analysts project limited growth in
expenditures for semiconductor capital equipment in 1999. Historically, a
significant portion of the Company's sales have been to Asian companies. The
recent economic crisis in Asia has had a material adverse effect on the
Company's operating results. The Company experienced the cancellation of an
order for a single system early in fiscal 1998, however, there can be no
assurance that further order cancellations or reductions in order growth or the
level of overall orders for semiconductor capital equipment will not have a
further material adverse effect upon the Company's business or results of
operations. The Company believes that the FPD market is similarly volatile. The
need for continued investment in research, development and engineering,
marketing and customer satisfaction activities may limit the Company's ability
to reduce expenses in response to continued or future downturns in the
semiconductor or FPD industries. The Company's net sales and results of
operations could be materially adversely affected if other downturns or
slowdowns in the semiconductor or FPD markets occur in the future.

International Sales

     Sales to customers located outside the United States accounted for
approximately 46% of the Company's net sales in fiscal 1998 and over 60% in
fiscal years 1997 and 1996. The Company anticipates that such international
sales are subject to numerous risks, including United States and international
regulatory requirements and policy changes, political and economic instability,
increased installation costs, difficulties in accounts receivable collection,
exchange rates, tariffs and other barriers, extended payment terms, difficulty
in staffing and managing international operations, dependence on and
difficulties in managing international distributors or representatives and
potentially adverse tax consequences.

     Furthermore, although the Company endeavors to meet technical standards
established by foreign regulatory bodies, there can be no assurance that the
Company will be able to comply with such standards in the future. In addition,
the laws of certain other countries may not protect the Company's intellectual
property to the same extent as the laws of the United States. Beginning January
1, 1999, eleven of the fifteen member countries of this European Union
established fixed conversion rates between their existing sovereign currencies
and the new currency, the Euro Dollar. The Company believes there will be no
material impact on its operating results as a result of the Euro currency
conversion.


                                       25
<PAGE>

     As part of its efforts to penetrate the East Asia market, the Company
entered into its first distributor agreement with PKL in Korea in 1996, a
distribution agreement with Innotech in Japan in 1992, a sales agent agreement
with AMPOC in Taiwan in 1996, a sales representation agreement with Aneric in
southeast Asia in 1997 and a sales agency agreement with Silicon International
in the Peoples Republic of China in 1997.

     Although management believes that it maintains good relationships with PKL,
Innotech, AMPOC, Silicon International and Aneric, there can be no assurance
that these relationships will continue. In the event of a termination of any of
the Company's representation, agency or distribution arrangements, the Company's
international sales could be adversely affected. Although the Company's sales
are curently denominated in United States dollars, to the extent that the
Company expands its international operations or changes its pricing practices to
denominate prices in international currencies, the Company will be exposed to
increased risks of currency fluctuation. Historically, a significant portion of
the Company's sales have been to Asian companies. The recent economic crisis in
Asia has had a material adverse effect on the Company's operating results.
Additionally, a strengthening in the value of the United States dollar in
relation to international currencies may adversely affect the Company's future
sales to international customers. There can be no assurance that any of these
factors will not have a material adverse effect on the Company. See
"Business-Sales and Marketing" and Part II, Item 7- "Management's Discussion and
Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations Overview."


Highly Competitive Industry

     The Company faces substantial competition in its market segments from both
established competitors and potential new entrants. The Company believes that
the primary competitive factors in the markets in which the Company competes are
yield, throughput, capital and direct costs, system performance, size of
installed base, breadth of product line and customer satisfaction, as well as
customer commitment to competing technologies. Most of the Company's competitors
have been in business longer than the Company, offer traditional wet processing
technology, and have broader product lines, more experience with high volume
manufacturing, broader name recognition, substantially larger installed bases
and significantly greater financial, technical and marketing resources than the
Company. In the semiconductor wet processing market, the Company competes
primarily with Dainippon Screen, FSI International, SCP Global Technologies,
STEAG Microtech, Inc., SubMicron Systems, Tokyo Electron Ltd., S.E.S. Co., Ltd.
and Verteq.

      In the FPD wet processing market, the Company competes primarily with
Dainippon Screen, Shimada and Shibaura. There can be no assurance that the
Company will overcome the established positions of these competitors or that the
Company's competitors will not develop enhancements to or future generations of
competitive products that will offer price and performance features that are
superior to the Company's systems. The Company believes that in order to remain
competitive, it must invest significant financial resources in developing new
product features and enhancements and in maintaining customer satisfaction
worldwide.


                                       26
<PAGE>

     In marketing its products, the Company will face competition from suppliers
employing new technologies in order to extend the capabilities of competitive
products beyond their current limits or increase their productivity.

     In addition, increased competitive pressure could lead to intensified
price-based competition, resulting in lower prices and margins, which would
materially adversely affect the Company's business and results of operations.
See "Business-Competition."

Intellectual Property Rights

     The Company relies on a combination of patents, copyrights, trademarks and
trade secrets, nondisclosure agreements and other forms of intellectual property
protection to defend its proprietary technology. Although the Company believes
that its patents and trademarks may have value, the Company recognizes that its
future success will depend primarily on the innovation, technical expertise and
marketing abilities of its personnel. The Company currently holds 12 patents in
the United States, 24 international patents, and has patent applications pending
or under evaluation in the United States and various foreign jurisdictions.

     In the United States, the Company has asserted its U.S. Patent No.
4,911,761 (the " `761 patent") for Direct-Displacement drying against defendants
in two actions alleging infringement, inducement of infringement and
contributory infringement of the patent. The Company also is both a defendant
and a counterclaim plaintiff in a third litigation where the plaintiff seeks a
declaratory judgment of non-infringement and that the `761 patent is invalid and
the Company has counterclaimed alleging infringement, inducement of
infringement, and contributory infringement of each of the `761 patent and U.S.
Patent Nos. 4,778,532 (the "`532 patent") and 4,917,123 (the "`123 patent").

     On July 10, 1995, the Company filed an action against STEAG Microtech, Inc.
("STEAG"), entitled CFMT, INC. AND CFM TECHNOLOGIES, INC. V. STEAG MICROTECH,
INC., Civil Action No. 95-CV442, in the United States District Court for the
District of Delaware. The Company sought damages and a permanent injunction to
prevent further infringement. STEAG Microtech, Inc. denied infringement and has
asserted, among other things, that the `761 patent is invalid and unenforceable.
On December 12, 1997, following a two-week trial, the jury returned a verdict
that STEAG Microtech, Inc. willfully infringed the `761 patent and that the
patent was not invalid. The jury awarded the Company damages of $3,105,000. The
District Court subsequently upheld the jury's verdict and entered final judgment
and a permanent injunction in the Company's favor. STEAG Microtech, Inc. has
appealed the verdict and various rulings by the District Court to the Court of
Appeals for the Federal Circuit.

      The Company filed a cross appeal on the grounds that the District Court
erred in denying the Company's request for enhancement of damages pursuant to 35
U.S.C. ss.ss. 284 and 285. The parties currently are briefing the issues on
appeal.

      On September 11, 1995, the Company brought an action against YieldUP
International Corp. ("YieldUP"), entitled CFMT, INC. AND CFM TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
V. YIELDUP INTERNATIONAL CORP., Civil Action No. 95-549-RRM, in the United
States District Court for the District of Delaware. The Company seeks damages
and a permanent injunction to prevent further infringement. YieldUP has denied
infringement and has asserted, among other things, that the subject patent is
invalid and unenforceable. On October 14, 1997, the District Court issued a
decision granting summary judgment in favor of YieldUP on the grounds that the
process used in YieldUP's processing equipment does not infringe the `761
patent. The District Court subsequently granted the Company's request for
reargument of the decision, and the Company and YieldUP have submitted
additional briefs on the issue. The District Court has not issued a decision on
the reargued summary judgment motion.

                                       27
<PAGE>

      In addition to the two suits initiated by the Company, a third competitor,
Dainippon Screen Mfg. Co. Ltd. and DNS Electronics LLC (collectively, "DNS")
filed a suit against the Company in March 1997, in an action entitled DAINIPPON
SCREEN MANUFACTURING CO., LTD. AND DNS ELECTRONICS, LLC V. CFMT, INC. AND CFM
TECHNOLOGIES, INC., Civil Action No. 97-20270 JW in the United States District
Court for the Northern District of California. In this action, DNS requested the
Court to declare that DNS does not infringe the `761 patent and that the
patent is invalid and unenforceable. DNS sought monetary damages and injunctive
relief for alleged violations of the Lanham Act, unfair competition, tortious
interference with prospective economic advantage, and unfair advertising. The
Court dismissed this action on the grounds of lack of personal jurisdiction and
absence of an indispensable party. DNS appealed this ruling as to the patent
causes of action, and the appellate court reversed the district court decision
on April 29, 1998. This portion of the case has been returned to the district
court, although the causes of action relating to the Lanham Act, unfair
competition, tortious interference with prospective economic advantage, and
unfair advertising have been dismissed. The Company has answered DNS's complaint
and has counterclaimed, alleging infringement by DNS of the `532, `123, and `761
patents. Discovery is presently ongoing with a claims construction hearing set
for September 10, 1999, and trial currently set to begin May 1, 2000.

      Furthermore,  in Europe,  STEAG Microtech,  Inc. has filed nullification
proceedings  against the Company's  drying patents in Germany  (DE68921757.8),
the UK (EP428,784),  France (EP428,784),  The Netherlands (23184), and Ireland
(66389).   The  Company  is   proceeding  to  defend  these   patents.   These
proceedings  could  result in the  nullification  of any or all of the subject
patents in the respective countries.

      The Company announced on January 4, 1999, that it filed a lawsuit in
Federal Court for the District of Wilmington, Delaware alleging patent
infringement of the `123 and `532 patents against YieldUP.

      The Company is seeking a permanent injunction preventing YieldUP from
using, making or selling equipment that violates these patents and requests
damages for past infringement.

      In all of these cases, there can be no assurance that any claim of the
subject patents will be finally adjudged to encompass use of the competitors'
product or that the subject patent will not be found to be unenforceable or
invalid during prosecution of the actions. A finding of invalidity or
unenforceability could result in the Company's competitors developing products
using the Company's proprietary technology, which in turn could have a material
adverse effect on the Company. The Company believes that these proceedings, even
if completely successful, will be costly to the Company in terms of both
financial and management resources.

     There can be no assurance that additional patents will be issued on the
Company's pending applications or that competitors will not legitimately be able
to ascertain proprietary information embedded in the Company's products, which
is not covered by patent or copyright. In such case, the Company may be
precluded from preventing its competitors from making use of such information.
There are no pending lawsuits or claims against the Company regarding
infringement of any existing patents or other intellectual property rights of
others. There can be no assurance, however, that such infringement claims will
not be asserted in the future, nor can there be any assurance, if such claims
are made, that the Company will be able to defend such claims successfully or,
if necessary, obtain licenses on reasonable terms. Adverse determinations in any
litigation naming the Company could subject the Company to significant
liabilities to third parties, require the Company to seek licenses from third
parties, and prevent the Company from manufacturing and selling its systems. Any
of these events could have a material adverse effect on the Company.



                                       28
<PAGE>

Environmental Regulation.

      The Company is subject to a variety of federal, state and local laws,
rules and regulations relating to the use, storage, discharge and disposal of
hazardous chemicals used during its research, development and engineering
activities. The Company believes that it is currently in compliance in all
material respects with such laws, rules and regulations. However, failure to so
comply could result in substantial liability to the Company, suspension or
cessation of the Company's operations, restrictions on the Company's ability to
expand its operations or requirements for the acquisition of additional
equipment or other significant expense, any of which could have a material
adverse effect on the Company. See "Business-Manufacturing."


Volatility of Stock Price.

      The Company believes that a variety of factors could cause the price of
the Company's Common Stock to fluctuate, perhaps substantially, including:
announcements of developments related to the Company's business; quarterly
fluctuations in the Company's actual or anticipated operating results and order
levels; general conditions in the semiconductor and FPD industries or the
worldwide economy; announcements of technological innovations; new products or
product enhancements by the Company or its competitors; developments in patents
or other intellectual property rights and litigation; and developments in the
Company's relationships with its customers, distributors and suppliers. In
addition, in recent years the stock market in general and the market for shares
of small capitalization and semiconductor industry-related stocks in particular
have experienced extreme price fluctuations which have often been unrelated to
the operating performance of affected companies. Any such fluctuations in the
future could adversely affect the market price of the Company's Common Stock.
The Company's stock price has declined from $17.4375 on January 20, 1998 to
$10.9375 as of January 15, 1999. There can be no assurance that the market price
of the Common Stock of the Company will not decline.


Year 2000 Issues

      There can be no assurances that the Company will not experience serious
unanticipated negative consequences and/or material costs caused by undetected
errors or defects in technology used in its products or internal systems, which
are comprised predominantly of third party software and hardware, or by the
inability of third parties to adequately disclose and correct their Year 2000
issues. While the Company presently believes that the ultimate outcome of its
efforts to be Year 2000 ready will not have a material effect on the Company's
current financial position, liquidity or operations, there can be no assurances
that unanticipated increased costs could have a material effect on the results
of operations. See Part II, Item 7- "Management's Discussion and Analysis of
Financial Condition and Results of Operations - Year 2000."


                                       29
<PAGE>

ITEM 2. PROPERTIES

      In fiscal 1998, the Company conducted its manufacturing in a 26,000 square
foot facility which it owns in West Chester, Pennsylvania and a temporary 13,941
square foot facility that it leased. The lease on the 13,941 square foot
facility expired in June 1998. The Company entered into a non-cancellable
agreement to lease a 60,000 square foot production facility located in Exton,
Pennsylvania in fiscal 1997. This new facility was substantially completed as of
October 31, 1998 and monthly rentals began in October 1998. Occupancy of this
facility is expected to occur in the second fiscal quarter of 1999. The Company
is seeking a tenant for approximately 7,000 square feet of this building. Once
the new Exton, Pennsylvania facility is fully operational, the Company plans to
convert its 26,000 square foot facility in West Chester, Pennsylvania to a
multi-use facility that will continue to house an existing applications
laboratory. This applications laboratory is used for research and development
and as a marketing tool for prospective customers to test new processes using
the Company's patented technology.

      The Company also leases a 32,000 square foot prototype laboratory and
storage facility. This lease expires in June 1999 at which time the Company will
vacate the facility.

      In January 1996, the Company commenced occupancy of a 38,400 square foot
leased office building located in the same industrial park as its manufacturing
facility to serve as the new location for its engineering, sales and marketing,
customer satisfaction and administration activities. The lease expires in
November 2000. The Company is actively seeking a tenant to sublease this
building beginning in mid-1999.

      In April 1997, the Company leased an 8,023 square foot facility in the
same industrial park as its manufacturing facility for its customer satisfaction
staff. The lease on this facility expires in March 1999 at which time the
Company will vacate the facility.

      In fiscal 1997, the Company entered into a non-cancelable agreement to
lease a 80,000 square foot office facility to be built for the Company in Exton,
Pennsylvania, adjacent to its new 60,000 square foot production facility. The
Company plans to move the majority of its engineering, sales and marketing,
customer satisfaction and administrative functions to this new facility upon
completion. Occupancy of the office facility is expected to occur in mid-1999.
The Company is actively seeking a tenant for approximately 20,000 square feet of
this building beginning in mid-1999. See Note 15 of the Notes to Consolidated
Financial Statements. The Company believes that suitable additional space, if
ultimately needed, will be available on terms acceptable to the Company.


                                       30
<PAGE>

ITEM 3. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS

     The Company has asserted claims of its U.S. Patent No. 4,911,761 (the 
" `761 patent") against defendants in two actions, CFMT, INC. AND CFM
TECHNOLOGIES, INC. V. STEAG MICROTECH, INC., Civil Action No. 95-CV442 and CFMT,
INC. AND CFM TECHNOLOGIES, INC. V. YIELDUP INTERNATIONAL CORP., Civil Action No.
95-549-RRM, alleging infringement, inducement of infringement, and contributory
infringement of the patent. In addition, the Company is also both a defendant
and a counterclaim plaintiff in a third litigation, DAINIPPON SCREEN
MANUFACTURING CO., LTD. AND DNS ELECTRONICS, LLC V. CFMT, INC. AND CFM
TECHNOLOGIES, INC., Civil Action No. 97-20270 JW, where the plaintiff seeks a
declaratory judgment of non-infringement and that the `761 patent is invalid and
the Company has counterclaimed alleging infringement, inducement of
infringement, and contributory infringement of both the `761 patent and U.S.
Patent Nos. 4,778,532 (the "`532 patent") and 4,917,123 (the "`123 patent").

      On July 10, 1995, the Company filed an action against STEAG Microtech,
Inc. ("STEAG") in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware.
The Company sought damages and a permanent injunction to prevent further
infringement. STEAG Microtech, Inc. denied infringement and has asserted, among
other things, that the `761 patent is invalid ANd unenforceable. On December
12, 1997, following a two-week trial, the jury returned a verdict that STEAG
Microtech, Inc. willfully infringed the `761 patent and that the patent was
not invalid. The jury awarded the Company damages of $3,105,000.

      The District Court subsequently upheld the jury's verdict and entered
final judgment and a permanent injunction in the Company's favor. STEAG
Microtech, Inc. has appealed the verdict and various rulings by the District
Court to the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. The Company filed a cross
appeal on the grounds that the District Court erred in denying the Company's
request for enhancement of damages pursuant to 35 U.S.C. ss.ss. 284 ANd 285. The
parties are currently briefing the issues on appeal.

      On September 11, 1995, the Company brought an action against YieldUP
International Corp. ("YieldUP") in the United States District Court for the
District of Delaware. The Company seeks damages and a permanent injunction to
prevent further infringement. YieldUP has denied infringement and has asserted,
among other things, that the subject patent is invalid and unenforceable. On
October 14, 1997, the District Court issued a decision granting summary judgment
in favor of YieldUP on the grounds that the process used in YieldUP processing
equipment does not infringe the `761 patent.

      The District Court subsequently granted the Company's request for
reargument of the decision, and the Company and YieldUP have submitted
additional briefs on the issue. The District Court has not issued a decision on
the reargued summary judgment motion.

      In March, 1997, a third competitor, Dainippon Screen Mfg. Co. Ltd. and DNS
Electronics LLC (collectively "DNS"), filed a suit against the Company in the
United States District Court for the Northern District of California. In this
action, DNS requested the Court to declare that DNS does not infringe the
`761 patent and that the patent is invalid and unenforceable. DNS souGHt
monetary damages and injunctive relief for alleged violations of the Lanham Act,
unfair competition, tortious interference with prospective economic advantage,
and unfair advertising.

      The Court dismissed this action on the grounds of lack of personal
jurisdiction and absence of an indispensable party. DNS appealed this ruling and
the appellate court reversed the district court decision on April 29, 1998. The
causes of action relating to the Lanham Act, unfair competition, tortious
interference with prospective economic advantage, and unfair advertising have
been dismissed. The remainder of the case has been returned to the district
court. The Company has answered DNS's complaint and has counterclaimed, alleging
infringement by DNS of the `532, `123, and `761 patents. Discovery is presently
ongoing with a claims construction hearing set for September 10, 1999, and trial
currently set to begin May 1, 2000.


                                       31
<PAGE>

      Furthermore,  in Europe,  STEAG Microtech,  Inc. has filed nullification
proceedings  against the Company's  drying patents in Germany  (DE68921757.8),
the UK (EP428,784),  France (EP428,784),  The Netherlands (23184), and Ireland
(66389).   The  Company  is   proceeding  to  defend  these   patents.   These
proceedings  could  result in the  nullification  of any or all of the subject
patents in the respective countries.

      The Company announced on January 4, 1999, that it filed a lawsuit in
Federal Court for the District of Wilmington, Delaware alleging patent
infringement of the `123 and `532 patents against YieldUP. The Company is
seeking a permanent injunction preventing YieldUP from using, making or selling
equipment that violates these patents and requests damages for past
infringement.


ITEM 4.  SUBMISSION OF MATTERS TO A VOTE OF SECURITY HOLDERS.

            None.


EXECUTIVE OFFICERS OF THE REGISTRANT

      The following table sets forth certain information concerning the
Company's executive officers and key employees:

NAME                     AGE    POSITION
----                     ---    --------

Steven T. Bay             42     Vice President-Chief Technical Officer
Joseph E. Berger          40     Vice President-Worldwide Sales and Marketing
Roger A. Carolin          43     President, Chief Executive Officer and Director
Heinrich S. Erhardt       54     Vice President-Product Development
Kenneth W. Horton         43     Director of Engineering
Garry M. Mayers           45     Vice President-Customer Service
Christopher F. McConnell  45     Chairman of the Board of Directors
John L. Posta             57     Vice President-Manufacturing
Lorin J. Randall          55     Vice President-Finance, Chief Financial
                                   Officer, Secretary and Treasurer
Steven Verhaverbeke       33     Director of Process Technology
Alan E. Walter            44     Senior Vice President-Business
                                    Development

     STEVEN T. BAY joined the Company in April 1992 and is currently Vice
President-Chief Technical Officer. From September 1994 to July 1998 he served as
Chief Technical Officer. From April 1992 to September 1994 he served as Director
of Technology. Mr. Bay was formerly employed by Bridgetek, Inc. of San Jose,
California, which was the manufacturer's representative for the Company in
California and the Pacific Northwest. Mr. Bay received his BA in Chemistry from
St. Louis University.

     JOSEPH E. BERGER joined the Company in June 1993 and has served as Vice
President-Worldwide Sales and Marketing since December 1995. Mr. Berger served
as the Company's Director of Sales and Marketing from June 1995 to December
1995, and as Program Director from June 1993 to June 1995. Mr. Berger served as
Director of Sales for A.E. Staley Manufacturing Co., a manufacturer of corn
sweetners and starches, from 1990 until May 1993. Mr. Berger received his BS in
Chemical Engineering from the University of Virginia and MBA from the Harvard
Business School.


                                       32
<PAGE>

     ROGER A. CAROLIN has served the Company as a director since its inception
in 1984 and as President and Chief Executive Officer since April 1991. From
October 1990 to April 1991, he served as a marketing and sales consultant to the
Company. From June 1984 to October 1990 Mr. Carolin was Senior Vice President of
The Mills Group, Inc., a real estate development firm. Previously, Mr. Carolin
was with The General Electric Company and Honeywell, Inc. in a variety of
technical positions. Mr. Carolin received his BS in Electrical Engineering from
Duke University and his MBA from the Harvard Business School.

    HEINRICH S. ERHARDT joined the Company in January 1992 and is currently Vice
President-Product Development. From January 1992 to September 1996, he served as
Vice President-Engineering. Mr. Erhardt received his BS in Mechanical
Engineering from City University of New York and his MS in Engineering Science
from the Pennsylvania State University.

    KENNETH W. HORTON joined the Company in August 1997 and currently serves as
Director of Engineering. From October 1995 to August 1997, Mr. Horton served as
Vice President for Quadrant International, and from January 1993 to October
1995, he served as Vice President of Operations for Great Valley Products. Mr.
Horton has a BS in engineering sciences from Dartmouth College and an MBA from
Stanford University.

     GARRY M. MAYERS joined the Company in October 1996 as Vice
President-Customer Support. From April 1991 until October 1996, Mr. Mayers was
Director of World Wide Customer Support at ADE Corporation, a manufacturer of
metrology equipment for silicon wafers. Mr. Mayers attended Northeastern
University, majoring in electrical engineering.

    CHRISTOPHER F. MCCONNELL founded the Company in May 1984 and served as
President and Chief Executive Officer until April 1991. In October 1990 he was
named Chairman of the Board of Directors. Prior to forming the Company, Mr.
McConnell held various technical and marketing positions with Dow Chemical. Mr.
McConnell received his BS and MS degrees in Chemical Engineering from Dartmouth
College and Purdue University, respectively, and his MBA from Harvard Business
School. Mr. McConnell is a named inventor on all of the Company's patents. Mr.
McConnell is a director and Chairman of the Board of Batteries Batteries, Inc.,
a company which is an assembler and distributor of specialty batteries and
cellular products.

     JOHN L. POSTA joined the Company in October 1993 as Vice
President-Manufacturing. Mr. Posta served as a consulting engineer to the
Company from August 1993 to October 1993 and as a manufacturing consultant from
August 1989 to October 1993. Mr. Posta received his BS in Industrial Management
from Fairleigh Dickinson University.

     LORIN J. RANDALL joined the Company in January 1995 as Vice
President-Finance, Chief Financial Officer, Secretary and Treasurer. From May
1994 to June 1995, Mr. Randall served as the President and Chief Executive
Officer of Greenwich Pharmaceuticals Incorporated, a drug development company
where from September 1991 to May 1994, he served as Vice President-Finance and
Chief Financial Officer. Previously, Mr. Randall served as chief executive
officer or chief financial officer of three companies in the electronics or
software business. Mr. Randall received his BS in Accounting from the
Pennsylvania State University and his MBA from Northeastern University. Mr.
Randall is a director of Quad Systems Corporation, a company which designs,
manufactures and markets semiconductor and printed circuit board assembly
equipment.


                                       33
<PAGE>

     STEVEN VERHAVERBEKE joined the Company in February 1995 as Director of
Process Technology. Dr. Verhaverbeke was employed by IMEC of Leuven, Belgium, a
microelectronics research institute, as a senior researcher from August 1994 to
January 1995 and as a doctoral researcher from September 1988 to July 1993. Dr.
Verhaverbeke also served as a researcher at Tohoku University in Sendai, Japan
from August 1993 to August 1994. Dr. Verhaverbeke received his Ph.D. in Chemical
Engineering from K. U. Leuven, Belgium.

      ALAN E. WALTER co-founded the Company in 1984 and currently serves as
Senior Vice President-Business Development. Prior to joining the Company, he was
with the Cochrane Division of Crane Company, a producer of ultra-high purity
water systems. Mr. Walter received his BS in Chemical Engineering from the
University of Delaware. He is a named inventor on ten of the Company's patents.






                                       34

<PAGE>
                                   PART II


ITEM 5.  MARKET FOR REGISTRANT'S COMMON EQUITY AND RELATED STOCKHOLDER
         MATTERS.

      The Company's Common Stock is traded in The Nasdaq Stock Market under the
symbol CFMT. The range of high and low closing prices for the Common Stock as
reported by the National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc. for the periods
indicated below is as follows:


FISCAL 1998                                            HIGH        LOW
                                                       ----        ---

1st Quarter....................................       $21.87      $13.50
2nd Quarter ...................................        19.37       10.75
3rd Quarter ...................................        15.00        8.00
4th Quarter ...................................         9.75        5.50

FISCAL 1997
1st Quarter....................................       $37.75      $ 8.25
2nd Quarter ...................................        41.75       25.00
3rd Quarter....................................        37.75       25.25
4th Quarter ...................................        40.88       14.00

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

      These prices reflect inter-dealer quotations, without retail mark-ups,
mark-downs or other fees or commissions, and may not necessarily represent
actual transactions.

      As of January 15, 1999, the closing quotation for the Common Stock was
$10.9375. As of January 15, 1999, there were approximately 168 holders of record
and the Company believes that there were approximately 3,900 beneficial owners
of the Company's Common Stock.

      The Company has never declared or paid a cash dividend on its Common Stock
and does not anticipate paying any cash dividends in the foreseeable future. The
Company currently intends to retain its earnings, if any, for the development of
its business. The declaration of any future dividends by the company is within
the discretion of its Board of Directors and will be dependent on the earnings,
financial condition and capital requirements of the company as well as any other
factors deemed relevant by its Board of Directors.


ITEM 6. SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA.

      The following table contains certain selected consolidated financial data
of the Company and is qualified by the more detailed Consolidated Financial
Statements and Notes thereto included elsewhere in this report. The consolidated
statement of operations data for the fiscal years ended October 31, 1996, 1997
and 1998 and the consolidated balance sheet data as of October 31, 1997 and 1998
have been derived from the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Company
which have been audited by Arthur Andersen LLP, independent public accountants,
as indicated in their report included elsewhere herein.


                                       35
<PAGE>

      The consolidated statement of operations data for the fiscal years ended
October 31, 1994 and 1995 and the consolidated balance sheet data as of October
31, 1994, 1995 and 1996 have been derived from the Consolidated Financial
Statements of the Company which have been audited by Arthur Andersen LLP,
independent public accountants, as indicated in their reports not included
herein. This data should be read in conjunction with the Consolidated Financial
Statements and Notes thereto and Item 7, "Management's Discussion and Analysis
of Financial Condition and Results of Operations" included elsewhere herein.


                                        FISCAL YEAR ENDED OCTOBER 31,
                               ------------------------------------------------
                                 1994     1995      1996      1997      1998
                                 ----     ----      ----      ----      ----
                                    (in thousands, except per share data)
STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS DATA:
Net sales ...................   $15,937  $23,430   $44,013   $75,772   $33,155
Cost of sales ...............     9,114   13,463    23,317    40,072    24,426
                                -------  -------   -------   -------   -------
   Gross profit .............     6,823    9,967    20,696    35,700     8,729
                                -------  -------   -------   -------   -------
Operating Expenses:                      
    Research, development and            
      engineering ............    2,100    1,717     4,375     9,334    11,496
    Selling, general and                 
      administrative .........    3,150    5,972    11,679    19,360    17,568
                                -------  -------   -------   -------   -------
    Total operating expenses      5,250    7,689    16,054    28,694    29,064
                                -------  -------   -------   -------   -------
Operating income(loss).......     1,573    2,278     4,642     7,006   (20,335)
Interest (income) ...........       (31)     (72)     (271)   (2,163)   (2,048)
Interest expense ............       828      245       428       281       242
                                -------  -------   -------   -------   -------
Income (loss) before income              
  taxes .....................       776    2,105     4,485    8,888    (18,529)
Income tax provision                     
  (benefit)..................       238      703     1,525    2,666     (6,746)
                                -------  -------   -------   -------   -------
Net income (loss) ...........   $   538  $ 1,402  $  2,960 $  6,222   $(11,783)
                                =======  =======  ======== ========   ======== 
                                         
Net income (loss) per 
  common share (1):  
    Basic ...................            $  0.37  $   0.64 $   0.85   $  (1.49)
                                         =======  ======== ========   ======== 
    Diluted .................            $  0.35  $   0.61 $   0.80   $  (1.49)
                                         =======  ======== ========   ======== 
                                        
Shares used in computing net
  income (loss) per
  common share:
    Basic ...................              3,802     4,624    7,318      7,908
                                         =======  ======== ========   ======== 
    Diluted .................              3,994     4,831    7,764      7,908
                                         =======  ======== ========   ======== 


                                       36
<PAGE>

                                            OCTOBER 31, 1998
                         -------------------------------------------------------
                            1994       1995       1996       1997       1998
                            ----       ----       ----       ----       ----
                                             (in thousands)
Balance Sheet Data:
Cash, cash equivalents
  and short-term
   investments .......    $ 1,106    $   408    $12,254    $ 46,181    $41,394
Working Capital ......      7,177      8,136     27,525      81,796     64,266
Total assets .........     16,689     18,454     44,251     109,496     89,813
Long-term debt, less
   current portion ...      7,820      3,005      2,525       2,571      2,186
Shareholders' Equity .      5,109      9,775     32,711      89,868     77,782

----------

(1)  Consistent with prior years, historical net income per common share for
     fiscal 1994 is not presented as such data is not meaningful to the
     accretion recorded in that period for redeemable common stock. See Note 2
     of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for an explanation of the
     computation of net income (loss) per common share.


ITEM 7.     MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
            AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS

OVERVIEW

      CFM Technologies, Inc. designs, manufactures and markets advanced wet
processing equipment for sale to the worldwide semiconductor and flat panel
display manufacturing industries. The Company was founded in 1984 and began
commercial operations in 1990 following a period of technology and product
development, during which time the Company's patented Full-Flow enclosed
processing and Direct-Displacement drying technologies were developed.

      The Company has derived substantially all of its revenues from the sale of
a relatively small number of its systems, recent sales of which have ranged in
price from approximately $1.2 million to $2.7 million. As of October 31, 1998,
the Company had shipped over 130 systems to more than 35 semiconductor
manufacturers worldwide. During fiscal 1998, the Company's net sales declined
significantly and the Company realized a net loss as a result of excess
production capacity throughout the semiconductor and FPD manufacturing
industries. Prior to fiscal 1998, the Company had been undergoing a period of
rapid growth with net sales during fiscal 1997 increasing by 72% over net sales
for fiscal 1996. Net sales of Full-Flow systems to companies in the FPD
manufacturing industry represented 6% and 24% of total net sales in fiscal 1998
and 1997, respectively. The Company believes that capital expenditures in the
FPD manufacturing industry will continue to be subject to significant variations
and expects that its FPD sales as a percentage of total sales will continue to
fluctuate as the Company evaluates the best strategy for serving this highly
cyclical market. The Company believes that FPD Full-Flow system sales will
continue to be a small portion of total sales during fiscal 1999.

      The Company sells its systems worldwide and records a significant portion
of its sales to customers outside the United States. In fiscal 1998,
international sales constituted 46% of net sales, down from 65% in fiscal 1997.
Sales to customers in Asia represented 28% and 47% of total sales in fiscal 1998
and 1997, respectively. Beginning in the fall of 1997 and throughout 1998, the
currencies and economies of certain Asian countries, including Korea, were under
pressure. Some of these Asian countries subsequently experienced changes in
currency valuation, received external financial support and agreed to certain
economic reorganization programs anticipated to reduce growth and credit demand.


                                       37
<PAGE>

      Early in fiscal 1998, the Company experienced an order cancellation and
the postponement of other orders. Additionally, early in fiscal 1998, the
Company received requests from certain customers in Asia for adjustments in
payment terms on some existing accounts receivable. Some accommodations in
payment terms were granted to these customers and, subject to certain legal
limitations, these terms have been and continue to be met. At October 31, 1998,
accounts receivable from customers in Asia comprised 71% of all accounts
receivable. Approximately one-half of these Asian accounts receivable were the
result of shipments made during October 1998.

      The Company reduced its staff during March 1998 by 76 employees or 19% of
the workforce. Another reduction of 37 employees or 12% of the workforce
occurred in July 1998. During this period, the Company took additional steps to
reduce expenses through the elimination of discretionary spending and the
curtailment of capital investments not related to immediate business
opportunities or contractual obligations. The Company adopted a strategy of
continued investment in new product and process development and the retention of
field and customer support personnel necessary to improve customer satisfaction.
The significant decline in overall demand for the Company's products in the
global marketplace resulted in significant losses. Future results will depend
upon a variety of factors, including the timing of significant orders, the
ability of the Company to bring new systems to market, the timing of new product
releases by the Company's competitors, the timing of a recovery from the current
downturn in capital spending by the Company's customers, the impact of economic
controls in countries where the Company does business, market acceptance of new
or enhanced versions of the Company's systems, changes in pricing by the Company
or its competitors and the volatility of the semiconductor and FPD industries
and of the markets served by the Company's customers.

      The Company's gross margin has been and will continue to be affected by a
variety of factors including temporary underabsorption of manufacturing overhead
and fixed costs, the mix and average selling prices of systems and the mix of
sales to domestic and international markets. The Company pays significant
commissions and service and support fees to agents on sales in East Asia. As a
result, gross margin and selling, general and administrative expenses as a
percentage of net sales have in the past and will continue in the future to
fluctuate based to a large extent on changes in the proportion of net sales in
East Asia.

                                       38
<PAGE>



RESULTS OF OPERATIONS

      The following table sets forth the components of the Company's statements
of operations for the fiscal years ended October 31, 1998, 1997 and 1996,
expressed as a percentage of net sales:

                                           FISCAL YEAR ENDED OCTOBER 31,
                                       -----------------------------------
                                         1998          1997         1996
                                         ----          ----         ----
Net sales .......................        100.0%       100.0%       100.0%
Cost of sales ...................         73.7         52.9         53.0       
                                         -----        -----        -----
        Gross profit ............         26.3         47.1         47.0
                                         -----        -----        -----
Operating expenses:
     Research, development and
       engineering ..............         34.6         12.3         10.0
     Selling, general and
       administrative ...........         53.0         25.6         26.5
                                         -----        -----        -----
         Total operating expenses         87.6         37.9         36.5
                                         -----        -----        -----
Operating income (loss) .........        (61.3)         9.2         10.5
Interest (income) expense, net ..         (5.4)        (2.5)         0.3
                                         -----        -----        -----
Income (loss) before income taxes        (55.9)        11.7         10.2
Income tax provision (benefit) ..        (20.4)         3.5          3.5
                                         =====        =====        =====
Net income (loss) ...............        (35.5)%        8.2%         6.7%
                                         =====        =====        =====

      Net Sales. Net sales increased 72% from $44.0 million in fiscal 1996 to
$75.8 million in fiscal 1997 and then decreased 56% to $33.2 million in fiscal
1998. The increase in fiscal 1997 resulted primarily from increased demand for
the Company's Full-Flow systems by companies in the semiconductor and FPD
industries as the Company's customers equipped new facilities or expanded
facilities, resulting in multiple systems purchases by some of the Company's
major customers, and initial sales to new customers. The decrease in net sales
in fiscal 1998 resulted primarily from a reduction in overall demand for
semiconductor and FPD manufacturing equipment as semiconductor and FPD device
manufacturers curtailed expansion plans because of industry-wide overcapacity.
Net sales for fiscal 1996, 1997 and 1998 included sales of Full-Flow systems to
companies in the FPD manufacturing industry representing approximately 20%, 24%
and 6%, of net sales, respectively. The Company believes that capital
expenditures in the FPD manufacturing industry are subject to significant
variations and expects that its FPD sales as a percentage of total sales will
continue to fluctuate as the Company evaluates the best strategy for serving
this highly cyclical market. Sales of FPD Full-Flow systems to LG Semiconductor,
a manufacturer located in Korea, represented 88% of all FPD sales during fiscal
1997. The Company believes that FPD Full-Flow system sales will continue to
represent a small portion of net sales during fiscal 1999. International sales
represented 63%, 65% and 46% of total net sales, in fiscal 1996, 1997 and 1998,
respectively. The number of international customers receiving shipments of the
Company's systems increased in both fiscal 1996 and 1997. The Company expects
international sales to continue to represent a significant portion of its net
sales as a result of continuing expansion of its international sales, service
and support organization. For a description of recent economic events in Asian
countries and their effects on the Company, see "Overview".

                                       39
<PAGE>


      Gross Profit. Gross profit as a percentage of net sales remained
substantially constant at 47.1% in fiscal 1997 compared with 47.0% in fiscal
1996. The level of gross profit in fiscal 1996 and fiscal 1997 can be attributed
to a mix of increases in sales prices, changes in product mix, reductions in the
cost of component parts due to volume and manufacturing efficiencies resulting
from increased volume and the expansion of the Company's manufacturing
facilities. Gross margin in fiscal 1998 declined significantly to (26.3%) as a
result of underabsorption of manufacturing overhead and fixed costs because of
low production levels.

      Research, Development and Engineering. Research, development and
engineering expenses increased from $4.4 million or 10.0% of net sales in fiscal
1996 to $9.3 million or 12.3% of net sales in fiscal 1997 and further increased
to $11.5 million or 34.6% of net sales in fiscal 1998. The substantial increase
in research, development and engineering spending in fiscal 1997 is attributable
to the development of a much larger Full-Flow FPD system which was first
delivered in June 1997. During fiscal 1998, the Company completed development of
a version of the Full-Flow platform to process 300mm semiconductor wafers and
entered into a joint development agreement with Semiconductor 300 a (joint
venture of Siemens and Motorola), delivering a dual-vessel 300mm system in April
1998. Additionally, during fiscal 1998, the Company developed new processes
utilizing the Full-Flow platform to perform critical cleaning steps prior to the
deposition of hemispherical grain or epitaxial silicon, to enable in situ
creation of variable concentration buffered hydrogen fluoride etchant and to
control the concentration of gasses dissolved in processing fluids used within
the Full-Flow system. The Company believes that continued substantial investment
in research, development and engineering is critical to maintaining a strong
technological position and, therefore, competitive position and accordingly
expects such expenses in fiscal 1999 will continue at approximately the fiscal
1998 level.

      Selling, General and Administrative. Selling, general and administrative
expenses increased from $11.7 million or 26.5% of net sales in fiscal 1996 to
$19.4 million or 25.6% of net sales in fiscal 1997 and decreased to $17.6
million or 53.0% of net sales in fiscal 1998. The increase in fiscal 1997
resulted primarily from increases in sales and marketing costs related to
increased customer support and increased international sales, as well as legal
expenses related to litigation undertaken to protect one of the Company's
patents. The decrease in fiscal 1998 resulted from a reduction of staff and a
significant curtailment in discretionary spending offset by increased costs of
patent litigation. See, Part I, Item 3, "Legal Proceedings". The Company
believes that, subject to improved demand in the markets which the Company
serves, selling, general and administrative expenses will increase in fiscal
1999 and beyond, as increased personnel and sales and support expenses are
anticipated in connection with the Company's efforts to increase its net sales
and as the Company continues to invest in developing and protecting its patents
and other intellectual property rights.

      Interest (Income) Expense, Net. Interest expense, net of interest income,
of $0.2 million in fiscal 1996 represented 0.3% of net sales. In fiscal 1997 and
1998, interest income, net of interest expense, was $1.9 million or 2.5% of net
sales and $1.8 million or 5.4% of net sales, respectively.



                                       40
<PAGE>

      The Company incurred interest expenses due to intra-period borrowings on
its revolving line of credit during fiscal 1996 which borrowings were utilized
to support the Company's increased working capital requirements. In fiscal 1997
and 1998, net interest income was earned as a result of the investment of funds
not immediately required for the Company's operations which were available as a
result of the Company's initial public offering in June 1996 and a follow-on
offering in February 1997. Net interest income declined in fiscal 1998 as a
result of lower invested balances and lower interest rates during the year.

      Income Tax Provision (Benefit). The Company's effective tax rate decreased
from 34.0% in fiscal 1996 to 30.0% in fiscal 1997. The rate for fiscal 1996
reflects the unavailability of research and development tax credits and limited
tax benefit from the Company's foreign sales corporation as a result of the
Company's export sales. The rate for fiscal 1997 reflected tax benefits from a
reinstitution of the research and development tax credit along with significant
tax benefits from the Company's foreign sales corporation. During fiscal 1998
the tax benefit recorded was at an effective rate of 36.4%. The income tax
benefit effective rate increased from the prior year rates primarily due to the
absence of any tax impact from the Company's foreign sales corporation based on
the loss incurred for fiscal 1998. Approximately $2.2 million of the income tax
benefit will be realized from refunds due from the carryback of current losses
to prior years tax returns and the remainder of the benefit is recorded as a
deferred tax asset. Based on an assessment of the Company's taxable earnings
history and expected future taxable income, management has determined that it is
more likely than not that the net deferred tax assets will be realized in future
periods. The Company may be required to provide a valuation allowance for this
asset in the future if it does not generate sufficient taxable income as
planned. Additionally, the ultimate realization of this asset could be
negatively impacted by market conditions and other variables not known or
anticipated at this time.


LIQUIDITY AND CAPITAL RESOURCES

     Since its inception, the Company has funded its capital requirements
through funding from two research and development limited partnerships, the
private sale of equity securities, the Company's initial public offering of
Common Stock completed in June 1996, a follow-on offering of Common Stock
completed in February 1997 and, to a lesser extent, bank borrowings and
equipment leases. As of October 31, 1998, the Company had $41.4 million in cash,
cash equivalents and short-term investments and $64.3 million in working
capital. Net cash used in operating activities was $3.6 million and $12.1
million for fiscal 1996 and 1997, respectively, and net cash provided by
operating activities was $0.3 million in fiscal 1998. The Company had a net loss
in fiscal 1998 of $11.8 million compared to net income in 1997 of $6.2 million.
Accounts receivable increased $18.3 million in fiscal 1997 and decreased $19.4
million in fiscal 1998. Inventories increased by $8.0 million during fiscal 1997
and decreased by $2.4 million during fiscal 1998. During fiscal 1997, accounts
receivable increased due to higher revenues and customer payment delays
resulting from additional review on initial sales of production systems by
customer production personnel prior to payment. This review is sometimes
time-consuming and precedes receipt of the final payment amount negotiated as a
part of the original purchase agreement. Subsequent deliveries of similar
products usually result in significantly more rapid collection of final amounts
owed. A similar situation can occur with initial installations at new customer
sites as personnel unfamiliar with Full-Flow systems receive training. Accounts
receivable decreased during fiscal 1998 as sales volume declined and existing
accounts were collected. Accounts receivable balances are expected to continue
to fluctuate with the volume of shipments of certain products and of products to
new customer sites.


                                       41

<PAGE>

     Purchases of property, plant and equipment were $4.3 million and $3.9
million in fiscal 1997 and 1998, respectively. During fiscal 1997, these
expenditures were primarily related to improvements in information systems
infrastructure, expansion of the Company's applications laboratory, additional
customer and employee training facilities and expanded production capacity. In
fiscal 1998, these expenditures primarily were for continued investment in the
Company's applications laboratory and improvements to leased facilities to be
occupied by the Company during fiscal 1999.

      During fiscal 1997, the Company leased an additional 22,000 square feet of
space in a facility in the same industrial park as its owned manufacturing and
leased administrative facilities to house a portion of the Company's production
operations and its customer satisfaction function. During fiscal 1998, the
leased premises were reduced to 8,000 square feet, which will be vacated in
March 1999. During fiscal 1997, the Company also entered into a lease with a
minimum term of 20 years for two new facilities, a 60,000 square foot production
facility and an 80,000 square foot office facility. The production facility was
recently completed and the office facility is presently under construction in
Exton, Pennsylvania, approximately seven miles from the site of the Company's
current operations. Rentals on the production facility began in October 1998 and
rentals on the office facility are expected to begin by mid 1999. During fiscal
1998, the Company leased 32,000 square feet of temporary prototype laboratory
and storage facility which will be vacated during fiscal 1999. The Company
intends to retain its owned facility in West Chester, Pennsylvania for use in
manufacturing, customer and employee training and research and development while
moving all other functions to Exton during fiscal 1999.

      The Company has a relationship with a commercial bank which includes a
mortgage on the Company's manufacturing facility in the amount of $0.8 million
and a $7.5 million revolving demand line of credit. The mortgage bears interest
at an annual rate of 8.9%. The line of credit is unsecured and borrowings are at
an interest rate equal to such bank's prime rate. There were no borrowings
outstanding at October 31, 1998.

      The Company also has mortgage notes payable to the Pennsylvania Industrial
Development Authority in the amount of $0.5 million bearing interest at 2.0% and
to the Chester County Development Council in the amount of $0.1 million bearing
interest at 5.0%. In addition, the Company has outstanding capital lease
obligations in the amount of $1.4 million bearing interest at rates ranging from
7% to 12% per annum.

      The Company had outstanding accounts receivable of approximately $33.4
million and $14.0 million as of October 31, 1997 and 1998, respectively. No
allowance for doubtful accounts receivable has been recorded as the Company
believes that all such accounts receivable are fully realizable.

      The Company believes that existing cash balances and its available line of
credit will be sufficient to meet the Company's cash requirements through the
next twelve months.

                                       42
<PAGE>


      However, depending upon its rate of growth and profitability, the Company
may require additional equity or debt financing to meet its working capital
requirements or capital expenditure needs.

       There can be no assurance that additional financing, if needed, will be
available when required, or, if available, will be on terms satisfactory to the
Company. The discussions above regarding the Company's expectations of future
sales, gross profits, research, development and engineering expenses, selling,
general and administrative expenses, use of deferred tax assets, product
introductions and cash requirements include certain forward-looking statements
on these subjects. As such, actual results may vary materially from such
expectations.

      Factors which could cause actual results to differ from expectations
include variations in the level of orders, which can be affected by general
economic conditions and growth rates in specific geographic areas where the
Company may have a concentration of business, in the semiconductor and FPD
manufacturing industries and in the markets served by the Company's customers,
the international economic and political climates, difficulties or delays in
product functionality or performance, the delivery performance of sole source
vendors, the timing of future product releases, failure to respond adequately to
either changes in technology or customer preferences, changes in pricing by the
Company or its competitors, ability to manage growth, risks of non-payment of
accounts receivable, changes in budgeted costs or failure to realize a
successful outcome to pending patent litigation, all of which constitute
significant risks. There can be no assurance that the Company's results of
operations will not be adversely affected by one of more of these factors.


YEAR 2000

      At midnight on December 31, 1999, all computer systems that use two digits
to represent the year are at risk of malfunction or failure. Many systems will
continue to run, but may interpret any date in the year '00 to be prior to any
date in the year '99, posing potential data comparison problems, or may fail to
recognize that the year 2000, unlike 1900, is a leap year. Businesses and
systems that use a four-digit format to report and process dates later than
December 31, 1999 are often denoted as "Year 2000 compliant". While many systems
have no date comparison functions and operate in a date-independent mode, they
may have a date function. If full system operation and correct display of dates
subsequent to January 1, 2000 are possible, these systems may be denoted as
"Year 2000 operationally ready". Many systems and subsystems using two digit
dates will operate smoothly until the end of their technological or economic
life without regard to the actual date. These systems are unaffected by whether
it is 2000 or 1900, make no "real-time" date comparisons and have no date
display features. At the other extreme are systems which will cease functioning
or malfunction when an unacceptable date is perceived (which in some cases could
be during 1999).

      The Company is committed to the operation of its business and the
operation of its products without interruption. Certain changes in the Company's
operating procedures may be needed to reduce risks or avoid complications
relating to the Year 2000 issue to ensure that the Company and its customers
will not be negatively impacted by Year 2000 issues.

    The Company's chief financial officer, has been selected by the Company's
senior management as the coordinator for the Company's Year 2000 compliance
efforts. A team has been formed with active participation by the information
systems, purchasing, software engineering, marketing and customer services
departments and has been working since 1997 to enable the Company to meet its
Year 2000 goals.


                                       43
<PAGE>

     The Company views Year 2000 issues in four categories of potential
exposure:

    Products - This encompasses the Company's products offered for sale and the
         products that are currently in service at customer sites.

    Business applications and infrastructure - This includes all client/server,
         desktop and network hardware and software used in routine business
         operations.

    Business relationships and third parties - This includes the supply chain
         for the Company's products, customers and service providers, including
         banks, insurance companies, payroll and pension plan administrators,
         legal, accounting and consulting firms, as well as public utilities,
         long distance telecommunications providers, transportation and
         overnight delivery companies and local government services.

    Non-Information Technology ("Non-IT") - This includes embedded
         microprocessors used in building facilities, manufacturing equipment
         and systems and control systems and instrumentation.

State of Readiness

Products

      The Company believes it is aware of the potential Year 2000 exposure of
its Full-Flow wet processing systems currently in production at customer sites
or of models available for sale. The Company has made an assessment of its
exposure using the Sematech Year 2000 Readiness Testing standard as the basis
for its assessment. This standard is one of two standards used by the
semiconductor equipment industry for assessing the Year 2000 readiness of the
industry's equipment. Based on an assessment under this standard, the Company's
current products available for sale and those shipped in the past year, with
respect to both hardware and software, are considered to be "Ready Now". Systems
shipped earlier will obtain the "Ready Now" standard once the on-board computer
system date is reset at the beginning of the new millenium. While the products
are "Ready Now" based on industry standards, customers may also elect to have
their on-board computer systems upgraded, for a fee, to be in technical
compliance (four-digit date representation). This upgrade is unnecessary in
order to obtain full functional operation. The Company has successfully
completed Year 2000 testing on a representative cross-section of its products in
production at a customer site. While the Company believes it has undertaken all
needed assessment, validation and implementation of product related Year 2000
issues, it intends to continue to search for any as yet unforeseen issues and
develop action plans to resolve such issues. The Company maintains a website,
available to its customers, that discusses Year 2000 issues related to its
products including detailed testing results.

Business applications and infrastructure

      The Company has completed an assessment of all of its internally used
business applications (software) and the hardware on which such applications
run. This assessment was conducted primarily by contacting developers of the
systems and manufacturers of the hardware and obtaining statements regarding the
Year 2000 readiness of the software and hardware presently in use.

       The primary enterprise-wide system used for business operations,
including order processing, systems design and documentation, procurement,
manufacturing and accounting has been described as Year 2000 compliant by the
manufacturer. The underlying hardware and operating system that the
enterprise-wide system runs on are also compliant, as described by their
respective manufacturers.


                                       44
<PAGE>

      Desktop computers in use throughout the Company vary in their Year 2000
compliance for both hardware and software. While the majority of the hardware is
compliant, most of the non-compliant hardware may be upgraded with software from
the manufacturer available free over the Internet. The Company intends to
perform such upgrades by the end of June 1999. The Company has a few
non-compliant machines that cannot be upgraded which are not currently in use
for any date comparison functions, and which it may elect to replace at a cost
of approximately $15,000. The Company is implementing Year 2000 compliant
desktop software and expects to have all computers using a date comparison
function upgraded by September 1999 at a cost to the Company of approximately
$20,000. Year 2000 compliant network server software is expected to be made
available early in 1999 by the manufacturer at an upgrade cost of approximately
$10,000. The Company intends to implement the upgrades to its server software by
June 1999.

Business relationships and third parties

      The Company has had varying success in assessing the Year 2000 readiness
of companies with which it has business relationships. In each case, the Company
has either contacted its vendors, customers or service providers or searched
their websites for information regarding Year 2000 compliance. While the Company
has received statements from many in this group, it has not yet obtained
certification statements from certain critical vendors. Many of the statements
received, including those from public utilities, stated intentions to become
compliant during 1999. The Company is pursuing additional discussions with
critical vendors to assess the potential impact, if any, on its operations.

Non-IT

      A special effort has been made to identify embedded microprocessors with
date functions in any part, assembly, subsystem or OEM component used in or
distributed in conjunction with the Company's products. No such embedded
microprocessors have been discovered to date. Non-IT embedded microprocessors
may also be present in elevators, heating and air-conditioning systems,
telecommunications devices and manufacturing equipment.


Costs to Address Year 2000 Issues

      Costs to address Year 2000 issues have primarily been incurred internally.
As the Company does not have a project tracking system, past and future Year
2000 costs can only be estimated.

      Past costs are estimated to be $30,000 and future costs for internal labor
are expected to be approximately $15,000. Costs to replace desktop computers are
estimated to be $15,000, software upgrades for the desktop computers are
estimated to be $20,000 and the upgrade to network server software is estimated
to be $10,000. The new telecommunications equipment, heating and
air-conditioning systems, and elevators in the new facilities in Exton, PA are
the result of moving to newly built facilities and not a result of Year 2000
issues. There may be additional costs incurred for unforeseen Year 2000 issues.
All costs will be funded out of general operating funds and are not expected to
be material.


                                       45
<PAGE>

Risks of the Company's Year 2000 Issues

      Although not expected, the most likely worst case scenario includes the
inability of vendors to supply product on a timely basis and the inability of
customers to take delivery of currently ordered equipment, order more equipment
or to pay the Company for products already purchased.

      Management will, in conjunction with its customers, continue to evaluate
currently identified and as yet unforeseen potential Year 2000 issues in its
products that could adversely affect customers' production capabilities.
Commercially available software capable of finding date comparison programs and
databases on desktop computers will be executed to minimize the risk of date
comparison errors. The Company will continue to seek readiness certification
from critical suppliers and customers.

Contingency Plans

      The Company is currently seeking alternate suppliers or obtaining in-house
capabilities for vendors that it deems to be both critical to the Company's
success and unable to adequately demonstrate Year 2000 readiness. As a part of
the Company's continuing customer service efforts, the Company is working with
its customers to encourage Year 2000 testing that includes the Company's
products.

     The current status of the Company's efforts to deal with Year 2000 issues
has been posted on the Company's Internet site which may be viewed at
http://www.CFMTech.com.

      There can be no assurances that the Company will not experience serious
unanticipated negative consequences and/or material costs caused by undetected
errors or defects in technology used in its products or internal systems, which
are comprised predominantly of third party software and hardware, or by the
inability of third parties to adequately disclose and correct their Year 2000
issues. While the Company presently believes that the ultimate outcome of its
efforts to be Year 2000 ready will not have a material effect on the Company's
financial position liquidity or operations, there can be no assurances that
unanticipated increased costs could have a material effect on the results of
operations.


IMPACT OF RECENTLY ISSUED ACCOUNTING STANDARDS

      In June 1997, the Financial Accounting Standards Board issued Statement of
Financial Accounting Standards No. 130, "Reporting Comprehensive Income" (SFAS
No. 130). SFAS No. 130 is effective for fiscal years beginning after December
15, 1997. SFAS No. 130 establishes standards for the reporting and display of
comprehensive income in a set of financial statements. Comprehensive income is
defined as the change in net assets of a business enterprise during a period
from transactions generated from non-owner sources. It includes all changes in
equity during a period except those resulting from investments by owners and
distributions to owners. Management believes that the adoption of SFAS No. 130
will not have a material impact on the Company's financial statements.

      In June 1997, the Financial Accounting Standards Board issued Statement of
Financial Accounting Standards No. 131 "Disclosures about Segments of an
Enterprise and Related Information" (SFAS No. 131). SFAS No. 131 applies to all
public companies and is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15,
1997. SFAS No. 131 requires that business segment financial information be
reported in the financial statements utilizing the management approach. The
management approach is defined as the manner in which management organizes the
segments within the enterprise for making operating decisions and assessing
performance. Management believes the adoption of SFAS No. 131 will not have a
material impact on the Company's financial statements.


                                       46
<PAGE>


      In March 1998, the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants
issued Statement of Position 98-1, "Accounting for the Costs of Computer
Software Developed or Obtained for Internal Use" (SOP 98-1). SOP 98-1 requires
that certain costs related to the development or purchase of internal-use
software be capitalized and amortized over the estimated useful life of the
software, and effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 1998. SOP
98-1 also requires that costs related to the preliminary project stage and post
implementation/operations stage in an internal-use computer software development
project be expensed as incurred. Management believes that the adoption of SOP
98-1 will not have a material impact on the Company's financial position or
results of operations.

      In June 1998, the Financial  Accounting Standards Board issued Statement
of  Financial   Accounting   Standards  No.  133  "Accounting  for  Derivative
Instruments  and  Hedging   Activities"  (SFAS  No.  133).  SFAS  No.  133  is
effective  for  fiscal  years  beginning  after  June 15,  1999.  SFAS No. 133
establishes  accounting and reporting  standards for  derivative  instruments,
including certain derivative instruments embedded in other contracts,  and for
derivatives  used for  hedging  activities.  SFAS No.  133  requires  that all
derivatives  be  recognized  either as an asset or liability and measures them
at fair  value.  Management  believes  that the  adoption of SFAS No. 133 will
not have a material impact on the Company's financial statements.


EFFECTS OF INFLATION

      Inflation has not been a material factor affecting the Company's business.


ITEM 7A.    QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK


Interest Rate Risk

      The Company's exposure to market risk for changes in interest rates
relates primarily to the Company's investment portfolio and long-term debt
obligations. The Company does not use derivative financial instruments in its
investment portfolio. The Company places its investments with high credit
quality issuers and by policy, is averse to principal loss and ensures the
safety and preservation of its invested funds by limiting default risk, market
risk and reinvestment risk. As of October 31, 1998, the Company's investments
consisted primarily of municipal and government securities that mature in one
year or less. As of October 31, 1998, the Company's fixed rate long-term debt
consists of mortgage notes and capital lease obligations.

Foreign Currency Risk

      The Company does not use foreign currency forward exchange contracts or
purchased currency options to hedge local currency cash flows or for trading
purposes. All sales arrangements with international customers are denominated in
U.S. dollars. The Company has subsidiary operations in Scotland, France, Taiwan
and Singapore which are subject to currency fluctuations. These foreign
subsidiaries are limited in their operations and level of investment by the
parent company so that the risk of currency fluctuations is not expected to be
material.


                                       47
<PAGE>


ITEM 8.     FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTARY DATA

      The audited financial statements of the Company appear beginning on Page
F-1 of this report.


ITEM 9.     CHANGES IN AND DISAGREEMENTS WITH ACCOUNTANTS ON
            ACCOUNTING AND FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE

      None.



                                    PART III


ITEM 10.    DIRECTORS AND EXECUTIVE OFFICERS OF THE REGISTRANT

      The information required by this Item with respect to directors will be
set forth in the Company's definitive Proxy Statement, to be filed within 120
days after the end of the fiscal year covered by this Annual Report on Form
10-K, and is incorporated by reference to the Proxy Statement.


ITEM 11. EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

      The information required by this Item will be set forth in the
Company's definitive Proxy Statement, to be filed within 120 days after the end
of the fiscal year covered by this Annual Report on Form 10-K, and is
incorporated by reference to the Proxy Statement.


ITEM 12. SECURITY OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS AND MANAGEMENT.

      The information required by this Item will be set forth in the
Company's definitive Proxy Statement, to be filed within 120 days after the end
of the fiscal year covered by this Annual Report on Form 10-K, and is
incorporated by reference to the Proxy Statement.


                                       48
<PAGE>

ITEM 13. CERTAIN RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED TRANSACTIONS.

      The information required by this Item will be set forth in the Company's
definitive Proxy Statement, to be filed within 120 days after the end of the
fiscal year covered by this Annual Report on Form 10-K, and is incorporated by
reference to the Proxy Statement.



                                   PART IV

ITEM 14.    EXHIBITS, FINANCIAL STATEMENT SCHEDULES, AND REPORTS ON FORM 8-K.


FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

      The financial statements and financial statement information required by
this Item are included on pages F-1 through F-21 of this report. The Report of
Independent Public Accountants appears on page F-2 of this report.

      All other schedules have been omitted because they are inapplicable, not
required, or the information is included elsewhere in the financial statements
or notes thereto.




EXHIBITS

      The following is a list of exhibits. Where so indicated by footnote,
exhibits which were previously filed are incorporated by reference. For exhibits
incorporated by reference, the location of the exhibit in the previous filing is
indicated in parentheses.

EXHIBIT
NUMBER

3.1         Articles of Incorporation of CFM Technologies, Inc., as amended*

3.1.1       Amendment to Articles of Incorporation.**

3.2         By-Laws of CFM Technologies, Inc.* - amended

4.1         Form of Common Stock Certificate.*

4.2         Statement with Respect to Shares filed with the Pennsylvania
            Department of State on May 1, 1997.*****

10.1        Employment Agreement dated as of January 9, 1995 by and between
            CFM Technologies, Inc. and Lorin Jeffry Randall.*

10.2        Stock Option Agreement dated March 18, 1991 between CFM
            Technologies, Inc. and Burton McGillivray, as extended and
            amended on June 11, 1993 and as amended on September 25, 1994.*

10.3        Stock Option Agreement dated as of December 9, 1994 by and
            between CFM Technologies, Inc. and Milton Stearns, as amended on
            November 3, 1995.*


                                       49
<PAGE>


10.4        CFM Technologies, Inc. Annual Profit Sharing Plan.*

10.4.1      Amendment to CFM Technologies, Inc. Annual Profit Sharing
            Plan.***

10.5        CFM Technologies, Inc. 1992 Employee Stock Option Plan.*

10.6        Amended and Restated CFM Technologies, Inc. 1995 Incentive
            Plan.****

10.7        Amended and Restated CFM Technologies, Inc. Non-Employee
            Directors' Stock Option Plan.****

10.8        CFM Technologies, Inc. Employee Stock Purchase Plan.*

10.9        Rights   Agreement   dated  as  of  April  24,  1997  between  CFM
            Technologies,  Inc. and American  Stock Transfer and Trust Co., as
            Rights Agent.*****

10.10       Distributor  Agreement dated November 28, 1991 by and between ANAM
            Semiconductor    Design   Co.,   Ltd.   and   CFM    Technologies,
            Incorporated,  and supplement to the  Distributor  Agreement dated
            August 26, 1994.*

10.11       Distributor Agreement dated March 3, 1992 by and between Innotech
            Corporation and CFM Technologies, Inc., as modified on June 15,
            1994.*

10.12       Lease Agreement  dated October 10, 1995 by and between  Hough/Loew
            Construction,  Inc.  and CFM  Technologies,  Inc.  and Addendum to
            Lease Agreement dated October 10,1995.*

10.12.1     Amendment  Number Two to Lease  Agreement  dated April 30, 1996 by
            and   between   and  CFM   Technologies,   Inc.   and   Hough/Loew
            Construction, Inc.***

10.13       Commercial  Lease  Agreement  dated  December 16, 1996 between CFM
            Technologies, Inc. and Devereau Properties, Inc.***

10.13.1     First  Amendment to Commercial  Lease  Agreement  dated August 22,
            1997 between CFM Technologies, Inc. and Devereau Properties, Inc.

10.14       Loan Agreement  dated July 27, 1994 by and between  Chester County
            Development Council("CCDC") and CFM Technologies, Incorporated.*

10.15       $100,000  Mortgage  dated as of July 27, 1994,  CFM  Technologies,
            Incorporated to CCDC.*

10.16       Guaranties  dated October 13, 1995 executed by CFMT,  Inc. and CFM
            International   Corp.   in  favor   of   Corestates   Bank,   N.A.
            ("CoreStates").*

10.17       Mortgage dated February 16, 1994 between CFM Technologies,
            Incorporated and Corestates.*

10.18       $150,000 Commercial  Promissory Note dated September 28, 1994 from
            CFM Technologies, Incorporated to Corestates.*

10.19       $100,000 Commercial Promissory Note dated August 11, 1994   from
            CFM Technologies, Incorporated to Corestates.*

10.20       Assignment  of Leases,  Rents,  Agreements  of Sale,  Licenses and
            Permits  dated  February  16,  1994 by CFM  Technologies,  Inc. to
            CoreStates.*


                                       50
<PAGE>

10.21       Agent Agreement dated December 16, 1996 between CFM  Technologies,
            Inc. and Ampoc Far East Company Limited.***

10.22       Letter  Agreement dated March 25, 1996 between  CoreStates and CFM
            Technologies,  Inc. and $7,500,000  Master Demand Note dated April
            1, 1996 from CFM Technologies, Inc. to CoreStates.*

10.23       Lease  Agreement  dated July 16, 1997  between  CFM  Technologies,
            Inc.  and CFM  Partners (No  relationship  with CFM  Technologies,
            Inc.).#

10.24       Agent Agreement dated April 15, 1997 by and between Aneric
            Enterprise PTE Limited and CFM Technologies, Inc.#


10.25       Agent Agreement dated October 29, 1997 by and between Silicon 
            International Ltd. and CFM Technologies, Inc.#

10.26       Agent Agreement dated January 7, 1999 by and between PKL Ltd. and 
            CFM Technologies, Inc.

21          Subsidiaries of the registrant.

23.1        Consent of Arthur Andersen LLP.

27          Financial Data Schedule.

----------

*      Incorporated by reference to the Registrant's Registration Statement on
       Form S-1 (Registration No. 33-80359) declared effective on June 18, 1996.

**     Incorporated by reference to the Registrant's definitive Proxy Statement
       dated and filed on February 13, 1997.

***    Incorporated by reference to the Registrant's Registration Statement on
       Form S-1 (Registration No. 333-20325), filed on January 24, 1997, and the
       Amendment No. 1 to such Registration Statement filed on January 27, 1997.

****   Incorporated by reference to the Registrant's Quarterly Report on Form
       10-Q for the quarter ended April 30, 1997.

*****  Incorporated by reference to the Registrant's Registration Statement on
       Form 8-A filed on April 24, 1997.

#      Incorporated by reference to the Registrant's Annual Report on Form 10-K
       for the fiscal year ended October 31, 1997.


REPORTS ON FORM 8-K

      The Company filed no reports on Form 8-K during the fiscal quarter ended
October 31, 1998.


                                       51
<PAGE>


                  INDEX TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

Report of Independent Public Accountants .............................F-2

Consolidated Balance Sheets as of October 31, 1998 and 1997...........F-3

Consolidated Statements of Operations for the years ended
      October 31, 1998, 1997 and 1996 ................................F-5

Consolidated Statements of Shareholders' Equity for the years ended
      October 31, 1998, 1997 and 1996.................................F-6

Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows for the years ended
      October 31, 1998, 1997 and 1996 ................................F-7

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements ...........................F-8




                                      F-1

<PAGE>



                    REPORT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS


To CFM Technologies, Inc.:

We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of CFM
Technologies, Inc. (a Pennsylvania corporation) and subsidiaries as of October
31, 1998 and 1997, and the related consolidated statements of operations,
shareholders' equity and cash flows for each of the three years in the period
ended October 31, 1998. These financial statements are the responsibility of the
Company's management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these
financial statements based on our audits.

We conducted our audits in accordance with generally accepted auditing
standards. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain
reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material
misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting
the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. An audit also includes
assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by
management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation.
We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.

In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in
all material respects, the financial position of CFM Technologies, Inc. and
subsidiaries as of October 31, 1998 and 1997, and the results of their
operations and their cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended
October 31, 1998, in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles.




                                                /s/ Arthur Andersen LLP
                                                ----------------------------
                                                Arthur Andersen LLP

Philadelphia, Pa.,
December 11, 1998



                                      F-2
<PAGE>


                  CFM TECHNOLOGIES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
                        CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS

                                                        OCTOBER 31,
                                                 ---------------------------
                                                    1998            1997
                                                    ----            ----
                                                       (in thousands)
                      ASSETS 

CURRENT ASSETS:
    Cash and cash equivalents ............      $  31,649       $  26,865
    Short-term investments ...............          9,745          19,316
    Accounts receivable ..................         14,040          33,392
    Inventories ..........................         13,657          16,081
    Prepaid expenses and other ...........          5,020           3,080
                                                ---------       ---------
       Total current assets ..............         74,111          98,734
                                                ---------       ---------


PROPERTY, PLANT AND EQUIPMENT:
    Land .................................            540             540
    Building and improvements ............          5,981           3,782
    Machinery and equipment ..............          9,599           8,106
    Furniture and fixtures ...............          1,423           1,337
                                                ---------       ---------
                                                   17,543          13,765
    Less - Accumulated depreciation and
       amortization ......................         (6,377)         (3,562)
                                                ---------       ---------
         Net property, plant and equipment         11,166          10,203
                                                ---------       ---------

OTHER ASSETS .............................          4,536             559
                                                ---------       ---------
                                                $  89,813       $ 109,496
                                                =========       =========







   The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements.


                                      F-3

<PAGE>



                  CFM TECHNOLOGIES, INC. AND SUBSIDARIES
                        CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
 
                                                           OCTOBER 31,
                                                    ------------------------
                                                       1998          1997
                                                       ----          ----
                                                         (in thousands)
      LIABILITIES AND SHAREHOLDERS' EQUITY

CURRENT LIABILITIES:
    Current portion of long-term debt ..........    $     672      $     617
    Accounts payable ...........................        1,800          7,709
    Accrued expenses ...........................        7,373          8,612
                                                    ---------      ---------
        Total current liabilities ..............        9,845         16,938
                                                    ---------      ---------


LONG-TERM DEBT .................................        2,186          2,571
                                                    ---------      ---------
DEFERRED INCOME TAXES ..........................         --              119
                                                    ---------      ---------
COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES (Note 15)

SHAREHOLDERS' EQUITY:
    Preferred stock, no par value; 1,000,000
      authorized shares; no shares issued or
      outstanding ..............................         --             --
    Common stock, no par value; 30,000,000
      authorized shares; 7,964,366 and 7,913,588
      shares issued ............................       81,033         80,762
    Treasury stock,96,200 common
          shares at cost .......................         (762)          --
    Deferred compensation ......................          (47)          (235)
    Retained earnings (deficit) ................       (2,442)         9,341
                                                    ---------      ---------
        Total shareholders' equity .............       77,782         89,868
                                                    ---------      ---------
                                                    $  89,813      $ 109,496
                                                    =========      =========







   The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements.

                                      F-4

<PAGE>

                     CFM TECHNOLOGIES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
                      CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS

                                               YEAR ENDED OCTOBER 31,
                                      -------------------------------------
                                       1998            1997           1996
                                       ----            ----           ----
                                      (in thousands, except per share data)

NET SALES .....................      $ 33,155       $ 75,772       $ 44,013
COST OF SALES .................        24,426         40,072         23,317
                                     --------       --------       --------
     Gross profit .............         8,729         35,700         20,696
                                     --------       --------       --------
OPERATING EXPENSES:
  Research, development and
    engineering ...............        11,496          9,334          4,375
  Selling, general and
    administrative ............        17,568         19,360         11,679
                                     --------       --------       --------
     Total operating expenses .        29,064         28,694         16,054
                                     --------       --------       --------
     Operating income (loss) ..       (20,335)         7,006          4,642

INTEREST (INCOME) .............        (2,048)        (2,163)          (271)
INTEREST EXPENSE ..............           242            281            428
                                     --------       --------       --------
  Income (loss) before income
    taxes .....................       (18,529)         8,888          4,485
INCOME TAX PROVISION (BENEFIT)         (6,746)         2,666          1,525
                                     --------       --------       --------
NET INCOME (LOSS) .............      $(11,783)      $  6,222       $  2,960
                                     ========       ========       ========

NET INCOME (LOSS) PER
   COMMON SHARE:
      Basic ...................      $  (1.49)      $   0.85       $   0.64
                                     ========       ========       ========
      Diluted .................      $  (1.49)      $   0.80       $   0.61
                                     ========       ========       ========
SHARES USED IN COMPUTING
   NET INCOME (LOSS)
   PER COMMON SHARE:
      Basic ...................         7,908          7,318          4,624
                                     ========       ========       ========
      Diluted .................         7,908          7,764          4,831
                                     ========       ========       ========




   The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements.


                                      F-5

<PAGE>


                     CFM TECHNOLOGIES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
                 CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF SHAREHOLDERS' EQUITY

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                                           
                                                COMMON STOCK           TREASURY STOCK        DEFERRED      RETAINED
                                            -------------------      ------------------      COMPEN-       EARNINGS
                                             SHARES     AMOUNT       SHARES      AMOUNT      SATION        (DEFICIT)     TOTAL
                                             ------     ------       ------      ------      ------        ---------     -----
                                                                       (in thousands)

<S>                                           <C>      <C>            <C>       <C>          <C>          <C>          <C>     
BALANCE, OCTOBER 31, 1995 ...............     3,803    $  9,616          --     $   --      $   --        $    159     $  9,775
                                                                                                                     
  Proceeds from sale of common stock, net     2,250      19,976          --         --          --            --         19,976
  Net income ............................      --          --            --         --          --           2,960        2,960
                                           --------    --------      --------   --------    --------      --------     --------
BALANCE, OCTOBER 31, 1996 ...............     6,053      29,592          --         --          --           3,119       32,711
                                                                                                                     
  Proceeds from sale of common stock, net     1,751      49,288          --         --          --            --         49,288
  Proceeds from exercise of stock options        96         545          --         --          --            --            545
  Tax benefit from exercise of stock                                                                                 
    options .............................      --           764          --         --          --            --            764
  Deferred compensation charge ..........      --           317          --         --          (317)         --           --
  Amortization of deferred compensation .      --          --            --         --            82          --             82
  Common stock issued under Employee                                                                                 
    Stock Purchase Plan .................        14         256          --         --          --            --            256
  Net income ............................      --          --            --         --          --           6,222        6,222
                                           --------    --------      --------   --------    --------      --------     --------
BALANCE, OCTOBER 31, 1997 ...............     7,914      80,762          --         --          (235)        9,341       89,868
                                                                                                                     
  Proceeds from exercise of stock options         1           6          --         --          --            --              6
  Tax benefit from exercise of stock
    options .............................      --            (2)         --         --          --            --             (2)
  Deferred compensation adjustment ......      --          (164)         --         --           164          --           --
  Amortization of deferred compensation .      --          --            --         --            24          --             24
  Common stock issued under Employee                                                                                 
    Stock Purchase Plan .................        49         425          --         --          --            --            425
  Stock options issued for services .....      --             6          --         --          --            --              6
  Purchase of treasury shares, at cost ..      --          --              96       (762)       --            --           (762)
  Net loss ..............................      --          --            --         --          --         (11,783)     (11,783)
                                           --------    --------      --------   --------    --------      --------     --------
BALANCE, OCTOBER 31, 1998 ...............     7,964    $ 81,033            96   $   (762)   $    (47)     $ (2,442)    $ 77,782
                                           ========    ========      ========   ========    ========      ========     ========
                                                                                                                    
</TABLE>

   The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements.

                                      F-6

<PAGE>



                  CFM TECHNOLOGIES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
                   CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                  YEAR ENDED OCTOBER 31,
                                                          --------------------------------------
                                                            1998            1997           1996
                                                            ----            ----           ----
                                                                       (in thousands)
<S>                                                       <C>           <C>             <C>     
OPERATING ACTIVITIES:
    Net income (loss) ..............................     $(11,783)       $  6,222        $  2,960
    Adjustments to reconcile net income (loss)                        
     to net cash provided by (used in) operating                      
     activities:                                                      
      Depreciation and amortization ................        3,085           2,317             881
      Loss on property, plant and equipment disposal          421            --              --
      Deferred compensation ........................           30              82            --
      Deferred income tax benefit ..................       (4,578)           (757)            (41)
      (Increase) decrease in:                                         
        Accounts receivable ........................       19,352         (18,302)         (6,204)
        Inventories ................................        2,424          (8,034)         (4,347)
        Prepaid expenses and other .................       (1,500)         (1,347)           (178)
        Other assets ...............................          120            (186)            (59)
      Increase (decrease) in:                                         
        Accounts payable ...........................       (5,909)          2,780           2,392
        Accrued expenses ...........................       (1,377)          5,161             963
                                                         --------        --------        --------
        Net cash provided by (used in) operating                      
         activities ................................          285         (12,064)         (3,633)
                                                         --------        --------        --------
                                                                      
INVESTING ACTIVITIES:                                                 
    Purchases of short-term investments ............      (28,993)        (44,245)         (4,366)
    Proceeds from short-term investments ...........       38,564          27,875           1,420
    Purchases of property, plant and equipment .....       (3,920)         (4,286)         (2,891)
                                                         --------        --------        --------
          Net cash provided by (used in) investing                    
           activities ..............................        5,651         (20,656)         (5,837)
                                                         --------        --------        --------
                                                                      
FINANCING ACTIVITIES:                                                 
    Payments on long-term debt .....................         (819)           (576)         (1,606)
    Proceeds from sale of common stock, net ........          425          49,544          19,976
    Purchase of treasury shares ....................         (762)           --              --
    Proceeds from exercise of stock options ........            6             545            --
    Tax benefits from exercise of stock options ....           (2)            764            --
                                                         --------        --------        --------
        Net cash (used in) provided by financing                      
         activities ................................       (1,152)         50,277          18,370
                                                         --------        --------        --------
                                                                      
NET INCREASE IN CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS ..........        4,784          17,557           8,900
CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS, BEGINNING OF PERIOD .....       26,865           9,308             408
                                                         --------        --------        --------
CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS, END OF PERIOD ...........     $ 31,649        $ 26,865        $  9,308
                                                         ========        ========        ========
                                                                      
SUPPLEMENTAL DISCLOSURE OF CASH FLOW INFORMATION:                     
    Cash paid for interest expense .................     $    296        $    284        $    444
    Cash received for interest income ..............        2,185           1,975             251
    Cash paid for income taxes .....................        1,795           2,031           1,949
    Cash received from income tax refunds ..........        3,023            --              --
SUPPLEMENTAL SCHEDULE OF NON-CASH                                     
  INVESTING AND FINANCING ACTIVITIES:                                 
    Machinery acquired under capital leases ........     $    489        $    750        $  1,041
                                                                    
</TABLE>


   The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements.


                                      F-7

<PAGE>

                     CFM TECHNOLOGIES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
                   NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS


1.  DESCRIPTION OF BUSINESS:

     CFM Technologies, Inc. (the Company) designs, manufactures and markets
advanced wet processing equipment for sale to the worldwide semiconductor and
flat panel display industries.

2.  SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES:


Principles of Consolidation

     The consolidated financial statements include the accounts of the Company
and its wholly owned subsidiaries. All significant intercompany balances and
transactions have been eliminated.


Use of Estimates

     The preparation of financial statements in conformity with generally
accepted accounting principles requires management to make estimates and
assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and
disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial
statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the
reporting period. Actual amounts could differ from those estimates.


Cash, Cash Equivalents and Short-Term Investments

     The Company considers all highly liquid debt instruments purchased with an
original maturity of three months or less to be cash equivalents. Short-term
investments are carried at amortized cost which equals market value. The
investments have various maturity dates which do not exceed one year. All of the
Company's short-term investments are classified as available for sale pursuant
to Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 115, "Accounting for Certain
Investments in Debt and Equity Securities" (SFAS 115). Therefore any unrealized
holding gains or losses would be presented as a separate component of
shareholders' equity. At October 31, 1998 and 1997, there were no material
unrealized holding gains or losses. The gross proceeds from sales and maturities
of investments were $38,564,000, $27,875,000 and $1,420,000 for the years ended
October 31, 1998, 1997 and 1996, respectively. Gross realized gains and losses
for the years ended October 31, 1998, 1997 and 1996 were not material. For the
purpose of determining gross realized gains and losses, the cost of securities
sold is based upon specific identification.


                                      F-8

<PAGE>



     Cash and cash equivalents and short-term investments consisted of the
following:

                                                   OCTOBER 31,
                                         -----------------------------
                                            1998              1997
                                            ----              ----
     Cash and cash equivalents:
       Municipal and government
         securities ................    $ 6,568,000       $17,402,000
       Money market funds and demand
         accounts ..................     16,822,000              --
       Commercial paper ............      5,034,000         5,283,000
       Repurchase agreements .......      3,225,000         4,180,000
                                        -----------       -----------
                                        $31,649,000       $26,865,000
                                        ===========       ===========
     Short-term investments:
       Municipal and government
         securities ................    $ 8,260,000       $15,684,000
       Commercial paper ............        985,000         3,632,000
       Mortgage-backed government
         securities ................        500,000              --
                                        -----------       -----------
                                        $ 9,745,000       $19,316,000
                                        ===========       ===========


Inventories

      Inventories are valued at the lower of first-in, first-out cost or market.


Property, Plant and Equipment

      Property, plant and equipment are recorded at cost. Significant
improvements are capitalized and expenditures for maintenance and repairs are
charged to expense as incurred. Upon the sale or retirement of these assets, the
cost and related accumulated depreciation are removed from the accounts and any
gain or loss is included in income.

      Depreciation and amortization are provided using the straight-line method
based on the estimated useful lives of the assets as follows:

     Building and improvements ..................        5-40 years
     Machinery and equipment ....................        3-10 years
     Furniture and fixtures .....................        5-10 years

     Depreciation and amortization expense was $3,025,000, $2,294,000 and
$862,000 in fiscal 1998, 1997 and 1996, respectively.


Revenue Recognition

      Net sales are generally recognized upon shipment of the system and, if
recognized prior to shipment, upon completion of customer inspection or
acceptance where risk of loss is transferred to the customer. The estimated
costs of system installation and warranty are accrued when the related sale is
recognized.


                                      F-9
<PAGE>


Research, Development and Engineering Expenses

     Research, development and engineering expenses are charged to expense as
incurred. Research, development and engineering expenses were net of
reimbursement of $0, $890,000 and $1,592,000 in fiscal 1998, 1997 and 1996,
respectively. Engineering expenses consist of personnel and material costs
related to the development of new products and the integration of existing
products into application-specific systems.


Income Taxes

     The Company accounts for income taxes under Statement of Financial
Accounting Standards No. 109, "Accounting for Income Taxes" (SFAS No. 109). SFAS
No. 109 requires the liability method of accounting for deferred income taxes.
Deferred tax assets and liabilities are determined based on the difference
between the financial statement and tax bases of assets and liabilities.
Deferred tax assets or liabilities at the end of each period are determined
using the tax rate expected to be in effect when taxes are actually paid or
recovered.


Concentration of Credit Risk

     Financial instruments that potentially subject the Company to concentration
of credit risk are accounts receivable. The Company's customer base principally
comprises companies within the semiconductor industry, which historically has
been volatile. The Company does not require collateral from its customers.


Fair Value of Financial Instruments

     The Company's financial instruments consist primarily of cash and cash
equivalents, short-term investments, accounts receivable, accounts payable and
debt instruments. The book values of cash and cash equivalents, short-term
investments, accounts receivable and accounts payable are considered to be
representative of their respective fair values. None of the Company's debt
instruments that are outstanding as of October 31, 1998 have readily
ascertainable market values; however, the carrying values are considered to
approximate their respective fair values. See Note 7 for the terms and carrying
values of the Company's various debt instruments.


Net Income (Loss) Per Common Share

     Basic net income (loss) per common share was computed by dividing net
income (loss) by the weighted average number of shares of common stock
outstanding during the period. Diluted net income per common share for the
fiscal years ended October 31, 1997 and 1996 reflects the potential dilution
from the exercise of outstanding stock options into common stock. Inclusion of
shares of common stock potentially issuable upon the exercise of stock options
in calculating diluted net loss per common share for the year ended October 31,
1998, would have been antidilutive, and therefore such shares were not included
in the calculation. The Company adopted SFAS No. 128, "Earnings per Share,"
effective December 15, 1997. As a result, the Company's reported earnings per
share for the years ended October 31, 1997 and 1996 were restated.


                                      F-10

<PAGE>

     The net income (loss) and weighted average common and common equivalent
shares outstanding for purposes of calculating net income (loss) per common
share are computed as follows:

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                 YEAR ENDED OCTOBER 31,
                                                    ------------------------------------------------
                                                       1998                1997             1996
                                                       ----                ----             ----
<S>                                                <C>                  <C>               <C>       
Net income (loss) used for basic
  and diluted net income (loss)    
  per common share...........................      $(11,783,000)        $6,222,000        $2,960,000
                                                   ============       ============      ============

Weighted average common shares outstanding
  used for basic net income (loss) 
  per common share..........................          7,908,000          7,318,000         4,624,000

Dilutive effect of common stock
 options outstanding........................              --               446,000           207,000
                                                   ------------       ------------      ------------

Weighted average common and common equivalent
  shares outstanding used for diluted net
  income (loss) per common share............          7,908,000          7,764,000         4,831,000
                                                   ============       ============      ============

Net income (loss) per common share:
      Basic................................             $(1.49)             $0.85             $0.64
                                                        ======              =====             =====
      Diluted..............................             $(1.49)             $0.80             $0.61
                                                        ======              =====             =====
</TABLE>

New Accounting Pronouncements

     In June 1997, the Financial Accounting Standards Board issued Statement of
Financial Accounting Standards No. 130 "Reporting Comprehensive Income" (SFAS
No. 130). SFAS No. 130 is effective for fiscal years beginning after December
15, 1997. SFAS No. 130 establishes standards for the reporting and display of
comprehensive income in a set of financial statements. Comprehensive income is
defined as the change in net assets of a business enterprise during a period
from transactions generated from non-owner sources. It includes all changes in
equity during a period except those resulting from investments by owners and
distributions to owners. Management believes that the adoption of SFAS No. 130
will not have a material impact on the Company's financial statements.

     In June 1997, the Financial Accounting Standards Board issued Statement of
Financial Accounting Standards No. 131 "Disclosures about Segments of an
Enterprise and Related Information" (SFAS No. 131). SFAS No. 131 applies to all
public companies and is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15,
1997. SFAS No. 131 requires that business segment financial information be
reported in the financial statements utilizing the management approach. The
management approach is defined as the manner in which management organizes the
segments within the enterprise for making operating decisions and assessing
performance. Management believes that the adoption of SFAS No. 131 will not have
a material impact on the Company's financial statements.

      In March 1998, the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants
issued Statement of Position 98-1, "Accounting for the Costs of Computer
Software Developed or Obtained for Internal Use" (SOP 98-1). SOP 98-1 requires
that certain costs related to the development or purchase of internal-use
software be capitalized and amortized over the estimated useful life of the
software, and is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 1998.
SOP 98-1 also requires that costs related to the preliminary project stage and
post implementation/operations stage in an internal-use computer software
development project be expensed as incurred. Management believes that the
adoption of SOP 98-1 will not have a material impact on the Company's financial
position or results of operations.

     In June 1998, the Financial Accounting Standards Board issued Statement of
Financial Accounting Standards No. 133 "Accounting for Derivative Instruments
and Hedging Activities" (SFAS No. 133). SFAS No. 133 is effective for fiscal
years beginning after June 15, 1999. SFAS No. 133 establishes accounting and
reporting standards for derivative instruments, including certain derivative
instruments embedded in other contracts, and for derivatives used for hedging
activities. SFAS No. 133 requires that all derivatives be recognized either as
an asset or liability and measures them at fair value. Management believes that
the adoption of SFAS No. 133 will not have a material impact on the Company's
financial statements.


                                      F-11

<PAGE>


Reclassifications

      Certain reclassifications of previously reported balances have been made
to conform with the current year classification of such balances.


3.  ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE:
                                               OCTOBER 31,
                                      -----------------------------
                                          1998            1997
                                          ----            ----
            Billed ...............    $10,058,000      $21,944,000
            Unbilled..............      3,982,000       11,448,000
                                      -----------      -----------
                                      $14,040,000      $33,392,000
                                      ===========      ===========
                        
     Unbilled receivables represent final retainage amounts to be billed upon
completion of the installation process.

     As of October 31, 1998, the Company had outstanding accounts receivable
totaling $8,502,000 from two customers who purchased several of the Company's
systems for Korean installations.

     No allowance for doubtful accounts receivable has been recorded because the
Company believes that all such accounts receivable are fully realizable.


4.  INVENTORIES:

                                               OCTOBER 31,
                                      -----------------------------
                                          1998            1997
                                          ----            ----
        Raw material.............      $ 8,669,000     $ 8,373,000
        Work in progress.........        4,988,000       7,708,000
                                       -----------     -----------
                                       $13,657,000     $16,081,000
                                       ===========     ===========

5.  LINE OF CREDIT:

      The Company has a $7,500,000 unsecured demand line of credit with a bank.
The line of credit agreement does not have a stated maturity or expiration date;
however, outstanding borrowings are due upon demand by the bank. Interest is
charged at the bank's prime rate and was 8.2% at October 31, 1998. As of October
31, 1998 and 1997, the Company had no borrowings on the line. The line of credit
requires the Company to comply with certain financial and other covenants,
including maintaining a minimum tangible net worth and minimum cash flow to debt
service coverage ratio. The line also provides for the issuance of letters of
credit. As of October 31, 1998, the Company had an outstanding letter of credit
in the amount of $300,000 guaranteeing payments associated with its new leased
facility in Exton, Pennsylvania (see Note 15).


                                      F-12

<PAGE>


6.  ACCRUED EXPENSES:
                                             OCTOBER 31,
                                     ---------------------------
                                        1998            1997
                                        ----            ----
Warranty and installation costs      $2,016,000       $2,277,000
Payroll and payroll related ...       1,263,000        1,932,000
Accrued commissions ...........       1,608,000        3,080,000
Other .........................       2,486,000        1,323,000
                                     ----------       ----------
                                     $7,373,000       $8,612,000
                                     ==========       ==========
                                 

7.    LONG-TERM DEBT:

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                                    OCTOBER 31,
                                                                              -----------------------
                                                                               1998            1997
                                                                               ----            ----
<S>                                                                          <C>            <C>     
 Mortgage note payable to bank, payable in monthly installments of $6,250
    plus interest at 8.9% through February 2009, collateralized by land
    and building ........................................................  $   775,000     $   850,000

 Mortgage note payable to Pennsylvania Industrial Development Authority
    (PIDA), payable in monthly installments of $4,363 including interest
    at 2% through August 2009, collateralized by land and building ......      510,000         551,000

 Mortgage note payable to Chester County Development Council, payable in
    monthly installments of $1,067 including interest at 5% through
    August 2004, collateralized by land and building ....................       64,000          74,000

 Term notes payable to bank, payable in monthly installments of $5,834
    plus interest at the bank's prime rate plus 1% through October 1999,
    collateralized by certain assets ....................................      104,000         123,000

 Capitalized lease obligations, lease periods expiring at various dates
    through 2003, interest rates range from 7% to 12%, collateralized by
    the leased assets ...................................................    1,405,000       1,590,000

                                                                             2,858,000       3,188,000
                                                                           -----------     -----------
Less- Current portion ...................................................     (672,000)       (617,000)
                                                                           -----------     -----------
                                                                           $ 2,186,000     $ 2,571,000
                                                                           ===========     ===========
</TABLE>

                                      F-13
<PAGE>


Maturities of long-term debt as of October 31, 1998 are as follows:


   FISCAL YEAR
   -----------
   1999 ................................      $  672,000  
   2000 ................................         552,000  
   2001 ................................         492,000  
   2002 ................................         297,000  
   2003 ................................         146,000  
   2004 and thereafter .................         699,000  
                                              ----------
                                              $2,858,000
                                              ==========

      The mortgage note due to PIDA contains certain financial covenants, the
most restrictive of which requires minimum levels of shareholders' equity. The
Company leases machinery and equipment and furniture and fixtures under capital
leases expiring in various years through 2003. The assets and liabilities under
these leases are recorded at the lower of the present value of the minimum lease
payments or the fair value of the asset. The assets are depreciated over their
estimated useful lives since ownership will transfer upon lease expiration. The
net book value of equipment under capitalized lease obligations as of October
31, 1998 were $1,342,000. The minimum lease payments, including interest, under
the capital lease obligations as of October 31, 1998 were $553,000, $493,000,
$395,000, $175,000 and $13,000 for fiscal 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002 and 2003,
respectively.


8.  SHAREHOLDERS' EQUITY:

      On April 17, 1997, the Company's Board of Directors adopted a Shareholder
Rights Plan designed to protect the Company's shareholders in the event of an
attempt to acquire control of the Company on terms which do not deal fairly with
all of the Company's shareholders. Terms of the Rights Plan provide for a
dividend distribution of one right for each share of Common Stock to holders of
record at the close of business on May 9, 1997. The rights will become
exercisable only in the event, with certain exceptions, an acquiring party
accumulates, or announces an offer to acquire, 20% or more of the Company's
Common Stock. The rights will expire on April 24, 2007. Each right will entitle
the holder to buy one one-hundredth of a share of a new series of preferred
stock at a price of $180. In addition, upon the occurrence of certain events,
holders of the rights will be entitled to purchase either Company stock or
shares in an "acquiring entity" at one-half of market value. The Company will
generally be entitled to redeem the rights at $.001 per right at any time until
the tenth day following the acquisition of 20% of its Common Stock.

      On February 19, 1997, the Company consummated a follow-on public offering
of its Common Stock. The Company sold 1,750,500 shares (including the
underwriters' over-allotment) of its Common Stock, no par value, at an offering
price of $30.00 per share. After deducting the underwriters' discount and other
offering expenses, the net proceeds to the Company were approximately
$49,288,000.


                                      F-14
<PAGE>

      On June 21, 1996, the Company consummated an initial public offering of
its Common Stock. The Company sold 2,249,661 shares (including the underwriters'
over-allotment) of its Common Stock, no par value, at an initial public offering
price of $10.00 per share. After deducting the underwriters' discount and other
offering expenses, the net proceeds to the Company were approximately
$19,976,000.

     On December 19, 1995, the Company's Board of Directors adopted, and on
January 3, 1996, the Company's shareholders approved the Employee Stock Purchase
Plan (Purchase Plan). The Purchase Plan allows eligible employees to purchase up
to 300,000 shares of common stock at the lower of 85% of the fair market value
of the stock on the first or last day of the applicable six month purchase
period. Eligible employees were able to participate in the Purchase Plan
beginning on October 1, 1996 through payroll withholding of up to $500 per pay
period. As of October 31, 1998 and 1997, employee withholdings included in
accrued expenses were $36,000 and $42,000, respectively. During fiscal 1998,
1997 and 1996, 49,939, 13,829 and 0 shares of Common Stock, respectively, were
issued under the Purchase Plan.

      On June 9, 1998, the Board of Directors authorized the Company to
repurchase up to 750,000 shares of the Company's Common Stock in open market,
privately negotiated or other transactions in conformity with the rules of the
Securities and Exchange Commission. As of October 31, 1998, the Company had
repurchased 96,200 shares of the Company's common stock at a cost of $761,715.


9.  STOCK OPTIONS:

     The Company has a stock option plan (the 1992 Plan) whereby options to
purchase common shares were issued to key management personnel, directors and
consultants at exercise prices not less than fair market value. The options have
vesting terms set by the Executive Compensation and Stock Option Committee of
the Board of Directors and expire 10 years after the date of grant.

     On December 19, 1995, the Company's Board of Directors adopted, and on
January 3, 1996, the Company's shareholders approved, the 1995 Incentive Plan
(Incentive Plan) and the Non-Employee Directors' Stock Option Plan (Directors'
Plan). The Incentive Plan and the Directors' Plan authorize the granting of up
to 1,000,000 shares of Common Stock or options to purchase Common Stock to
Company employees and up to 150,000 options to purchase Common Stock to
non-employee directors, respectively. The Company will not grant any additional
options under the 1992 Plan.


     The following table summarizes stock option activity:

                                                                     WEIGHTED
                                                     RANGE OF        AVERAGE
                                                     EXERCISE        EXERCISE
                                      NUMBER OF     PRICES PER       PRICE PER
                                       SHARES         SHARE            SHARE
                                      ---------     -----------     -----------

Options outstanding at
  October 31, 1995 .........          606,250       $0.24-$7.52       $ 4.36
     Granted ...............          139,905        7.52-10.75         8.30
     Canceled ..............             (832)             7.52         7.52
                                    ---------
Options outstanding at
  October 31, 1996 .........          745,323        0.24-10.75         5.10

     Granted ..............           401,600      18.25-38.625        21.01
     Exercised ............           (96,335)       2.41-18.25         5.66
     Canceled .............           (11,480)       7.52-18.25         9.18
                                    ---------
Options outstanding at
  October 31, 1997 ........         1,039,108       0.24-38.625        11.14

     Granted ..............           307,767      7.625-19.937        12.56
     Exercised ............              (839)            7.516         7.52
     Canceled .............           (77,743)     7.516-38.625        21.49
                                    ---------
Options outstanding at
  October 31, 1998 ........         1,268,293     $0.24-$38.625       $10.95
                                    =========



                                      F-15

<PAGE>

     The following table summarizes information regarding stock options
outstanding at October 31, 1998:

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

                                          OPTIONS OUTSTANDING               OPTIONS EXERCISABLE
                                -------------------------------------     -----------------------
                                              WEIGHTED      WEIGHTED
                                              AVERAGE       AVERAGE
                                 NUMBER      REMAINING      EXERCISE        NUMBER       WEIGHTED
   RANGE OF                    OUTSTANDING   CONTRACTUAL     PRICE        EXERCISABLE    AVERAGE
EXERCISE PRICES                AT OCTOBER     LIFE IN         PER          AT OCTOBER    EXERCISE
                                31, 1998       YEARS         SHARE         31, 1998      PRICE
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<S>                               <C>          <C>          <C>              <C>         <C>          
$ 0.24                            3,327        3.2          $ 0.24           3,327       $ 0.24       
$ 2.41                          330,053        3.5          $ 2.41         330,053       $ 2.41  
$ 7.52                          228,215        6.6          $ 7.52         187,799       $ 7.52     
$ 7.625                          89,370        9.9          $ 7.63           2,205       $ 7.63
$ 9.00-$10.75                    56,575        8.0          $ 9.24          36,004       $ 9.24
$ 11.56-$14.31                  152,047        9.2          $13.78           1,700       $14.31
$ 15.75-$17.75                   52,151        9.3          $17.03             375       $17.75
$ 18.25                         313,400        8.2          $18.25         120,800       $18.25       
$ 19.94-$34.31                    8,556        8.5          $23.35           6,373       $23.40   
$ 36.125-$38.625                 34,600        8.4          $36.13          13,000       $36.13 

</TABLE>

     As of October 31, 1998, there were 406,098 stock options available for
grant under the Company's stock option plans. During fiscal year 1998, 32,125
options were re-priced based on fair market value at the time of the re-pricing.
No officers or directors had any options re-priced.

     The Company applies Accounting Principles Board Opinion No. 25, "Accounting
for Stock Issued to Employees" and the related interpretations in accounting for
its stock option plans. The disclosure requirements of Statement of Financial
Accounting Standards No. 123 "Accounting for Stock Based Compensation" (SFAS No.
123) were adopted by the Company in fiscal 1997. Had compensation cost for
options granted during fiscal 1998, 1997 and 1996 under the stock option plans,
as well as the Common Stock issued under the Purchase Plan (see Note 8), been
determined based upon the fair value of the options and Common Stock at the date
of grant, as prescribed by SFAS No. 123, the Company's pro forma net income
(loss) and pro forma net income (loss) per common share would have been reduced
to the following amounts:


                                             YEAR ENDED OCTOBER 31,
                                 ---------------------------------------------
                                      1998             1997           1996
                                      ----             ----           ----
Net income (loss) .........      $(11,783,000)     $6,222,000      $2,960,000
Pro forma net income (loss)       (12,994,000)      5,369,000       2,843,000
Net income (loss) per
  common share:
      Basic ...............             (1.49)           0.85            0.64
      Diluted .............             (1.49)           0.80            0.61
Pro forma net income (loss)          
  per common share:                  
      Basic ...............             (1.68)           0.74            0.62
      Diluted .............             (1.68)           0.69            0.59
                                    


                                      F-16

<PAGE>


      The weighted average fair value of each stock option granted during the
 years ended October 31, 1998, 1997 and 1996 was $6.67, $13.36 and $4.65,
 respectively. As of October 31, 1998, the weighted average remaining
 contractual life of each stock option outstanding was 6.9 years. The weighted
 average remaining contractual life of each stock option granted during the
 years ended October 31, 1998, 1997 and 1996 was 9.4, 9.6 and 8.9 years,
 respectively. The fair value of each option grant is estimated on the date of
 grant using the Black - Scholes option pricing model with the following
 weighted average assumptions:


                                             YEAR ENDED OCTOBER 31,
                                 ---------------------------------------------
                                      1998             1997           1996
                                      ----             ----           ----
Risk - free interest rate .......    5.37%          6.26%            5.98%
Expected dividend yield .........     --              --               --
Expected life ...................  5.5 years      5.5 years        5.5 years
Expected volatility .............      58%            53%              53%

      Because additional option grants are expected to be made each year, the
above pro forma disclosures are not representative of pro forma effects of
reported net income for future years.

      In fiscal 1997, the Company granted stock options to purchase an aggregate
of up to 56,000 shares of Common Stock to an employee and certain consultants
for which the Company has recorded deferred compensation based upon the
difference between the deemed value for accounting purposes of the Company's
Common Stock and the exercise price per share on the date of option grant. The
deferred compensation balance will be amortized as compensation expense over the
option vesting periods which range from one to four years. In fiscal 1998, the
Company granted stock options to purchase up to 1,205 shares of Common Stock to
a consultant in exchange for services provided to the Company. The difference
between the deemed value for accounting purposes of the Company's Common Stock
and the exercise price per share on the date of option grant was recorded as an
expense.


10.   EMPLOYEE BENEFIT PLANS:

      The Company has a defined contribution retirement plan for the benefit of
eligible employees. Management believes that the plan qualifies under Section
401(k) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended. The plan provides for
matching contributions by the Company at a discretionary percentage of eligible
pre-tax contributions by the employee. Matching contributions by the Company
were $310,000, $206,000 and $107,000 for the years ended October 31, 1998, 1997
and 1996, respectively.

     In fiscal 1995, the Company established a profit-sharing plan for the
benefit of eligible employees. The plan provides for a target contribution of
approximately 2% of total planned salaries and wages, with actual payments based
upon the achievement of certain annual performance results. The Company recorded
profit sharing expense of $0, $175,000 and $65,000 for the years ended October
31, 1998, 1997 and 1996, respectively.



                                      F-17

<PAGE>


11.  RELATED PARTY TRANSACTIONS:

     The Company recorded commission expense in fiscal 1998, 1997 and 1996 of
$391,000, $3,948,000, and $2,444,000, respectively, related to commissions
payable to a sales agent which is partially owned by a shareholder of the
Company. Commissions payable to this sales agent included in accrued expenses as
of October 31, 1998 and 1997 were $1,437,000 and $2,586,000, respectively. The
sales agent is controlled by an individual who is a director and shareholder of
the Company. The Company also recorded net sales in fiscal 1998 and 1997 of
$4,891,000 and $6,760,000, respectively, to a semiconductor company controlled
by the same director of the Company.


12.   INCOME TAXES:

     The components of income (loss) before income taxes are as follows:

                                           YEAR ENDED OCTOBER 31,
                           ----------------------------------------------------
                                 1998                1997               1996
                                 ----                ----               ----
          Domestic.......    $(18,707,000)        $7,729,000        $4,363,000
          Foreign........         178,000          1,159,000           122,000
                             ------------         ----------        ----------
                             $(18,529,000)        $8,888,000        $4,485,000
                             ============         ==========        ==========

        The components of the income tax provision (benefit) are as follows:

                                            YEAR ENDED OCTOBER 31,
                           ----------------------------------------------------
                                 1998                1997               1996
                                 ----                ----               ----
         Current:       
           Federal........   $(2,280,000)         $2,936,000        $1,451,000
           Foreign........       116,000             412,000            42,000
           State .........        (4,000)             75,000            73,000
                             -----------          ----------        ----------
                              (2,168,000)          3,423,000         1,566,000
                             -----------          ----------        ----------
                       
         Deferred:     
           Federal........    (4,528,000)           (732,000)          (12,000)
           State..........       (50,000)            (25,000)          (29,000)
                             -----------          ----------        ----------
                              (4,578,000)           (757,000)          (41,000)
                             -----------          ----------        ----------
                             $(6,746,000)         $2,666,000        $1,525,000
                             ===========          ==========        ==========


      Income tax expense (benefit) differs from the amount currently payable or
receivable because certain expenses, primarily depreciation and accruals, are
reported in different periods for financial reporting and income tax purposes.




                                      F-18

<PAGE>


     The federal statutory income tax rate is reconciled to the effective income
tax rate as follows:

                                                   YEAR ENDED OCTOBER 31,
                                             ----------------------------------
                                               1998        1997        1996
                                               ----        ----        ----
Federal statutory rate ..................     (34.0)%      34.0%       34.0%
State income taxes, net of
  federal benefit .......................      (0.2)        0.4         0.6
Foreign and U.S. tax effects attributable
  to foreign operations .................       0.3        (4.9)       (1.3)
Research and development credit .........      (0.9)       (0.3)       (0.2)
Other ...................................      (1.6)        0.8         0.9
                                               ----        ----        ----
                                              (36.4)%      30.0%       34.0%
                                               ====        ====        ====


     The components of the net current and long-term deferred tax assets and
liabilities, measured under SFAS No. 109, are as follows:

                                                    OCTOBER 31,
                                          ------------------------------
                                             1998              1997
                                             ----              ----
Deferred tax assets-
  Net operating loss carry forwards      $ 2,715,000       $      --
  Tax credit carry forwards .......        1,374,000              --
  Inventories .....................          400,000            92,000
  Warranty and installation
    accrual .......................          685,000           683,000
  Commissions .....................          387,000           452,000
  Other ...........................          435,000           144,000
                                         -----------       -----------
                                           5,996,000         1,371,000
Deferred tax liability-
  Depreciation ....................          (28,000)         (119,000)
                                         ===========       ===========
    Net deferred tax asset ........      $ 5,968,000       $ 1,252,000
                                         ===========       ===========

     Based on an assessment of the Company's taxable earnings history and
expected future taxable income, management has determined that it is more likely
than not that the net deferred tax assets will be realized in future periods.
The Company may be required to provide a valuation allowance for this asset in
the future if it does not generate sufficient taxable income as planned.
Additionally, the ultimate realization of this asset could be negatively
impacted by market conditions and other variables not known or anticipated at
this time.


                                      F-19

<PAGE>


13. CUSTOMER AND GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION:

     The Company's operations are conducted in one business segment. Export net
sales were $15,228,000, $49,019,000, and $27,789,000 in fiscal 1998, 1997 and
1996, respectively. Export net sales to Europe and East Asia were $5,983,000 and
$9,245,000 in fiscal 1998, $13,427,000 and $35,592,000 in fiscal 1997 and
$13,140,000 and $14,649,000 in fiscal 1996, respectively.


     The following table summarizes significant customers with net sales in
excess of 10% of net sales:

                                                YEAR ENDED OCTOBER 31,
                                     -----------------------------------------
CUSTOMER                                 1998           1997            1996
--------                                 ----           ----            ----

       A ..........................   $6,499,000              *     $11,149,000
                                                   
       B ..........................    4,891,000              *              *
                                                                    
       C ..........................    4,404,000    $ 8,534,000              *
                                                                    
       D ..........................    3,452,000              *              *
                                                                    
       E ..........................    3,427,000              *              *
                                                                    
       F ..........................            *              *      8,361,000
                                                                    
       G ..........................            *              *      4,762,000
                                                                    
       H ..........................            *     16,100,000     12,828,000
                                                                    
                                                                    
----------                                                        
* Net sales less than 10% of net sales


14. SUPPLIER CONCENTRATION:

      The Company relies to a substantial extent on outside vendors to
manufacture and supply many of the components and subassemblies used in the
Company's systems. Certain of these are obtained from a sole supplier or a
limited group of suppliers, many of which are small, independent companies.
Moreover, the Company believes that certain of these components and
subassemblies can only be obtained from its current suppliers. The Company's
reliance on outside vendors generally, and on sole suppliers in particular,
involves several risks, including a potential inability to obtain an adequate
supply of required components and reduced control over pricing, timely delivery
and quality of components.

                                      F-20

<PAGE>

15. COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES:

      In fiscal 1995, the Company entered into a non-cancelable lease for office
facilities with an expiration date in November 2000 and annual rental payments
of $548,000 per year. In fiscal 1997, the Company entered into a non-cancelable
agreement to lease a 60,000 square foot production facility and an 80,000 square
foot office facility to be built for the Company in Exton, Pennsylvania. The
operating lease has an initial term of 20 years and minimum annual rental
payments of $1,482,250 for each year of the initial term. Options to extend the
term of the lease for a total of 9.5 additional years at minimum annual rental
payments of not more than $1,518,037 and a subsequent additional 5.5 years at
fair market value are included in the lease. Rentals began on the production
facility in October 1998 and rentals on the office facility are expected to
begin by mid 1999. The Company expects to occupy the production facility in the
second fiscal quarter of 1999 and the office facility in mid 1999.

     Future minimum rental payments as of October 31, 1998 on these leases are
as follows:

               FISCAL YEAR
               -----------
                1999 ............................        $1,857,000
                2000 ............................         1,582,000
                2001 ............................         1,482,000
                2002 ............................         1,482,000
                2003 ............................         1,482,000
                Thereafter ......................        22,569,000

     The Company has asserted claims of its U.S. Patent No. 4,911,761 (the "761
patent") against two defendants in two actions, alleging infringement,
inducement of infringement, and contributory infringement of the `761 patent. In
the first of these actions, on December 12, 1997, a jury returned a verdict that
the defendant willfully infringed the `761 patent, that the `761 patent was not
invalid and awarded the Company damages of $3,105,000. The defendant has
appealed this verdict and the Company has appealed certain matters related to
the damages awarded. In the second action, the party's have submitted additional
information on the case and the court has not yet issued a decision. In
addition, the Company is also both a defendant and a counterclaim plaintiff in a
third litigation where the plaintiff seeks a declaratory judgment of
non-infringement and that the `761 patent is invalid and the Company has
counterclaimed alleging infringement, inducement of infringement, and
contributory infringement of the `761 patent. Discovery is presently ongoing
with a claims construction hearing set for September 10, 1999 and trial
currently set to begin May 1, 2000.

     Furthermore, in Europe, a competitor has filed nullification proceedings
against the Company's drying patents in Germany (DE68921757.8), the UK
(EP428,784), France (EP428,784), The Netherlands (23184), and Ireland (66389).
The Company is proceeding to defend these patents. These proceedings could
result in the nullification of any or all of the subject patents in the
respective countries.

     Management believes that the ultimate resolution of these matters will not
have a material negative impact on the Company's financial position or results
of operations.


                                      F-21

<PAGE>

                                   SIGNATURES

     Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on
its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.


                              CFM Technologies, Inc.


                              By: /s/  Roger A. Carolin
                                  ----------------------------------------
                                     Roger A. Carolin
                                     President and Chief Executive Officer


     Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Act of 1934, this report has
been signed below by the following persons on behalf of the registrant and in
the capacities and on the date indicated.

      Signature                  Title                         Date
      ---------                  -----                         ----

/s/  Christopher F. McConnell    Chairman of the Board         January 22, 1999
-----------------------------    of Directors
                                 
                                 
/s/  Roger A. Carolin            President, Chief Executive    January 22, 1999
-----------------------------    Officer and Director
                                 (Principal Executive Officer)
                                 
/s/  Lorin J. Randall            Vice President, Chief         January 22, 1999
-----------------------------    Financial Officer,
                                 Treasurer and Secretary
                                 (Principal Financial
                                 Officer and Principal
                                 Accounting Officer)
                                 
/s/  James Kim                   Director                      January 22, 1999
----------------------------- 
                                 
/s/  Brad Mattson                Director                      January 22, 1999
----------------------------- 
                                 
/s/  Burton E. McGillivray       Director                      January 22, 1999
----------------------------- 
                                 
/s/  Milton S. Stearns, Jr.      Director                      January 22, 1999
----------------------------- 



                                      E-1

<PAGE>

                                  EXHIBIT INDEX


EXHIBIT
NUMBER      DESCRIPTION

3.1         Articles of Incorporation of CFM Technologies, Inc., as amended*

3.1.1       Amendment to Articles of Incorporation.**

3.2         By-Laws of CFM Technologies, Inc.*

4.1         Form of Common Stock Certificate.*

4.2         Statement with Respect to Shares filed with the Pennsylvania
            Department of State on May 1, 1997.*****

10.1        Employment Agreement dated as of January 9, 1995 by and between 
            CFM Technologies, Inc. and Lorin Jeffry Randall.*

10.2        Stock Option Agreement dated March 18, 1991 between 
            CFM Technologies, Inc. and Burton McGillivray, as
            extended and amended on June 11, 1993 and as amended on 
            September 25, 1994.*

10.3        Stock Option Agreement dated as of December 9, 1994 by and 
            between CFM Technologies, Inc. and Milton
            Stearns, as amended on November 3, 1995.*

10.4        CFM Technologies, Inc. Annual Profit Sharing Plan.*

10.4.1      Amendment to CFM Technologies, Inc. Annual Profit Sharing  Plan.***

10.5        CFM Technologies, Inc. 1992 Employee Stock Option Plan.*

10.6        Amended and Restated CFM Technologies, Inc. 1995 Incentive Plan.****

10.7        Amended and Restated CFM Technologies, Inc. 
            Non-Employee Directors' Stock Option Plan.****

10.8        CFM Technologies, Inc. Employee Stock Purchase Plan.*

10.9        Rights Agreement dated as of April 24, 1997 between 
            CFM Technologies, Inc. and American Stock
            Transfer and Trust Co., as Rights Agent.*****

10.10       Distributor  Agreement dated November 28, 1991 by and between 
            ANAM Semiconductor  Design Co., Ltd. and
            CFM Technologies, Incorporated, and supplement to the 
            Distributor Agreement dated August 26, 1994.*

10.11       Distributor  Agreement dated March 3, 1992 by and between Innotech
            Corporation and CFM  Technologies, Inc., 
            as modified on June 15, 1994.*

10.12       Lease  Agreement  dated  October  10,  1995  by and  between  
            Hough/Loew  Construction,  Inc. and CFM Technologies. Inc. and 
            Addendum to Lease Agreement dated October 10, 1995.*

10.12.1     Amendment Number Two to Lease Agreement dated April 30, 1996 by and
            between and CFM Technologies, Inc. and 
            Hough/Loew Construction, Inc.***

10.13       Commercial Lease Agreement dated December 16, 1996 
            between CFM Technologies, Inc. and Devereau
            Properties, Inc.***

10.13.1     First Amendment to Commercial Lease Agreement dated 
            August 22, 1997 between CFM Technologies, Inc.
            and Devereau Properties, Inc.


                                      E-2

<PAGE>


10.14       Loan Agreement dated July 27, 1994 by and between 
            Chester County Development Council ("CCDC") and CFM
            Technologies, Incorporated. *

10.15       $100,000 Mortgage dated as of July 27, 1994, 
            CFM Technologies, Incorporated to CCDC. *

10.16       Guaranties dated October 13, 1995 executed by CFMT, Inc.
            and CFM International Corp. in favor of
            Corestates Bank, N.A. ("CoreStates"). *

10.17       Mortgage dated February 16, 1994 between CFM Technologies,
            Incorporated and Corestates. *

10.18       $150,000 Commercial Promissory Note dated September 28, 1994 
            from CFM Technologies, Incorporated to Corestates. *

10.19       $100,000 Commercial Promissory Note dated August 11, 1994
            from CFM Technologies, Incorporated to Corestates. *

10.20       Assignment of Leases, Rents, Agreements of Sale, Licenses and
            Permits dated February 16, 1994 by CFM
            Technologies, Inc.  to CoreStates.*

10.21       Agent Agreement dated December 16, 1996 between 
            CFM Technologies, Inc. and Ampoc Far East Company Limited.***

10.22       Letter Agreement dated March 25, 1996 between CoreStates and 
            CFM Technologies, Inc. and $7,500,000 
            Master Demand Note dated April 1, 1996 from 
            CFM Technologies, Inc. to CoreStates.*

10.23       Lease Agreement dated July 16, 1997 between CFM Technologies, Inc. 
            and CFM Partners (No relationship with CFM Technologies, Inc.).

10.24       Agent Agreement dated April 15, 1997 by and between 
            Aneric Enterprise PTE Limited and CFM Technologies, Inc.

10.25       Agent Agreement dated October 29, 1997 by and between 
            Silicon International Ltd. and CFM Technologies, Inc.

10.26       Agent Agreement dated January 7, 1999 by and between 
            PKL Ltd. and CFM Technologies, Inc.

21          Subsidiaries of the registrant.

23.1        Consent of Arthur Andersen LLP.

27          Financial Data Schedule.

----------

*      Incorporated by reference to the Registrant's Registration Statement on
       Form S-1 (Registration No. 33-80359) declared effective on June 18, 1996.

**     Incorporated by reference to the Registrant's definitive Proxy Statement
       dated and filed on February 13, 1997.

***    Incorporated by reference to the Registrant's Registration Statement on
       Form S-1 (Registration No. 333-20325), filed on January 24, 1996, and the
       Amendment No. 1 to such Registration Statement filed on January 27, 1997.

****   Incorporated by reference to the Registrant's Quarterly Report on Form
       10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended April 30, 1997.

*****  Incorporated by reference to the Registrant's Registration Statement on
       Form 8-A filed on April 24, 1997.

#      Incorporated by reference to the Registrant's Annual Report on Form 10-K
       for the fiscal year ended October 31, 1997.



                                      E-3