IMO — what changed in the latest 10-Q
A section-by-section comparison of IMO's newest periodic SEC filing (10-K/10-Q) against the prior same-form filing: paragraphs added and removed per section, with verbatim excerpts. Purely a deterministic text diff — no similarity scores, no directional read, not investment advice.
Comparing 10-Q · 2026-08-03 vs the prior 10-Q · 2026-05-04
| Section | Outcome | Added | Removed | Minor | Unchanged |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MD&A | Text added/removed | +33 | −12 | ~4 | 2 |
| Controls & procedures | Text added/removed | 0 | 0 | ~1 | 0 |
| Legal proceedings | No paragraph-level changes | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Other information | Text added/removed | 0 | 0 | ~1 | 0 |
Counts are paragraphs; added/removed means text added or removed vs the prior filing — no direction or judgement implied.
Not shown (absent or not faithfully extractable): Market risk (Item 3), Risk factors
Representative excerpts
Up to 5 excerpts of about 300 characters per section, quoted verbatim from the two SEC filings.
MD&A
Text added vs the prior filing · source: 10-Q · 2026-08-03
Volume – Lower volumes were primarily driven by lower production at Kearl and Syncrude.
Royalty – Higher royalties were primarily driven by higher commodity prices.
Lower production at Kearl was driven by the absence of exceptional high-quality ore grade versus the second quarter of 2025.
Lower production at Syncrude was driven by extreme rainfall, partially offset by lower unplanned downtime.
Margins – Higher margins primarily reflect improved market conditions.
Text removed vs the prior filing · source: 10-Q · 2026-05-04
Volume – Inventory impacts partially offset by higher production.
Other – Primarily due to unfavourable foreign exchange impacts of about $100 million.
Lower production at Syncrude driven by unplanned coker downtime, partially offset by improved mine reliability.
Lower refinery throughput and capacity utilization were primarily due to unplanned downtime and a disruption of synthetic crude feedstock caused by Syncrude's coker outage.
Lower petroleum product sales were primarily due to lower volumes in the supply channel.
How to read Risk Factors (Item 1A) in a 10-Q
A 10-Q risk-factor section usually takes one of three forms; this page classifies it as one of:
- Pointer — the filer states there have been no material changes and points back to the annual 10-K risk factors; there is no own risk text to compare this quarter.
- Partial update — the filer carves out specific updated risks ("except as set forth below"); the excerpts show exactly what is new this quarter.
- Restated in full — the quarter carries the complete risk-factor text. When the prior quarter was only a pointer there is no prior full text to diff against, so the page flags the section as restated instead.
This describes the filing structure only — it is never a judgement on whether risk went up or down.
Source: text-level diff of the two SEC EDGAR filings · deterministic (no AI-generated content) · for reference only · not investment advice