THO — what changed in the latest 10-Q
A section-by-section comparison of THO'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 · 2026-06-03 vs the prior 10-Q · 2026-03-03
| Section | Outcome | Added | Removed | Minor | Unchanged |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MD&A | Text added/removed | +22 | −21 | ~87 | 49 |
| Market risk (Item 3) | Text added/removed | 0 | 0 | ~2 | 2 |
| Controls & procedures | Text added/removed | 0 | 0 | ~1 | 1 |
| Legal proceedings | No paragraph-level changes | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Risk factors | No paragraph-level changes | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Other information | Text added/removed | +1 | −4 | 0 | 0 |
Counts are paragraphs; added/removed means text added or removed vs the prior filing — no direction or judgement implied.
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 · 2026-06-03
•the level of consumer confidence and the level of discretionary consumer spending;
Nonetheless, we have taken and continue to take a number of affirmative steps. We are actively engaging our vendors regarding the timing and extent of any tariff pass-through costs, including challenging pass-through charges that we believe are not properly supported, and, where possible, are sourci…
Historically, we have generally been able to offset net cost increases over time. However, given the size and nature of the tariffs implemented since early calendar 2025, and the anticipated size and nature of any future tariffs, it is more difficult and likely less desirable for us to pass on the f…
It is extremely difficult to predict when or whether future supply chain issues related to chassis or other components used in the production of RVs will arise, especially when considering the impact of tariffs, the current situation in the Strait of Hormuz, regulatory changes or supply chain constr…
The $88,349, or 19.9%, decrease in gross profit was primarily due to the combined impact of the decrease in consolidated net sales in the current-year quarter compared to the prior-year quarter and the decrease in gross profit percentage, which was primarily due to unfavorable changes in North Ameri…
Text removed vs the prior filing · source: 10-Q · 2026-03-03
•the level of consumer confidence and the level of discretionary consumer spending;
Historically, we have generally been able to offset net cost increases over time, but given the size and nature of the tariffs implemented since early calendar 2025 and any future tariffs, it makes it more difficult and likely less desirable for us to pass on the full impact of tariff increases imme…
It is extremely difficult to predict when or whether future supply chain issues related to chassis or other components used in the production of RVs will arise, especially when considering the impact of tariffs, regulatory changes or supply chain constraints on the availability of chassis or other c…
THOR’s European RV backlog as of January 31, 2026 increased $188,087, or 11.4%, to $1,832,102 compared to $1,644,015 as of January 31, 2025, primarily due to the increase in the foreign currency exchange rate between the two periods.
Consolidated gross profit for the three months ended January 31, 2026 increased $6,057, or 2.5%, compared to the three months ended January 31, 2025. Consolidated gross profit was 11.8% of consolidated net sales for the three months ended January 31, 2026 and 12.1% for the three months ended January…
Other information
Text added vs the prior filing · source: 10-Q · 2026-06-03
No director or officer of the Company adopted or terminated a Rule 10b5-1 trading arrangement or “non-Rule 10b5-1 trading arrangement” (as defined in Item 408 of Regulation S-K) during the three months ended April 30, 2026.
Text removed vs the prior filing · source: 10-Q · 2026-03-03
The Company’s Insider Trading Policy permits its directors and officers to trade Company stock under a “Rule 10b5-1 trading arrangement” (as defined in Item 408 of Regulation S-K) that is intended to satisfy the affirmative defense of Rule 10b5-1(c) under the Exchange Act, subject to compliance with…
On January 15, 2026, our Chief Financial Officer, Colleen Zuhl, adopted a Rule 10b5-1 trading arrangement (providing for the sale of up to 9,917 shares of Company common stock) that is intended to satisfy the affirmative defense of Rule 10b5-1(c) under the Exchange Act. Mrs. Zuhl’s Rule 10b5-1 tradi…
On January 23, 2026, our Chief Executive Officer, Robert Martin, adopted a Rule 10b5-1 trading arrangement (providing for the sale of up to 50,033 shares of Company common stock) that is intended to satisfy the affirmative defense of Rule 10b5-1(c) under the Exchange Act. Mr. Martin’s 10b5-1 trading…
Except as described above, no director or officer of the Company adopted or terminated a Rule 10b5-1 trading arrangement or “non-Rule 10b5-1 trading arrangement” (as defined in Item 408 of Regulation S-K) during the three months ended January 31, 2026.
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