VPRB — what changed in the latest 10-Q
A section-by-section comparison of VPRB'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 · 2026-08-14 vs the prior 10-Q · 2026-05-18
| Section | Outcome | Added | Removed | Minor | Unchanged |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MD&A | Text added/removed | +22 | −15 | ~5 | 29 |
| Market risk (Item 3) | No paragraph-level changes | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Controls & procedures | Text added/removed | 0 | 0 | ~5 | 11 |
| Risk factors | No material changes reported (points to the 10-K) | — | — | — | — |
| Other information | Text added/removed | 0 | 0 | ~1 | 1 |
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): Legal proceedings
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 · 2026-08-14
● Design, market and distribute a line of pocket lighters under the “DISSIM” brand;
For the three and six months ended June 30, 2026, we generated total revenue of $703,770 and $1,283,841, respectively, and net loss of $353,447 and net income of $1,587,115, respectively. For the six months ended June 30, 2026, net cash provided by operating activities was $2,036,603. As of June 30,…
Product sales were $703,770 for the three months ended June 30, 2026, compared with $967,300 for the three months ended June 30, 2025, a decrease of $263,530, or 27%. We did not recognize royalty revenue during the 2026 period, compared with royalty revenue of $62,237 during the 2025 period. Accordi…
Cost of sales was $542,695 for the three months ended June 30, 2026, compared with $650,068 for the three months ended June 30, 2025, a decrease of $107,373, or 17%, primarily due to lower product sales. Gross profit decreased by $218,394, or 58%, to $161,075. Gross profit as a percentage of total r…
Operating expenses were $493,617 for the three months ended June 30, 2026, compared with $653,159 for the three months ended June 30, 2025, a decrease of $159,542, or 24%. The decrease reflected reductions across several selling, general and administrative expense categories. Despite the decrease in…
Text removed vs the prior filing · source: 10-Q · 2026-05-18
● Design, market, license, and distribute a line of vaporizers;
● Design, market and distribute a line of e-liquids under the “HELIUM” brand;
For the three months ended March 31, 2026 and 2025, we generated revenue of $580,071 and $885,283, respectively, reported net income (loss) before taxes of $2,590,821 and $(290,864), respectively, and net cash provided by (used in) operating activities of $2,574,493 and $(333,358) at March 31, 2026 …
Our revenue from product sales for the three months ended March 31, 2026 and 2025 was $580,071 and $885,283, respectively. Royalty revenue for the three months ended March 31, 2026, and 2025 was $0 and $48,045, respectively. The decrease in product and royalty revenue was a result of the business tr…
Operating expenses for the three months ended March 31, 2026, were $603,041, as compared to $496,459 for the three months ended March 31, 2025. The increase of $106,580 was a result of increases in professional fees and trade show costs, offset by reduction in marketing expense.
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