XERS — what changed in the latest 10-Q
A section-by-section comparison of XERS'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 · 2026-08-06 vs the prior 10-Q · 2026-05-07
| Section | Outcome | Added | Removed | Minor | Unchanged |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MD&A | Text added/removed | +24 | −11 | ~13 | 45 |
| Market risk (Item 3) | Text added/removed | 0 | 0 | ~2 | 2 |
| Controls & procedures | Text added/removed | 0 | 0 | ~2 | 0 |
| Legal proceedings | Text added/removed | +1 | −1 | ~1 | 2 |
| Risk factors | No material changes reported (points to the 10-K) | — | — | — | — |
| Other information | Text added/removed | +2 | −1 | 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 · 2026-08-06
Three Months Ended June 30,ChangeSix Months Ended June 30,Change
Net revenue increased by $49.6 million or 87.0% for the six months ended June 30, 2026 compared to the six months ended June 30, 2025. The increase was due to higher volume ($42.6 million or 74.7%), primarily driven by increased patient demand, and favorable net pricing ($7.0 million or 12.3%).
Net revenue decreased by $1.0 million or 2.2% for the six months ended June 30, 2026 compared to the six months ended June 30, 2025. The decrease was due to lower volume ($1.9 million or 4.3%), partially offset by favorable net pricing ($0.9 million or 2.1%).
Net revenue increased by $0.2 million or 1.7% for the three months ended June 30, 2026 compared to the three months ended June 30, 2025. The increase was due favorable net pricing ($0.7 million or 5.8%), partially offset by lower volume ($0.5 million or 4.1%).
Net revenue increased by $0.6 million or 2.8% for the six months ended June 30, 2026 compared to the six months ended June 30, 2025. The increase was due to favorable net pricing ($1.3 million or 5.7%), partially offset by lower volume ($0.7 million or 2.9%).
Text removed vs the prior filing · source: 10-Q · 2026-05-07
Cost of goods sold, excluding amortization of intangible assets10,574 8,728 1,846 21.2
Net revenue was $20.8 million for the three months ended March 31, 2026 and March 31, 2025. Lower volume ($0.4 million or 1.9%) was offset by favorable net pricing ($0.4 million or 1.7%).
Royalty, contract and other revenue decreased $1.6 million for the three months ended March 31, 2026 compared to the three months ended March 31, 2025. The decrease primarily reflects the recognition of a milestone from a partnership agreement in 2025.
Cost of goods sold increased by $1.8 million or 21.2% for the three months ended March 31, 2026 compared to the same period ended March 31, 2025.
Cost of goods sold as a percent of total revenue improved by 2.3%, to 12.8% for the three months ended March 31, 2026 compared to 15.1% for the same period ended March 31, 2025, primarily due to favorable product mix dynamics ($2.1 million or 3.7%), offset by write-downs of expired and excess invent…
Legal proceedings
Text added vs the prior filing · source: 10-Q · 2026-08-06
Collectively, the complaints allege that, by filing ANDAs for their respective generic products, each of Torrent, Somerset, Sandoz, Zydus, and Novitium has infringed the Orange Book Patents for Recorlev®. The complaints seek an order preventing the FDA from granting final approval of the respective …
Text removed vs the prior filing · source: 10-Q · 2026-05-07
Collectively, the complaints allege that, by filing the ANDAs, each of Torrent, Somerset, Sandoz, and Zydus has infringed the Orange Book patents for Recorlev® that each defendant included in its respective Paragraph IV certification. The complaints further seek: (a) an injunction preventing the FDA…
Other information
Text added vs the prior filing · source: 10-Q · 2026-08-06
On May 12, 2026, Beth Hecht, Chief Legal Officer and Corporate Secretary of the Company, adopted a Rule 10b5-1 trading arrangement providing for the sale from time to time of an aggregate of up to 300,000 shares of the Company's common stock. The trading arrangement is intended to satisfy the affirm…
Except as described above, during the quarter ended June 30, 2026, none of the Company's other directors or officers (as defined in Rule 16a-1(f)) adopted, materially modified, or terminated any contract, instruction, or written plan for the purchase or sale of Company securities under a “Rule 10b5-…
Text removed vs the prior filing · source: 10-Q · 2026-05-07
During the quarter ended March 31, 2026, none of the Company's directors or officers (as defined in Rule 16a-1(f)) adopted, materially modified, or terminated any contract, instruction, or written plan for the purchase or sale of Company securities under a “Rule 10b5-1 trading arrangement” or any “n…
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