MBBC — what changed in the latest 10-Q
A section-by-section comparison of MBBC'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 · 2026-05-13 vs the prior 10-Q · 2026-02-11
| Section | Outcome | Added | Removed | Minor | Unchanged |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MD&A | Text added/removed | +8 | −7 | ~45 | 81 |
| Market risk (Item 3) | No paragraph-level changes | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Controls & procedures | Text added/removed | 0 | 0 | ~2 | 1 |
| Legal proceedings | Text added/removed | 0 | 0 | ~1 | 0 |
| 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): 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 · 2026-05-13
Deposits. Total deposits decreased by $1.0 million, or 0.6%, to $174.2 million at March 31, 2026, from $175.2 million at June 30, 2025 primarily due to a decrease in demand, NOW and money market deposits of $1.0 million, or 1.5%, and a decrease in certificates of deposit balances of $639,000, or 1.0…
Interest expense on deposits decreased by $55,000, or 7.2%, to $705,000 for the three months ended March 31, 2026 from $760,000 for the three months ended March 31, 2025 due to a decrease in the average rate paid on deposits and a slight decrease in the average balance of deposits. The average rate …
Based on our evaluation of the above factors, we recorded a provision for credit losses of $5,000 for the three months ended March 31, 2026 compared to a recovery of credit losses of $42,000 for the three months ended March 31,
2025. The increase in provision when comparing the two periods was primarily related to an increase in the loan portfolio for the three months ended March 31, 2026.
The allowance for credit losses was $1.7 million, or 0.80%, of loans outstanding at March 31, 2026 and $1.6 million, or 0.85%, of loans outstanding at March 31, 2025.
Text removed vs the prior filing · source: 10-Q · 2026-02-11
Deposits. Total deposits increased by $3.1 million, or 1.8%, to $178.4 million at December 31, 2025, from $175.2 million at June 30, 2025 primarily due to an increase in demand, NOW and money market deposits of $6.0 million, or 12.6%. This increase was offset by a decrease in certificates of deposit…
Interest expense on deposits decreased by $11,000, or 1.5%, to $752,000 for the three months ended December 31, 2025 from $763,000 for the three months ended December 31, 2024 due to a decrease in the average rate paid on deposits which was offset by an increase in the average balance of deposits. T…
Based on our evaluation of the above factors, we recorded a provision for credit losses of $33,000 for the three months ended December 31, 2025 compared to a provision for credit losses of $8,000 for the three months ended December 31, 2024. The increase in provision when comparing the two periods w…
The allowance for credit losses was $1.7 million, or 0.80%, of loans outstanding at December 31, 2025 and $1.7 million, or 0.92%, of loans outstanding at December 31, 2024.
To the best of our knowledge, we have recorded our best estimate of expected losses in the loan portfolio and for unfunded commitments at December 31, 2025. In addition, the WDFI and the FDIC, as an integral part of their examination process, will periodically review our allowance for credit losses,…
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