NDSN — what changed in the latest 10-Q
A section-by-section comparison of NDSN'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 · 2026-08-20 vs the prior 10-Q · 2026-05-21
| Section | Outcome | Added | Removed | Minor | Unchanged |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MD&A | Text added/removed | +2 | −2 | ~26 | 11 |
| Market risk (Item 3) | No paragraph-level changes | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Controls & procedures | Text added/removed | 0 | 0 | ~2 | 0 |
| Risk factors | No material changes reported (points to the 10-K) | — | — | — | — |
| Other information | Text added/removed | 0 | −5 | ~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): 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 · 2026-08-20
Segment EBITDA for IPS decreased 170 basis points despite higher sales due to continued investment in innovation and select near-term inflationary pressures. Segment EBITDA for MFS increased 40 basis points on higher sales. Segment EBITDA for ATS increased 560 basis points driven by robust sales gro…
We have a $1,200,000 Revolving Credit Facility that matures in January 2031. We have a commercial paper program of $1,200,000 that uses the Revolving Credit Facility as a liquidity backstop. At July 31, 2026, we had zero outstanding under the Revolving Credit Facility and $192 million of outstanding…
Text removed vs the prior filing · source: 10-Q · 2026-05-21
Segment EBITDA for IPS was relatively flat on higher sales. Segment EBITDA for MFS decreased 50 basis points despite higher sales due to the impact of near-term product start-up headwinds. Segment EBITDA for ATS increased 270 basis points driven by robust sales growth and controlled selling and admi…
We have a $1,200,000 Revolving Credit Facility that matures in January 2031. At April 30, 2026, we had $295,000 outstanding under the Revolving Credit Facility.
Other information
Text removed vs the prior filing · source: 10-Q · 2026-05-21
1 Intended to satisfy the affirmative defense of Rule 10b5-1(c)
2 Not intended to satisfy the affirmative defense of Rule 10b5-1(c)
3 This Rule 10b5‑1 trading plan, which was adopted on January 13, 2026, was inadvertently omitted from the Company’s Form 10‑Q for the quarter ended January 31, 2026, due to a clerical error and is being disclosed in this Form 10‑Q.
4 The Rule 10b5‑1 trading plan entered into on January 12, 2026, was terminated by Mr. Nagarajan on February 6, 2026, prior to its scheduled expiration date.
5 The Rule 10b5‑1 trading plan entered into on January 16, 2026, was terminated by Mr. Kelley on February 10, 2026, prior to its scheduled expiration date.
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