GLD — what changed in the latest 10-Q
A section-by-section comparison of GLD'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 · 2026-08-04 vs the prior 10-Q · 2026-05-05
| Section | Outcome | Added | Removed | Minor | Unchanged |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MD&A | Text added/removed | +1 | −2 | ~4 | 12 |
| Market risk (Item 3) | No paragraph-level changes | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Controls & procedures | No paragraph-level changes | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| Risk factors | Some risk factors updated | +3 | −1 | 0 | 1 |
| 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): 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 · 2026-08-04
At June 30, 2026, the Trust did not have any cash balances. When selling gold to pay expenses, the Trustee endeavors to sell the exact amount of gold needed to pay expenses in order to minimize the Trust’s holdings of assets other than gold. As a consequence, we expect that the Trust will not record…
Text removed vs the prior filing · source: 10-Q · 2026-05-05
At September 30, 2025, the amount of gold owned by the Trust and held by the Custodians was 32,528,241.1 ounces, 100% of which is allocated gold in the form of London Good Delivery gold bars with a market value of $124,430,280,803 based on the LBMA Gold Price PM on September 30, 2025 (cost— $77,748,…
At March 31, 2026, the Trust did not have any cash balances. When selling gold to pay expenses, the Trustee endeavors to sell the exact amount of gold needed to pay expenses in order to minimize the Trust’s holdings of assets other than gold. As a consequence, we expect that the Trust will not recor…
Risk factors
Text added vs the prior filing · source: 10-Q · 2026-08-04
You should carefully consider the factors discussed in Part I, Item 1A. “Risk Factors” in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended September 30, 2025, which could materially adversely affect the Trust, the value of the Shares and an investment in the Shares. Except as described below, there…
The Trust's ability to create and redeem Shares, custody gold bullion and operate efficiently depends on continued market acceptance of the LBMA Good Delivery Rules, the Good Delivery List and related London gold market standards.
The Trust depends on the LBMA’s Good Delivery Rules, the Good Delivery List and related London market standards for the acceptance, transfer, custody and liquidity of gold bullion. Changes to the Good Delivery Rules, the Good Delivery List or other London market acceptance standards could adversely …
Text removed vs the prior filing · source: 10-Q · 2026-05-05
You should carefully consider the factors discussed in Part I, Item 1A. “Risk Factors” in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended September 30, 2025, which could materially affect our business, financial condition or future results. There have been no material changes in our risk factors f…
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