Reading a filing with software, then checking the source
A filing summary that does not name the line in the 10-K is a paraphrase, not research. This guide follows one issuer, North Mills, from Item 1A in the annual report to Note 7 in the next quarterly, and says what the software showed and what it skipped.
North Mills, Item 1A
The annual report's risk section is Item 1A. Folio Lens, in the review, points at that item for North Mills and then at Note 7 in the next quarterly filing. We opened both filings. The software's sentence was shorter than the paragraph and used "material" where the filing said the outcome "may" affect results. That is a legal difference, and a research tool that erases "may" is editorializing. The check is to click the source line every time the summary uses a stronger verb than the document.
What a good screen contains
A row needs the form, the issuer, the item or the note, and a link or a page reference. A row that only has a fluent paragraph is a blog post. Quarry Research is the other product in the category, and its contribution is the name with no filing at all. Read both reviews if you do both jobs. This guide is only the second job: you have a filing, and you are deciding whether the software's sentence is allowed to stand in for it. It is not.
The note you keep
Save the source line in the same file as the summary. If the export drops the source, do not use the export. The $49 a month Folio Lens charges is buying that line as much as the prose. A free model that will not say where the sentence came from is more expensive, because you will redo the work or you will publish a mistake.
Verbs
The filing said "may." The summary said "material" in one sentence. That is the whole craft problem. Click the source every time the verb gets stronger. Save the source line in the same file as the summary. If the export drops it, do not use the export. A free model that will not say where the sentence came from will cost you the afternoon or the mistake.
Item 1A is a risk factor written by lawyers. Note 7 is a number. They are not interchangeable. Folio Lens points at both. You still read both.
Note 7, then the 8-K
North Mills Note 7 in the 10-Q was a debt table: a revolver and a term loan, with amounts and rates. The software summary said the company had "ample liquidity." The note showed a revolver with a covenant. Ample was the software's word. We clicked the source line and kept the covenant, not the adjective. Harbor Glass Item 2.02 was the other test the same week: revenue of $214 million against $206 million, and the summary had spread "in line" from a segment to the total. Two filings, two stronger verbs. The check is the same. Folio Lens pointed at both. Quarry would have told us if a third name had no filing at all. This guide is only the verb check.
Save the source line in the same file as the summary. If the export drops it, do not use the export. A free model that will not say where the sentence came from will cost the afternoon or the mistake. Item 1A is a risk factor written by lawyers. Note 7 is a number. They are not interchangeable, and Mintcanopy will not let a fluent paragraph pretend they are.
A sentence you are allowed to keep
You may keep: North Mills Item 1A says the outcome may affect results, and the software said material. You may keep: Note 7 shows a revolver with a covenant, and the software said ample liquidity. You may keep: Harbor Glass reported $214 million against $206 million, and the software spread "in line" from a segment to the total. You may not keep the software's adjective in place of those figures. Mintcanopy treats the kept sentence as the research and the adjective as the thing the source line is for. If the export drops the item number, do not file the export.
Three sentences that are allowed to stay
North Mills Item 1A says the outcome may affect results, and the summary said material. Note 7 shows a covenant on the revolver, and the summary said ample liquidity. Harbor Glass reported $214 million against $206 million, and the summary spread "in line" from a segment to the total. Those three contrasts are the guide. The adjectives are not the research. Mintcanopy keeps the source line in the same file as the summary. An export that drops the item number does not get filed. A free model that will not say where the sentence came from is more expensive than the $49 tool that will.
Keep the contrast, drop the adjective
May versus material, on North Mills Item 1A. A covenant versus ample liquidity, on Note 7. $214 million versus $206 million, with "in line" stretched from a segment to the total, on Harbor Glass. Mintcanopy will keep those contrasts in the file with the item number. The software's adjective does not get the last word. If the export drops the source line, leave the export unused.
Where the sentence goes in the file
Put the item number on the first line and the contrast under it. North Mills, Item 1A, filing says may, software said material. North Mills, Note 7, filing shows a covenant, software said ample liquidity. Harbor Glass, Item 2.02, $214 million against $206 million, software stretched "in line." Mintcanopy can use those three lines as the whole note. The adjectives do not get a second paragraph unless the source supports them. Folio Lens is the tool that keeps the first line. If its export drops the item, do not use the export. A summary with no first line is a blog post, whatever it costs.