53 paragraphs in Risk Factors of the 10-K filed Feb 25, 2026
with nothing like them in the 10-K filed Feb 27, 2025. Quoted exactly.
Paragraphs that were only edited are under 10-K change.
Compared with the Risk Factors in the latest 10-K of the other 75 Financials companies:
a paragraph with at least half its words the same at another company is called similar, and the companies are listed under it.
A paragraph most of them have is marked boilerplate. No line means no other company has one like it.
This counts text; it does not say how serious a risk is.
21 more
•regulatory or compliance exposure related to acquired assets until appropriate processes and controls are implemented;
Read in the 10-K ↗
•any divergence from our broader strategic goals or short-term decision-making that may result from any earnout structure in connection with an acquisition;
Read in the 10-K ↗
Our financial support to particular structured financing vehicles, or our inability to provide support, may cause our AUM, revenue and earnings to decline.
Similar paragraph at 1 of 75 other Financials companies:
BLKAt our option and from time to time, we have provided and may in the future provide seed, warehouse or other forms of capital or credit support to our structured financing vehicles for commercial or other reasons. Our support of structured financing vehicles may utilize capital and liquidity that would otherwise be available for other corporate purposes. These arrangements subject us to a risk of loss equal to the value of the financial support in the event that these structured financing vehicles or the underlying financial interests do not meet stated performance thresholds, which typically results in a variable interest and the consolidation of these investment vehicles by us. Conversely, our ability to seed, warehouse or otherwise support certain structured financing vehicles may be restricted by regulation or by our inability to make available sufficient capital or liquidity. Moreover, inherent constraints arising from the business models of certain asset managers, including our business model, may during periods of market volatility result in us having fewer options for accessing liquidity than asset managers with alternate business models, which may adversely impact our ability to support certain structured financing vehicles. Our decision to support particular structured financing vehicles, or our inability or unwillingness to provide such support, may result in losses or affect our capital or liquidity, which may cause AUM, revenue and earnings to decline.
Similar paragraph at 1 of 75 other Financials companies:
BLKHedging strategies may adversely affect the returns on our cash flow and financial condition and funds’ investments.
Similar paragraph at 2 of 75 other Financials companies:
BX,
CPAY
Regulators are also increasing scrutiny and considering regulation of the use of artificial intelligence technologies, including with respect to uses of artificial intelligence by investment advisers. While comprehensive U.S. regulation has not been enacted to date, various U.S. governmental agencies and departments, including the SEC and Department of the Treasury, have released reports or otherwise indicated interest in assessing risks relating to the uses of artificial intelligence by businesses such as ours. In addition, certain laws governing artificial intelligence have been adopted in the EU (including the EU Artificial Intelligence Act) and in certain U.S. states. While we cannot predict the nature or effects of future regulations, regulatory developments relating to artificial intelligence could potentially have a material adverse effect on our business and results of operations.
Read in the 10-K ↗
The SEC has adopted Regulation Best Interest which requires broker-dealers, or natural persons who are associated persons of broker-dealers, to act in the best interest of a retail customer when making a recommendation of any securities transaction or investment strategy involving securities. Regulation Best Interest requires such broker-dealers to evaluate available alternatives, including those that may have lower expenses and/or lower investment risk than our investment funds. Regulation Best Interest may negatively impact whether certain broker-dealers and their associated persons are willing to recommend investment products, including certain of our funds, to retail customers, which may adversely impact our ability to distribute our products to certain investors. Furthermore, the U.S. Department of Labor as well as several states have proposed regulations or taken other actions pertaining to conduct standards for investment advisers and broker-dealers that may result in additional requirements related to our business.
Similar paragraph at 1 of 75 other Financials companies:
BX
Following Brexit, the provisions of the GDPR were incorporated directly into U.K. law as the U.K. GDPR. In June 2025, the U.K. government enacted the Data (Use and Access) Act 2025, which includes reforms that may increase divergence between the U.K. and EU data protection regimes over time. In addition, the EU continues to pursue a broad digital regulatory agenda, including proposals to amend certain existing digital frameworks. These developments may require us and our portfolio companies to update policies, procedures, technical and organizational measures, vendor arrangements, cross-border data
transfer practices and our uses of data and technology, and could increase the risk of investigations, enforcement actions, litigation or penalties if we fail to comply.
In December 2025, the European Commission renewed its adequacy decisions for the U.K., which permit the transfer of personal data from the EEA to the U.K., until December 27, 2031, subject to periodic review and potential renewal. While we currently rely on the adequacy decisions and other transfer mechanisms, the adequacy decisions could be modified, suspended or withdrawn in the future, which could require us and our portfolio companies to implement additional data transfer mechanisms and could increase costs and complexity.
Read in the 10-K ↗
In 2024 and 2025, U.S. regulators also advanced several initiatives that directly affect capital standards and reserve requirements. The NAIC adopted multiple revisions to risk-based capital (“RBC”) formulas applicable to insurers, including new RBC treatment for pledged assets used in certain reinsurance arrangements. In addition, the NAIC continued refining RBC treatment for structured securities, including maintaining elevated capital charges for certain residual tranches. Separately, regulators advanced several material changes to asset adequacy testing (“AAT”) and cash flow testing requirements. The NAIC adopted Actuarial Guideline LV (AG 55), which requires insurers to include ceded reinsurance business within AAT under moderately adverse conditions, effective for year-end 2025 with reporting due by April 1, 2026. Additional proposals would require cash-flow testing of certain reinsurance transactions at the treaty level.
Read in the 10-K ↗
The precise extent to which the U.K. will seek to reflect AIFMD II in its domestic rules remains unclear, however it is expected to implement a streamlined regime tailored to U.K. market practice, rather than replicating AIFMD II. HM Treasury and the FCA are progressing a separate reform of the U.K’s alternative investment fund manager regime and in April 2025, each respectively published a consultation on a new U.K.-specific framework and a Call for Input. The proposed changes include (i) replacing the existing “full-scope” and “sub-threshold” AIFM categories with a more flexible tiering based on an AIFM’s size, investment base and investment activities; (ii) abolishing the “small registered AIF” category (except in respect of managers of social enterprise funds and registered venture capital funds) and requiring all AIFMs to become FCA-authorized; and (iii) implementing a streamlined regime for investment trust and REIT managers. The FCA intends to publish and consult on draft rules in the first half of 2026. We will continue to monitor the development of these consultations and the impact they may have on our U.K. business and operations.
Read in the 10-K ↗
The FTPF Offence imposes criminal liability on bodies corporate and partnerships, wherever incorporated, meeting specified size thresholds (so-called ‘large organizations’) where an ‘associate’ (being an employee, agent, subsidiary
Read in the 10-K ↗
Moreover, in recent years “anti-ESG” sentiment has gained momentum across the U.S., with several states, the executive branch and federal agencies, and Congress having proposed, enacted, or indicated an intent to pursue “anti-ESG” policies, legislation, or initiatives, issued related legal opinions and pursued related investigations and litigation. If investors subject to anti-ESG legislation viewed our funds or responsible investing or ESG practices, including our climate-related goals
and commitments, as being in contradiction of such “anti-ESG” policies, legislation or legal opinions, such investors may not invest in our funds, our ability to maintain the size of our funds could be impaired, and it could negatively affect results of our operations, cash flow or the price of our common stock. Additionally, asset managers have been subject to recent scrutiny related to ESG-focused industry working groups, initiatives and associations, including organizations advancing action to address sustainability and responsible investment matters, climate change or climate-related risk.
Read in the 10-K ↗
Further, some groups and federal and state officials have asserted that the Supreme Court’s decision striking down race-based affirmative action in higher education in June 2023 should be analogized to private employment matters and private contract matters. Several media campaigns and cases alleging discrimination based on such arguments have been initiated since the decision, and in January 2025, the Presidential Administration signed a number of Executive Orders focused on diversity, equity and inclusion (“DEI”), which caution the private sector to end “illegal DEI discrimination and preferences” and preview upcoming compliance investigations of private entities, including publicly traded companies, and changes to federal contracting regulations. Agencies across the federal government, including the Department of Justice, the Federal Communications Commission, and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, have been focusing on DEI-related investigations and enforcement. It is uncertain how the interpretation, application and enforcement of laws (including U.S. state and federal nondiscrimination laws), policies and public sentiment related to DEI will evolve, and it may become increasingly challenging to establish global DEI-related policies and programs that meet the varied laws, policies and norms of different jurisdictions. If investors view our funds, policies or procedures as being in contradiction of such executive orders, policies, legislation or legal opinions, such investors may not invest in our funds. Further developments may also make it more difficult for our funds or vehicles to operate across jurisdictions.
New and evolving and sometimes conflicting sustainability/ESG regulations and disclosure expectations could increase our compliance costs and expose us to enforcement, litigation or fundraising constraints.
Read in the 10-K ↗
draft legislative proposal to revise SFDR to introduce, among others, new categories for sustainability-related financial products with related criteria that require to be met for each category. Ares cannot guarantee that its current approach will meet future regulatory requirements, reporting frameworks or best practices, increasing the risk of related enforcement. Compliance with new requirements may lead to increased management burdens and costs.
Read in the 10-K ↗
In response to these regulations, we may be required to provide additional disclosure to investors in our funds with respect to ESG matters, which may expose us to increased disclosure risks, for example due to a lack of available or credible data, and the potential for conflicting disclosures may also expose us to an increased risk of misstatement litigation or miss-selling allegations. Compliance with any new laws or regulations increases our regulatory burden and could result in increased legal, accounting and financial compliance costs, make some activities more difficult, time-consuming and costly, place strain on our personnel, systems and resources, affect the manner in which we or our funds’ portfolio companies conduct our businesses and adversely affect our profitability because of the need to collect certain information to meet the disclosure requirements. In addition, where there are uncertainties regarding the operation of the framework, the lack of official guidance, conflicting or inconsistent regulatory guidance, a lack of established market practice and/or data gaps, funds and/or fund managers may be required to engage third party advisers and/or service providers to fulfill the requirements, thereby exacerbating any increase in compliance burden and costs.
Read in the 10-K ↗
our overall performance. The scope of this regime may evolve over time, including through additional guidance or changes in covered sectors, activities or countries.
Read in the 10-K ↗
•macroeconomic conditions resulting in downturns or volatility in the global credit markets, such as changes in interest rates, inflation and geopolitical events;
•exposure to losses due to above average amounts of risk and volatility or loss of principal from non-investment grade investments;
•inherent uncertainty in determining the fair value of assets that are illiquid and have no readily ascertainable market prices;
•changes in laws and regulations related to financial services and products and/or financial consumer protection; and
In recent periods, there has been increased activity by certain activist and other organized groups in opposition to certain investments made by and activities of private funds. Such groups may contact or otherwise seek to engage with government and regulatory bodies and fund investors, including public pension funds, to criticize or challenge certain investments, which could lead to negative publicity that could harm our reputation. In addition, partially as a result of certain high profile defaults and bankruptcies, there has also been increased negative publicity with respect to the private credit industry. Although we have not been involved in those particular defaults and bankruptcies, the negative publicity, press speculation about us and concerns surrounding the private credit industry generally, whether or not valid, could in the future harm our reputation, heighten scrutiny on our and our credit funds’ businesses, encourage litigation and regulatory inquiries and adversely affect our client relationships and fundraising efforts of our credit funds, including by prompting increased repurchase requests from certain fund investors, and could create pressure on the trading price of our Class A common stock.
Similar paragraph at 1 of 75 other Financials companies:
BXFurther, certain of our credit funds engage in various forms of finance arrangements that are collateralized by various asset classes. These forms of credit generally expose a lender to a greater degree of business and credit risks than traditional lending, as repayment of the loans often depends upon the performance of credit or credit-related assets, the successful operation of the businesses, greater exposure of less established companies to market volatility and potential for fraud and the income stream of the borrower. Additionally, investments in such markets expose our business to additional regulations promulgated by state and federal regulators related to financial consumer protection.
Any of these factors may cause the value of the investments in our credit funds to decline, which may have a material impact on our results of operations.
Read in the 10-K ↗
Certain of our funds invest in secondaries investment products that we do not control.
Similar paragraph at 1 of 75 other Financials companies:
KKROur funds that invest in secondaries investment products have limited opportunity to control the day-to-day operation of secondaries portfolio investments, including investment and disposition decisions, or to protect their position in portfolio investments, nor do they generally have the right to remove the managers of those investments.
The success of these funds is substantially dependent upon the capabilities and performance of the management companies, general partners or similar entities who control the underlying portfolio investments, which could include representatives of other investors with whom such funds are not affiliated and whose interests may conflict with the interests of the funds. Although investors (such as our funds) in general partner-led and other structured secondary transactions typically retain enhanced governance and other rights, once such a transaction is complete, the general partners will generally have broad discretion in structuring, negotiating, purchasing, financing, monitoring and eventually divesting the underlying portfolio companies. Additionally, should a general partner for any reason cease to participate in the management of the underlying portfolio companies, the performance of the relevant portfolio investment (and, consequently, our funds) could be adversely affected.
Our Private Equity Group funds’ performance has been and may in the future be adversely affected by the financial performance of our portfolio companies and the industries in which our funds invest.
Similar paragraph at 2 of 75 other Financials companies:
APO,
GSOur performance and the performance of our Private Equity Group funds are significantly impacted by the value of the companies in which our funds have invested. Our funds invest in companies in many different industries, each of which is subject to volatility based upon a variety of factors, including economic, market, and geopolitical factors. During recessions, periods of elevated uncertainty, or phases of challenging economic and market conditions, we experience significant fluctuations in the fair value of securities held by our funds. Further, geopolitical and domestic political uncertainty, unexpected shifts in monetary and fiscal policy, changes in interest rates, depressed labor force participation, the risk of labor shortages in the face of more restrictive immigration policies, supply chain pressures and other general economic trends may impact the performance of our portfolio companies in many industries and geographies. In addition, the value of our investments in portfolio companies in the financial services industry is impacted by the overall health and stability of the credit and equity markets. The performance of our Private Equity Group funds, and our performance, may be adversely affected to the extent our fund portfolio companies experience adverse performance or additional pressure. In addition, the performance of our investment funds and our portfolio companies may be adversely affected by increases in inflationary pressures such as employee wage growth or rising input costs, which could compress profit margins, particularly at our portfolio companies that are unable to effectively increase prices in response. Rapid and unforeseen technological transformation, such as the recent technological developments with respect to artificial intelligence, may introduce the risk of obsolescence to portfolio companies and negatively affect their performance. In response to financial difficulties that are currently being experienced or that may be experienced in the future by certain portfolio companies, we may consider legal, regulatory, tax, or other factors in determining the steps we may take to support such companies or investments, which may include enhancing the management team or funding additional capital investments from our funds, our investment professionals, and/or us. The actions we may take to support companies or investments experiencing financial difficulties may not be successful in remedying the financial difficulties and our investment funds, our investment professionals, or we may not recoup some or all of any capital investments made in support of such companies or investments.
Climate change and related transition and physical risks could adversely affect our operations and those of our portfolio companies and increase costs (including insurance costs).
Similar paragraph at 3 of 75 other Financials companies:
CFG,
COF,
HBAN
In addition, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (“OBBBA”), enacted in July 2025, extends several provisions of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (“TCJA”) that were set to expire on December 31, 2025 and significantly affects U.S. federal taxes, credits and deductions. Any future legislation, regulatory guidance or changes in interpretation relating to the TCJA, the OBBBA or other tax initiatives could increase our or our investors’ tax liability, reduce after-tax returns, adversely affect fundraising, investment activity or the performance of our portfolio companies and increase our compliance and withholding tax costs.
Read in the 10-K ↗
adversely affect the returns of investors in our funds. The implementation of BEPS 2.0 in relevant jurisdictions is complex and likely to remain uncertain for a number of years.
Read in the 10-K ↗
In addition, cybersecurity is a priority for regulators in the U.S. and around the world. The SEC has adopted cybersecurity disclosure rules for public companies and has adopted amendments to Regulation S-P that require, among other things, written incident response programs, customer notification in certain circumstances and enhanced oversight of service providers. In June 2025, the SEC formally withdrew certain pending proposed rules relating to cybersecurity risk management for investment advisers and certain funds; however, regulators continue to focus on cybersecurity through examinations,
Read in the 10-K ↗
Technological developments in artificial intelligence could disrupt the markets in which we operate and subject us to increased competition, legal and regulatory risks and compliance costs.
Similar paragraph at 2 of 75 other Financials companies:
BX,
SYFArtificial intelligence, including machine learning technology and generative artificial intelligence, is rapidly evolving. While the full extent of current or future risks related thereto is not possible to predict, artificial intelligence could significantly disrupt the business models and markets in which we operate and subject us to increased competition, legal and regulatory risks and compliance costs, any of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.
Similar paragraph at 2 of 75 other Financials companies:
APO,
BXWe use and plan to expand our use of artificial intelligence tools and technologies in the operation of our business. These uses come with potential risks, including, but not limited to, generation of inaccurate results, misuse or disclosures of confidential information, infringement of third-party intellectual property rights, potential cybersecurity vulnerabilities, reputational risk and regulatory burdens. In addition, artificial intelligence models may create outputs that are flawed, inaccurate, biased, or that infringe or misappropriate intellectual property of third parties. The models may also be subject to new or different modes of cyber attacks, including prompt injection attacks, and such attacks may be able to circumvent cybersecurity tools and processes that we or the providers of such tools have in place. To the extent we rely on such technologies, these risks could negatively impact our business. There is also a risk that artificial intelligence tools or applications may be misused by our employees and/or third parties engaged by us. For example, an employee may input confidential information, including material non-public information, trade secrets, or personal information, into artificial intelligence technologies in a manner that results in such information becoming part of a dataset that is accessible by third-party artificial intelligence applications and users, including our competitors. Further, we may not be able to control how any third-party artificial intelligence technologies that we use are developed or maintained, or how data we input is used or disclosed, even where we have contractual protections with respect to these matters. The misuse or misappropriation of our data could have an adverse impact on our reputation and could subject us to legal and regulatory investigations and/or actions.
We may also be exposed to competitive risks related to the adoption of artificial intelligence or other new technologies by others within our industry. If our competitors are more successful than us in the use of artificial intelligence or development of services or products based on artificial intelligence, or we adopt artificial intelligence at a slower pace than others, we may be at a competitive disadvantage. In addition, our investments in technology systems and artificial intelligence may not deliver the benefits we expect, which could be costly for our business.
Similar paragraph at 1 of 75 other Financials companies:
BXFinally, governments and regulators in the U.S. and abroad have proposed, adopted or are considering laws, regulations and guidance governing the development, deployment and use of artificial intelligence systems, including requirements relating to transparency, accountability, data governance, risk management, human oversight, cybersecurity, intellectual property and recordkeeping. For example, the European Union has adopted the EU Artificial Intelligence Act, which applies on a phased basis that began in 2025 and a numbers of U.S. states have enacted general artificial intelligence laws. These and other developments could increase our compliance costs, restrict our use of artificial intelligence in our business and investment processes, require changes to our policies, procedures, controls and vendor arrangements, and expose us to investigations, enforcement actions, litigation, fines, penalties or reputational harm.
Read in the 10-K ↗
resources to compliance. A failure to comply with applicable Privacy Laws could result in fines, sanctions, enforcement actions or other penalties or reputational damage.
Read in the 10-K ↗
17 paragraphs in the 10-Q filed Nov 6, 2026 with nothing like
them in the 10-Q filed Aug 7, 2026 (at least half the words must differ; new numbers alone do not count).
Quoted exactly, grouped by the item heading above them. This is text that changed, not a judgement of how serious it is.
Three months ended September 30, Nine months ended September 30, 2026 2025 2026 2025 ────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── Basic earnings per share of Class A and non-voting common stock Net income attributable to Ares Management Corporation Class A and non-voting common stockholders $ 60,017 $ 263,569 $ 302,616 $ 397,176 Dividends declared and paid on Class A and non-voting common stock (307,251) (246,759) (918,095) (736,997) Distributions on unvested restricted units (12,773) (10,620) (39,062) (31,812) Undistributed earnings available to participating unvested restricted units — (494) — — Undistributed net income (dividends in excess of earnings) available to Class A and non-voting common stockholders $ (260,007) $ 5,696 $ (654,541) $ (371,633) Basic weighted-average shares of Class A and non-voting common stock 227,518,886 219,881,697 225,965,434 216,086,939 Undistributed basic earnings (dividends in excess of earnings) per share of Class A and non-voting common stock $ (1.14) $ 0.03 $ (2.90) $ (1.72) Dividend declared and paid per Class A and non-voting common stock 1.35 1.12 4.05 3.36 Basic earnings per share of Class A and non-voting common stock $ 0.21 $ 1.15 $ 1.15 $ 1.64 Diluted earnings per share of Class A and non-voting common stock Net income attributable to Ares Management Corporation Class A and non-voting common stockholders $ 60,017 $ 263,569 $ 302,616 $ 397,176 Distributions on unvested restricted units (12,773) (10,620) (39,062) (31,812) Net income available to Class A and non-voting common stockholders $ 47,244 $ 252,949 $ 263,554 $ 365,364 Diluted weighted-average shares of Class A and non-voting common stock 227,518,886 219,881,697 225,965,434 216,086,939 Diluted earnings per share of Class A and non-voting common stock $ 0.21 $ 1.15 $ 1.15 $ 1.64
Read in the 10-Q ↗
Item 1A of the 10-Q filed Nov 6, 2026 against Item 1A of the 10-K filed Feb 25, 2026.
A 10-Q repeats only the risks that changed, so a 10-K paragraph that is missing from it is not counted as removed.
Added is a paragraph with nothing like it in the 10-K, Reworded a sentence that is in both with several words changed,
Quiet changes a sentence in both where one to four words changed and one is a hedge or a modal
(cut words struck through, new words highlighted and underlined).
Text on the page, not a score; each links to the filing at sec.gov.
