# Year-over-year worksheet

The [comparison worksheet](/comparison-worksheet/) puts two brands side by side. This one puts two filings from the same brand side by side. The interesting cells are the ones that differ.

Print it or copy the tables into a notebook. Fill it from the documents, never from a summary. Older filing on the left in every table, so a fact that appears on the left and not on the right is visible at a glance. The current document alone cannot show you what left.

The last column is a question you could send today: "the 2023 document showed X and the 2024 document does not; please explain." Write the difference down, then ask.

## Identity, before any figure

Finish this table first. Two documents that describe different offerings cannot be compared.

<table>
<caption>If a row differs, stop and settle it. Silence stays an em dash.</caption>
<thead>
<tr>
<th scope="col">Field</th>
<th scope="col">Older filing</th>
<th scope="col">Newer filing</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr><th scope="row">Legal franchisor (Item 1)</th><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr>
<tr><th scope="row">Issue date</th><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr>
<tr><th scope="row">State effective date, if any</th><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr>
<tr><th scope="row">Offering type (unit / area development / area representative)</th><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr>
<tr><th scope="row">Format and premises size offered</th><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr>
<tr><th scope="row">Minimum commitment, if any</th><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr>
<tr><th scope="row">Fiscal years covered by Item 19</th><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr>
<tr><th scope="row">Fiscal years covered by Item 20</th><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr>
<tr><th scope="row">Complete document or extract; amendments filed after issuance</th><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr>
<tr><th scope="row">Same offering? (yes / no)</th><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr>
</tbody>
</table>

If the last row is "no", stop. The Atomic Wings pair discussed on [reading successive filings](/reading-successive-filings/) is that situation: a 2024 area representative offering whose outlet table counts "Area Representatives" against a 2025 offering that counts "Franchised" outlets. Both tables are correct and no comparison between their totals exists. Write down that the offering changed — that is the finding — and stop the sheet there.

## Item 19: window, population, and what left

<table>
<caption>Population first. A number without its period and its document is not usable.</caption>
<thead>
<tr>
<th scope="col">Field</th>
<th scope="col">Older filing</th>
<th scope="col">Newer filing</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr><th scope="row">Representation made? (yes / no)</th><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr>
<tr><th scope="row">Metric (gross, COGS, payroll, profit, other)</th><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr>
<tr><th scope="row">Fiscal years shown</th><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr>
<tr><th scope="row">Outlet type (franchised / affiliate / mixed)</th><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr>
<tr><th scope="row">Outlets in the table</th><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr>
<tr><th scope="row">Outlets excluded, and the stated reason</th><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr>
<tr><th scope="row">Per-unit figures or one aggregate?</th><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr>
<tr><th scope="row">High, low, median or average given?</th><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr>
<tr><th scope="row">Fiscal years in the older filing and not the newer</th><td colspan="2">—</td></tr>
<tr><th scope="row">Figures those departed years carried</th><td colspan="2">—</td></tr>
<tr><th scope="row">Overlapping years: do the figures agree?</th><td colspan="2">—</td></tr>
</tbody>
</table>

Those last three rows are the ones nobody else fills. 375° Chicken 'n Fries is the worked example: the 2023 filing covers 2019 through 2022 and the 2024 filing covers 2020 through 2023, so the departed-year row reads "FY2019" and the figures row reads "sales $701,815, net loss $42,106". The overlapping years carry identical figures in both documents, which is what allows the rest of the comparison to be trusted.

The exclusion row is where survivorship appears. Mad for Chicken's 2025 filing supplies the wording to copy: four affiliate and two franchised outlets excluded "because they closed and did not operate the full year", having been open "only two (2) to eleven (11) months during our most recent fiscal year." Quote the filing rather than paraphrasing it; the wording is the evidence.

## Item 20: two tables, three years each, two years shared

<table>
<caption>Add each year in each document. The shared years are the only place a franchisor reports the same movement twice.</caption>
<thead>
<tr>
<th scope="col">Field</th>
<th scope="col">Older filing</th>
<th scope="col">Newer filing</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr><th scope="row">Outlet types counted (franchised / company / licensed / other)</th><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr>
<tr><th scope="row">Year-end counts, each year shown</th><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr>
<tr><th scope="row">Openings, each year</th><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr>
<tr><th scope="row">Terminations, non-renewals, reacquisitions, cessations</th><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr>
<tr><th scope="row">Transfers</th><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr>
<tr><th scope="row">Projected openings disclosed</th><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr>
<tr><th scope="row">Item 1 narrative count vs Item 20 year end</th><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr>
<tr><th scope="row">Overlapping years: do the two tables agree?</th><td colspan="2">—</td></tr>
<tr><th scope="row">Older filing's projections vs newer filing's actual openings</th><td colspan="2">—</td></tr>
</tbody>
</table>

Record zeros as findings. Item 20 of GDK's 2024 filing reports zero terminations, non-renewals, reacquisitions and cessations across 2021, 2022 and 2023; a sheet that only has room for decline will leave that cell blank and quietly imply the opposite. Record what a zero covers as well, in the same cell: Item 20 counts outlets of the US franchisor through the last completed fiscal year, so it is silent about the current year and about every outlet outside the United States, and a run of zeros in the closure columns is not an answer to a question about either.

The Item 1 row catches a discrepancy inside one document rather than between two. That same GDK filing states nine US outlets open at issuance in Item 1 against seven at 2023 year end in Item 20. Different as-of dates, both capable of being accurate. Put both numbers on the sheet. The footnote — or the franchisor — is the next sentence.

## Items 6 and 7: the cost of being in the system

<table>
<caption>Count the Item 6 rows before comparing any percentage. A new row is a bigger change than a moved rate.</caption>
<thead>
<tr>
<th scope="col">Field</th>
<th scope="col">Older filing</th>
<th scope="col">Newer filing</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr><th scope="row">Number of rows in Item 6</th><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr>
<tr><th scope="row">Rows present in one filing only (list)</th><td colspan="2">—</td></tr>
<tr><th scope="row">Royalty: rate, base, timing</th><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr>
<tr><th scope="row">Royalty: cap or right to increase</th><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr>
<tr><th scope="row">Brand fund: rate and ceiling</th><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr>
<tr><th scope="row">Local advertising requirement</th><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr>
<tr><th scope="row">Technology or platform charges</th><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr>
<tr><th scope="row">Item 7 format and premises size assumed</th><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr>
<tr><th scope="row">Item 7 total, low and high</th><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr>
<tr><th scope="row">Line items present in one filing only</th><td colspan="2">—</td></tr>
<tr><th scope="row">Additional funds: amount and months covered</th><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr>
<tr><th scope="row">Footnotes rewritten? (yes / no / which)</th><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr>
</tbody>
</table>

Match the format before comparing the totals. A brand disclosing both a full restaurant and an express format needs two sheets, exactly as the [comparison worksheet](/comparison-worksheet/) requires two sheets for two formats across brands. Mad for Chicken's Item 7 range moved between its 2024 and 2025 filings and the brand discloses an express format separately; a comparison that mixes formats will produce a movement that is entirely an artifact of the mixing.

Copy a rate as printed, including a footnote that disagrees with the table. 375°'s 2024 filing carries a royalty footnote reading "five percent (6%)" against 6% in its Item 6 table. Write both, and ask which the agreement charges.

## Items 11, 13, 3 and the framing Items

<table>
<caption>Language rows. Copy the wording. Do not summarise a status into an outcome.</caption>
<thead>
<tr>
<th scope="col">Field</th>
<th scope="col">Older filing</th>
<th scope="col">Newer filing</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr><th scope="row">Item 11: classroom hours / on-the-job hours</th><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr>
<tr><th scope="row">Item 11: who must attend; who pays travel</th><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr>
<tr><th scope="row">Item 11: obligations stated as "will" that became "may", or the reverse</th><td colspan="2">—</td></tr>
<tr><th scope="row">Item 13: registration status of the principal mark, verbatim</th><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr>
<tr><th scope="row">Item 13: owner of the marks; applicant, if different</th><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr>
<tr><th scope="row">Item 13: change-of-mark clause and who pays</th><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr>
<tr><th scope="row">Item 3: entries, with status</th><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr>
<tr><th scope="row">Item 3: entries in the older filing and not the newer</th><td colspan="2">—</td></tr>
<tr><th scope="row">Item 1: entity name, principal address, parents and affiliates</th><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr>
<tr><th scope="row">Item 2: named people, and who is no longer listed</th><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr>
<tr><th scope="row">Item 12 and 17: territory, term, renewal, transfer</th><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr>
</tbody>
</table>

Two hours moving is a real change to a labour plan: Mad for Chicken's on-the-job requirement went from 106 hours in the 2024 filing to 196 in the 2025 filing. Two entity names moving is a real change to who you contract with: 375°'s Item 19 statement is headed 375 Ventures LLC in 2023 and 375 Enterprises LLC in 2024, with identical overlapping figures. An address moving is a real change to where support sits: GDK's 2023 Item 19 directs reports to a Massachusetts address and the 2024 filing gives a Michigan principal address.

For a trademark row, copy the disclosure with its date and then check the register. Doner Shack's FDD issued 29 April 2025 states that the franchisor has no federal registration for its principal mark, that an application has been pending since 3 May 2024, and that a franchisee "may have to change to an alternative trademark, which may increase your expenses" if the right to use it is challenged; the same Item states no adverse determinations and no known superior rights. That is the older cell, and it was accurate when written. The newer cell comes from the USPTO status view for serial 79/411,340, retrieved 16 August 2026: a non-final action mailed 20 December 2024, a letter of suspension on 19 March 2025, publication for opposition in April 2026 with none filed, and registration 8,290,085 on the Principal Register issued 9 June 2026 across all five classes, with the words "DONER SHACK" disclaimed so that what issued protects the composite logo rather than the name. A separate word-mark application, serial 99/401,785, filed 19 September 2025, has been suspended since 7 April 2026. Copy the dates and the outcomes; do not write down why a refusal issued unless the office action itself is in front of you. A status is not an outcome, and a registration number is not the same thing as rights in the words.

## The change log

Everything above feeds one short list.

<table>
<caption>One row per difference. The question column is a sentence you could send today.</caption>
<thead>
<tr>
<th scope="col">Item</th>
<th scope="col">What the older filing said</th>
<th scope="col">What the newer filing says</th>
<th scope="col">Question to put in writing</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr><th scope="row">—</th><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr>
<tr><th scope="row">—</th><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr>
<tr><th scope="row">—</th><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr>
<tr><th scope="row">—</th><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr>
<tr><th scope="row">—</th><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr>
</tbody>
</table>

A filled row reads like this, in shape rather than in substance: Item 19 — older filing showed four fiscal years beginning with one that carried a net loss; newer filing shows four fiscal years beginning a year later; please confirm the earliest year's figures and describe what changed after it. No adjective, no theory, one document and one Item per row.

Sort the finished log into three piles before anyone else sees it. Differences with an obvious mechanical explanation, which you note and drop. Differences that change the economics, which go to an accountant. Differences that change a right or an obligation, which go to [counsel](/attorney-and-accountant/). What survives all three goes to the franchisor and to operators from the [Item 20 lists](/item-20-outlet-tables/).

<div class="checklist" markdown="1">

Using this sheet

- Older filing left, newer filing right, in every table, without exception.
- Identity table completed and "same offering" answered before any figure is copied.
- Em dash where a filing is silent; "unchanged" where the two agree. Never a blank.
- One format per sheet, exactly as with a cross-brand comparison.
- Quote wording verbatim in the language rows.
- Every difference becomes one question naming the document, Item and page.
- This is a research sheet, not the FDD that governs a transaction, and it is not legal, tax or investment advice.

</div>

## Related reading

- [Reading successive filings](/reading-successive-filings/) — four comparisons from public filings
- [Where change shows first](/what-changes-between-filings/) — what a movement in each Item tends to mean
- [Finding prior-year filings](/finding-prior-year-filings/) — obtaining the left-hand column
- [Comparison worksheet](/comparison-worksheet/) — the same discipline across brands
- [Franchisor question list](/franchisor-question-list/) — the format for the questions this sheet produces

---
HTML: https://qsrfieldguide.com/year-over-year-worksheet/