Alaska vs New Hampshire
Federal spending comparison
Alaska and New Hampshire are both small Census states with high spending-per-capita readings. Alaska’s USAspending.gov obligation stock is $3.49B; New Hampshire’s is $2.48B. Census counts are 740,133 in Alaska and 1,409,032 in New Hampshire. Spending per capita is $532.17 versus $284.15. Award counts are 25,423 versus 9,224. FY2026 flips a slim dollar lead to New Hampshire: $400.4M versus Alaska’s $393.9M. Commercial and institutional building construction leads Alaska; small arms, ordnance, and ordnance accessories manufacturing leads New Hampshire. The figures are obligations, not outlays.
Key figures
- Alaska $3.49B vs New Hampshire $2.48B in stacked USAspending obligations.
- Alaska per capita $532.17 vs New Hampshire $284.15 on 740,133 vs 1,409,032 residents.
- Awards: 25,423 vs 9,224; FY2026 $393.9M vs $400.4M.
- Top industries: commercial construction in Alaska; small arms and ordnance in New Hampshire.
- Figures are USAspending.gov obligations, not Treasury outlays.
Two small states, two high-intensity files
Alaska’s $3.49B on 740,133 residents produces $532.17 per capita. New Hampshire’s $2.48B on 1,409,032 residents produces $284.15. Both ratios are high relative to larger Census states in this batch. Alaska still holds the larger stacked stock.
Award volume favors Alaska, 25,423 versus 9,224. New Hampshire’s file is sparse in rows on $2.48B. Alaska’s 25,423 actions sit on $3.49B.
FY2026 is the close cut. $400.4M in New Hampshire versus $393.9M in Alaska is a recency lead for New Hampshire on a smaller all-years stock. Cite USAspending.gov for both cuts.
Alaska’s $3.49B and New Hampshire’s $2.48B are both large stocks for small Census counts of 740,133 and 1,409,032. Spending per capita of $532.17 and $284.15 follows. FY2026 of $393.9M versus $400.4M is the close recency cut. All dollar cuts are USAspending.gov obligations.
Commercial and institutional building construction versus small arms, ordnance, and ordnance accessories manufacturing is mix. Award counts of 25,423 and 9,224 stay row totals. Cite USAspending.gov. Outlays are not in the packet.
Construction versus small arms and ordnance
Alaska’s lead NAICS is commercial and institutional building construction. New Hampshire’s lead NAICS is small arms, ordnance, and ordnance accessories manufacturing. Those peaks sit on $3.49B and $2.48B.
The 25,423 Alaska awards and 9,224 New Hampshire awards include many actions outside those labels. Use the Alaska and New Hampshire state hubs for agencies and recipients. Both peaks are USAspending.gov obligation mixes.
Full analysis: Alaska vs New Hampshire on USAspending: $3.49B vs $2.48B →
Questions
- Does Alaska or New Hampshire have more federal spending?
- Alaska leads stacked USAspending.gov obligations $3.49B to New Hampshire’s $2.48B. Alaska also leads spending per capita, $532.17 versus $284.15, and awards, 25,423 versus 9,224. New Hampshire has more residents (1,409,032 vs 740,133) and a slim FY2026 lead ($400.4M vs $393.9M).
- Does New Hampshire outspend Alaska in FY2026?
- Yes on the latest-year slice. The packet reports FY2026 obligations of $400.4M in New Hampshire and $393.9M in Alaska. The all-years stocks still favor Alaska, $3.49B versus $2.48B. These figures are USAspending.gov obligations, not outlays.
- What industries lead in Alaska and New Hampshire?
- Alaska’s top industry is commercial and institutional building construction. New Hampshire’s is small arms, ordnance, and ordnance accessories manufacturing. Those labels are the largest NAICS slices on $3.49B and $2.48B. Award counts are 25,423 in Alaska and 9,224 in New Hampshire.
- Are Alaska vs New Hampshire figures Treasury outlays?
- No. The $3.49B and $2.48B totals, and FY2026 amounts of $393.9M and $400.4M, are USAspending.gov obligations. Outlays are cash payments and can lag. Spending per capita ($532.17 vs $284.15) uses Census population where present.
State comparison from SpendingVault aggregates of USAspending obligations. Per-capita uses Census population where present.
| Alaska | Metric | New Hampshire |
|---|---|---|
| $7.08B | Total Spending | $7.19B |
| $10K | Per Capita | $5K |
| N/A | % of GDP | N/A |
| 740K | Population | 1.4M |
| N/A | Median Income | N/A |
| N/A | Poverty Rate | N/A |
| N/A | Bachelor Degree % | N/A |
| N/A | Median Age | N/A |
| N/A | Unemployment | N/A |
| N/A | GDP (Millions) | N/A |
Top Agencies — Alaska
- Department of Health and Human Services$30.53B
- Department of Defense$12.68B
- Social Security Administration$6.94B
- Department of Transportation$5.19B
- Department of the Treasury$3.06B
Top Agencies — New Hampshire
- Social Security Administration$22.11B
- Department of Defense$14.17B
- Department of Health and Human Services$10.73B
- Department of Education$2.77B
- Department of Veterans Affairs$2.59B
Top Industries — Alaska
- COMMERCIAL AND INSTITUTIONAL BUILDING CONSTRUCTION$2.75B
- FOSSIL FUEL ELECTRIC POWER GENERATION$1.69B
- FACILITIES SUPPORT SERVICES$1.54B
- OTHER HEAVY AND CIVIL ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION$1.21B
- ENGINEERING SERVICES$1.11B
Top Industries — New Hampshire
- OTHER AIRCRAFT PARTS AND AUXILIARY EQUIPMENT MANUFACTURING$2.73B
- SEARCH, DETECTION, NAVIGATION, GUIDANCE, AERONAUTICAL, AND NAUTICAL SYSTEM AND INSTRUMENT MANUFACTURING$2.02B
- GUIDED MISSILE AND SPACE VEHICLE MANUFACTURING$1.73B
- OTHER ELECTRONIC COMPONENT MANUFACTURING$1.10B
- ENGINEERING SERVICES$1.07B
Source: USAspending.gov · More Comparisons · Alaska · New Hampshire