Alaska vs Tennessee on USAspending: $3.49B vs $3.58B

Nearly the same stock, ten times the people

Tennessee’s $3.58B is about 1.03 times Alaska’s $3.49B. Call that a rounding-error lead on the dollar column. Tennessee’s Census count of 7,227,750 is about 9.8 times Alaska’s 740,133. The same obligation series, divided only in the packet’s published ratios, yields $532.17 per capita in Alaska and $97.50 in Tennessee. A nearly even stock spread across a nearly tenfold population gap is the whole story of this pair’s intensity split.

Those per-capita figures are packet ratios of USAspending.gov obligations beside Census population. They are not outlays per resident and they are not a forecast of Treasury checks. The comparison tables keep both states on obligations so $3.49B and $3.58B stay on the same definition.

Alaska files 25,423 awards against Tennessee’s 63,616. Tennessee has more rows, but not by the same factor as population. The extra people in Tennessee dilute the per-capita ratio more than the extra awards thicken the file.

Building construction versus courier and express work

Alaska’s largest NAICS slice is commercial and institutional building construction. Tennessee’s largest NAICS slice is couriers and express delivery services. Construction can park large obligation amounts in a smaller action list. Courier traffic can multiply actions, which is consistent with Tennessee’s 63,616 awards versus Alaska’s 25,423 on nearly the same stacked dollars.

Neither label is the whole economy of either state. They are the peaks on $3.49B and $3.58B. Use the Alaska and Tennessee state pages for agencies and recipients behind those peaks. Both peaks are obligation mixes.

FY2026: Tennessee’s $704.7M against Alaska’s $393.9M

Fiscal year 2026 obligations are $704.7M in Tennessee and $393.9M in Alaska. Recency widens Tennessee’s lead. $704.7M is about 1.79 times $393.9M, a larger relative gap than the all-years $3.58B versus $3.49B. Read FY2026 as the latest year in the obligation file, not as cash paid.

Do not blend FY2026 dollars with all-years award counts of 63,616 and 25,423. Spending per capita of $532.17 and $97.50 already uses the Census counts of 740,133 and 7,227,750 and should not be recomputed from the year slice.

63,616 awards on 7.2 million residents

Tennessee’s 63,616 awards and 7,227,750 residents make it the larger state on both counts. Alaska’s 25,423 awards and 740,133 residents make it the smaller state on both counts. Dollars still sit within about $90 million of each other. Intensity does not: $97.50 versus $532.17. Volume of people and volume of rows both run against Alaska; the per-capita ratio still runs for Alaska.

That inversion is why this pair is useful as a head-to-head. A searcher who only ranks states by stacked billions sees a near-tie. A searcher who only ranks by Census size never sees that Alaska’s $3.49B is concentrated.

How to read Alaska versus Tennessee

Read Tennessee first on stacked stock ($3.58B vs $3.49B), awards (63,616 vs 25,423), population (7,227,750 vs 740,133), and FY2026 ($704.7M vs $393.9M). Read Alaska first on spending per capita ($532.17 vs $97.50). Note construction versus couriers. Keep every cut labeled as USAspending.gov obligations.

The comparison hub is the table set. The Alaska and Tennessee hubs are the state drill-downs. Do not swap in outlays.

Why Tennessee’s 7.2 million residents change the reading

Tennessee’s Census count of 7,227,750 is the largest population in this pair and one of the largest denominators among the states in this batch. Alaska’s 740,133 is the smallest. Stacked obligations of $3.58B and $3.49B sit within about $90 million of each other. The published per-capita figures of $97.50 and $532.17 follow from placing those stocks beside those Census counts. A searcher who ranks only by billions will call this a near-tie. A searcher who ranks by people will never see Alaska’s concentration.

FY2026 obligations of $704.7M in Tennessee and $393.9M in Alaska restore a clearer dollar lead to Tennessee in the latest year. Award counts of 63,616 and 25,423 sit between those extremes. Courier and express delivery services as Tennessee’s peak and commercial and institutional building construction as Alaska’s peak are obligation-mix labels, not outlay labels. Use the state hubs for agencies and recipients.

Questions

Does Alaska or Tennessee have more federal spending?

Tennessee leads stacked USAspending.gov obligations $3.58B to Alaska’s $3.49B. Alaska leads spending per capita, $532.17 versus $97.50, on 740,133 residents against Tennessee’s 7,227,750. Tennessee has more awards (63,616 vs 25,423). FY2026 obligations are $704.7M in Tennessee and $393.9M in Alaska.

Why does Alaska outrank Tennessee per capita?

The stacked stocks are close, $3.49B versus $3.58B, while Tennessee’s Census count of 7,227,750 is about 9.8 times Alaska’s 740,133. That population gap produces $532.17 per capita in Alaska and $97.50 in Tennessee. The ratios are packet figures on USAspending.gov obligations, not outlays.

What industries lead in Alaska and Tennessee?

Alaska’s top industry is commercial and institutional building construction. Tennessee’s is couriers and express delivery services. Those labels sit on $3.49B and $3.58B. Award counts are 25,423 in Alaska and 63,616 in Tennessee. Both are obligation mixes from USAspending.gov. Those NAICS labels are the largest slices on the stacked stocks, not complete industrial profiles.

Are Alaska vs Tennessee figures outlays?

No. The $3.49B and $3.58B totals, and FY2026 amounts of $393.9M and $704.7M, are USAspending.gov obligations. Outlays are cash payments and can lag. Spending per capita ($532.17 vs $97.50) uses Census population where present. Spending per capita uses Census population where present and should not be read as cash per resident.