Alabama vs Colorado on USAspending: $7.7B vs $8.1B

Two mid-size states, one thinner award file

These figures are USAspending.gov obligations, not Treasury outlays. Colorado’s $8.1B stock sits $371 million above Alabama’s $7.7B. Place of performance in the award file is the scoring rule. Populations of 5,957,493 and 5,157,699 put both states in a similar size band. The comparison is not a giant-versus-small contest on people or on stacked dollars.

Award counts break the resemblance. Alabama’s 161,254 actions exceed Colorado’s 91,723. Alabama’s $7.7B is spread across more records. Colorado’s $8.1B sits on a thinner file, which implies a heavier typical booking. Dollars and people are close; paperwork volume is not.

Alabama and Colorado sit in the same Census band (5,157,699 vs 5,957,493) and the same $8 billion band ($7,682,295,934 vs $8,052,957,089). They do not sit in the same paperwork band: 161,254 awards versus 91,723. FY2026 of $602,489,799 versus $579,929,386 is nearly even. Per capita of $116.81 versus $97.34 is the quieter intensity split. Building construction versus chartered freight air is mix.

Intensity: $116.81 in Alabama, $97.34 in Colorado

Alabama’s smaller Census count of 5,157,699 against $7,682,295,934 produces $116.81 per capita. Colorado’s 5,957,493 residents against $8,052,957,089 produce $97.34. Intensity favors Alabama by about $19 per person even though Colorado holds the larger stacked total.

A $116.81 per-person reading is an intensity fact attached to $7.7B, not a transfer to each resident. Colorado’s $97.34 is attached to $8.1B. This table scores USAspending place of performance, not state GDP. Similar populations can still hide a 70,000-award gap and a quieter intensity split.

Buildings in Alabama, chartered freight air in Colorado

Alabama’s largest industry slice is commercial and institutional building construction. Colorado’s is nonscheduled chartered freight air transportation. Those NAICS labels mark the top grouping in each file. Construction awards and charter-freight awards are different lead products on stocks $371 million apart.

A building-construction lead inside Alabama’s 161,254-award file can include large facility actions without explaining the rest of $7.7B. A chartered-freight lead can concentrate transportation awards inside Colorado’s 91,723-award file without making Colorado a single-product state. Mix differs. Neither label is the entire stock.

FY2026 almost even: $602.5M vs $579.9M

FY2026 obligations are $602,489,799 in Alabama and $579,929,386 in Colorado. Alabama is slightly ahead in the latest year, reversing the stacked ranking that favors Colorado. Recency questions belong in FY2026. The $7.7B and $8.1B totals remain the full USAspending.gov aggregate this comparison uses. Both cuts are obligations, not outlays.

Do not divide those FY figures by Alabama’s 161,254 or Colorado’s 91,723 all-years awards. Per capita of $116.81 on 5,157,699 residents versus $97.34 on 5,957,493 residents is the intensity comparison. FY2026 is a narrower window that happens to sit close; stacked totals still favor Colorado.

Alabama’s $602,489,799 latest year versus Colorado’s $579,929,386 is a recency near-tie on stocks of $7,682,295,934 and $8,052,957,089. Do not average those FY figures into the stacked totals. 161,254 awards versus 91,723 awards remain the paperwork split. $116.81 versus $97.34 remains the intensity split on 5,157,699 versus 5,957,493 residents.

Close people, inverted rows

Colorado leads stacked dollars ($8.1B vs $7.7B) and population (5,957,493 vs 5,157,699). Alabama leads award count (161,254 vs 91,723), per capita ($116.81 vs $97.34), and FY2026 by a thin margin ($602.5M vs $579.9M). Those splits are why Alabama versus Colorado cannot be reduced to two similar $8 billion files.

Commercial and institutional building construction versus nonscheduled chartered freight air transportation is mix inside files that contain many other industries. Use the Alabama and Colorado hubs for agencies and recipients. Keep both stocks labeled as USAspending.gov obligations.

Why similar Census counts still produce different files

Alabama’s 5,157,699 residents and Colorado’s 5,957,493 residents look like a peer pair. The files are not peers once rows are counted. Alabama’s 161,254 awards on $7,682,295,934 versus Colorado’s 91,723 awards on $8,052,957,089 is a paperwork split on stocks only $371 million apart. Per capita of $116.81 versus $97.34 follows from those stocks and those Census counts.

FY2026 of $602,489,799 versus $579,929,386 is nearly even and should not be averaged into the stacked totals. Commercial and institutional building construction versus nonscheduled chartered freight air transportation is mix. Both cuts remain USAspending.gov obligations by place of performance, not cash paid from the Treasury.

Questions

Which state has more federal spending, Alabama or Colorado?

Colorado leads in stacked USAspending.gov obligations: $8,052,957,089 versus Alabama’s $7,682,295,934. Alabama has more awards (161,254 vs 91,723). Populations are close (5,157,699 vs 5,957,493). Spending per capita is $116.81 in Alabama and $97.34 in Colorado. FY2026 obligations are $602.5M and $579.9M. These are obligations, not Treasury outlays.

Do Alabama and Colorado have similar federal award counts?

No. Alabama logs 161,254 awards on $7.7B. Colorado logs 91,723 awards on $8.1B. Colorado’s thinner file implies a heavier typical booking. Per capita is $116.81 versus $97.34. Populations are 5,157,699 and 5,957,493. FY2026 is nearly even ($602.5M vs $579.9M).

What industries lead Alabama and Colorado federal awards?

Alabama’s top industry is commercial and institutional building construction. Colorado’s is nonscheduled chartered freight air transportation. Those slices sit on $7.7B and $8.1B obligation stocks. They mark the largest grouping in each file, not every award in either state. Award counts are 161,254 in Alabama and 91,723 in Colorado.

Are Alabama vs Colorado figures Treasury outlays?

No. SpendingVault uses USAspending.gov obligations. Outlays are cash payments and can lag. The $7.7B and $8.1B stacked totals and FY2026 amounts of $602.5M and $579.9M measure award commitments by place of performance, not Monthly Treasury Statement payments.