Alabama vs Utah on USAspending: $7.68B vs $4.06B

Alabama’s larger stock, Utah’s denser ratio

Alabama’s $7.68B is about 1.89 times Utah’s $4.06B. Population is only about 1.47 times: 5,157,699 versus 3,503,613. Dollars outrun people, which might suggest Alabama would also lead per capita. It does not. Utah’s $199.06 still beats Alabama’s $116.81 because $4.06B on 3,503,613 residents is a hotter ratio than $7.68B on 5,157,699.

Award counts stretch Alabama’s scale further. 161,254 Alabama awards versus 26,509 Utah awards is about 6.1 times as many rows on only 1.89 times the dollars. Alabama’s file is busy. Utah’s 26,509 actions on $4.06B are fewer and, on a per-resident basis, still map to more obligated federal dollars.

The stacked ranking is Alabama’s. The intensity ranking is Utah’s. FY2026, covered next, also goes to Utah on dollars.

Construction in Alabama, nonferrous metal in Utah

Alabama’s lead NAICS is commercial and institutional building construction. Utah’s lead NAICS is nonferrous metal (except copper and aluminum) rolling, drawing, and extruding. Those are different peaks on $7.68B and $4.06B. Building work is the tallest bar in Alabama; metal rolling, drawing, and extruding is the tallest bar in Utah.

Neither label covers the full file. Alabama’s 161,254 awards and Utah’s 26,509 awards include many actions outside construction and metal work. Use the Alabama and Utah state hubs for agencies and recipients. Both peaks are obligation mixes from USAspending.gov.

FY2026: Utah’s $697.4M over Alabama’s $602.5M

Fiscal year 2026 obligations are $697.4M in Utah and $602.5M in Alabama. Recency flips the dollar ranking that the stacked $7.68B versus $4.06B still assigns to Alabama. The latest-year gap is real and modest. Treat it as a recency cut, not as a trend line and not as cash paid by Treasury.

Do not divide $602.5M or $697.4M by 161,254 or 26,509 all-years awards. Per capita of $116.81 and $199.06 already uses 5,157,699 and 3,503,613 residents against the stacked stocks.

Census counts that do not decide the intensity race

Alabama’s 5,157,699 residents exceed Utah’s 3,503,613, and Alabama’s $7.68B exceeds Utah’s $4.06B. The per-person ranking still belongs to Utah at $199.06 versus $116.81. Headcount is not the engine of intensity in this pair. Award volume of 161,254 versus 26,509 is also not the engine; it simply shows Alabama’s file has more rows.

Keep $116.81 and $199.06 labeled as stacked USAspending.gov obligations divided by Census counts. They are not outlays per resident.

How to read Alabama versus Utah

Start with Alabama’s stacked lead ($7.68B vs $4.06B and 161,254 vs 26,509 awards). Then read Utah’s intensity lead ($199.06 vs $116.81) and Utah’s FY2026 dollar lead ($697.4M vs $602.5M). Note construction versus nonferrous metal. All of those cuts are obligations.

The comparison hub holds the tables. The Alabama and Utah hubs hold agencies and recipients. Outlays are a different series.

Construction versus metal is not a payment ranking

Alabama’s $7.68B and Utah’s $4.06B are USAspending.gov obligations. Commercial and institutional building construction versus nonferrous metal rolling, drawing, and extruding is the industry split. FY2026’s $602.5M versus $697.4M is the recency ranking Utah wins. None of those cuts is an outlay.

Spending per capita of $116.81 and $199.06 sits beside Census counts of 5,157,699 and 3,503,613. Award counts of 161,254 and 26,509 show Alabama’s file is far busier in rows. A busier file is not automatically the hotter ratio. Use the Alabama and Utah hubs for agencies and recipients if the lead NAICS is only a starting point.

Alabama’s 161,254 awards on $7.68B remain the busier file. Utah’s 26,509 awards on $4.06B remain the thinner file with the hotter $199.06 reading and the $697.4M FY2026 booking. Construction versus nonferrous metal rolling is mix, not a cash ranking. Keep $116.81 and $199.06 labeled as packet per-capita figures beside 5,157,699 and 3,503,613 residents.

Questions

Does Alabama or Utah have more federal spending?

Alabama leads stacked USAspending.gov obligations $7.68B to Utah’s $4.06B. Utah leads spending per capita, $199.06 versus $116.81, on 3,503,613 residents against Alabama’s 5,157,699. Alabama has more awards (161,254 vs 26,509). FY2026 obligations are $602.5M in Alabama and $697.4M in Utah.

Why is Utah’s per-capita figure higher than Alabama’s?

The packet reports $199.06 per capita in Utah on 3,503,613 residents and $116.81 in Alabama on 5,157,699. Alabama has more people and far more awards (161,254 vs 26,509). Stacked obligations are $7.68B versus $4.06B. These figures are USAspending.gov obligations, not outlays.

What industries lead in Alabama and Utah federal awards?

Alabama’s top industry is commercial and institutional building construction. Utah’s is nonferrous metal (except copper and aluminum) rolling, drawing, and extruding. Those labels are the largest NAICS slices on $7.68B and $4.06B. Award counts are 161,254 in Alabama and 26,509 in Utah.

Are Alabama vs Utah figures Treasury outlays?

No. The $7.68B and $4.06B totals, and FY2026 amounts of $602.5M and $697.4M, are USAspending.gov obligations. Outlays are cash payments and can lag. Spending per capita ($116.81 vs $199.06) uses Census population against those obligations.