California vs Utah on USAspending: $39.5B against $4.1B

A metals peak on 26,509 awards

Utah’s lead NAICS is nonferrous metal (except copper and aluminum) rolling, drawing, and extruding. That specialty-metals label is unusual among California pairings in this slice. It sits on $4.1B against California’s $39.5B commercial-construction peak. A rolling-and-drawing mix can concentrate dollars at a few mills. The packet names the peak; it does not name the plants.

Utah’s 26,509 awards against California’s 639,340 is about 4 percent of the California row count on about 10 percent of the dollars. The Utah tape is concentrated. Use the California and Utah state hubs for agencies and recipients. Cite USAspending.gov.

Utah’s $199.06 reading

Utah’s 3,503,613 residents are about 9 percent of California’s 39,431,263. Utah’s $4.1B is about 10 percent of California’s $39.5B. Dollars slightly outrun population, which is why $199.06 exceeds $135.64. Scale is California’s. Intensity is Utah’s.

Keep those per-capita figures labeled as Census-based packet figures on USAspending.gov obligations. They are not outlays per resident. Place-of-performance for metal rolling can sit at a mill. The packet does not reallocate.

FY2026: $697.4M versus $5.3B

Fiscal year 2026 obligations are $5.3B in California and $697.4M in Utah. Utah’s latest-year amount is a sizable slice of $4.1B. California’s $5.3B is a smaller share of $39.5B. Recency narrows the dollar gap relative to the stacked stock, without reversing California’s lead.

Treat FY2026 as a recency slice of obligations, not Treasury cash. Do not divide $5.3B or $697.4M by 639,340 or 26,509 all-years awards. Spending per capita of $135.64 and $199.06 already uses Census denominators of 39,431,263 and 3,503,613.

Specialty metals versus federal buildings

Nonferrous metal rolling, drawing, and extruding and commercial and institutional building construction are different NAICS families. Readers should not treat Utah’s $4.1B as a smaller California. The stacks differ in size, intensity, award concentration, and lead industry. The 26,509 and 639,340 rows include many codes beyond those peaks.

Outlays are a different USAspending.gov series. This page stays on obligations: $39.5B versus $4.1B stacked, and $5.3B versus $697.4M in FY2026.

Specialty metals on 26,509 mill actions

Utah’s nonferrous-metal-rolling-drawing-and-extruding peak on $4.1B with 26,509 awards is a mill-concentration signature. Few actions, a $4.1B stock, and $199.06 per capita on 3,503,613 residents describe a specialty metals file. California’s 639,340 awards on $39.5B with $135.64 on 39,431,263 describe a broad construction-led file. Utah leads intensity. California leads scale.

FY2026 of $697.4M versus $5.3B is a sizable Utah slice of $4.1B. Recency narrows the dollar gap relative to the stacked stock without reversing California’s lead. Cite USAspending.gov for obligations. Do not convert mill dollars into outlays, and do not divide $697.4M by 26,509 all-years awards.

Place-of-performance for metal rolling can sit at a mill. The packet does not reallocate. Use the California and Utah hubs for agencies and recipients. The comparison hub holds the $39.5B versus $4.1B tables. Keep 26,509 versus 639,340 labeled as all-years award counts. Commercial construction versus nonferrous metals are mix tags on different stacks.

Utah’s 26,509 awards on 3,503,613 residents under $199.06 per capita describe a concentrated metals-rolling file on $4.1B that wins intensity. California’s $39.5B, 639,340 awards, and $135.64 on 39,431,263 residents remain the scale side. FY2026 of $697.4M versus $5.3B is a sizable Utah cut. Nonferrous metal rolling, drawing, and extruding is a mix tag. Cite USAspending.gov.

How to read California versus Utah

Read California first on stacked dollars ($39.5B vs $4.1B) and award count (639,340 vs 26,509). Read Utah first on spending per capita ($199.06 vs $135.64), on a concentrated 26,509-row tape, and on the nonferrous-metals peak against California’s commercial-construction peak. FY2026 is $5.3B versus $697.4M.

The comparison hub holds the tables. Outlays are not listed.

Utah’s 3,503,613 residents and California’s 39,431,263 residents set the $199.06 versus $135.64 denominators on $4.1B versus $39.5B. Award counts of 26,509 versus 639,340 and FY2026 of $697.4M versus $5.3B complete the comparison. Nonferrous metal rolling versus commercial construction remains the mix contrast. Cite USAspending.gov. Keep every dollar labeled as an obligation.

Questions

Does California or Utah have more federal spending?

California leads stacked USAspending.gov obligations $39.5B to Utah’s $4.1B. Utah leads spending per capita, $199.06 versus $135.64, on 3,503,613 residents against California’s 39,431,263. Award counts are 639,340 in California and 26,509 in Utah. FY2026 obligations are $5.3B in California and $697.4M in Utah.

What is Utah’s lead industry versus California?

Utah’s top industry is nonferrous metal (except copper and aluminum) rolling, drawing, and extruding. California’s is commercial and institutional building construction. Those labels are the largest NAICS slices on $4.1B and $39.5B. Award counts are 26,509 in Utah and 639,340 in California. The figures are USAspending.gov obligations, not outlays.

Why does Utah have so few awards?

The packet reports 26,509 awards in Utah on $4.1B versus 639,340 in California on $39.5B. Utah’s metals-rolling peak is a mix that can concentrate dollars in fewer mill actions. Spending per capita is $199.06 versus $135.64. The packet lists USAspending.gov obligations only.

Are California vs Utah figures Treasury outlays?

No. The $39.5B and $4.1B totals, and FY2026 amounts of $5.3B and $697.4M, are USAspending.gov obligations. Outlays are cash payments and can lag. Spending per capita ($135.64 vs $199.06) uses Census population where present. Award counts in the packet are all-years totals, not a single fiscal year’s actions.