Georgia vs Oklahoma on USAspending: $9.7B vs $5.5B

Same aircraft family, different dollar stocks

These figures are USAspending.gov obligations, not Treasury outlays. Georgia’s $9.7B stock sits about $4.2 billion above Oklahoma’s $5.5B. Place of performance in the award file is the scoring rule. The pair is useful because the top NAICS labels sit in the same aircraft-manufacturing family even while scale, people, and rows diverge.

Georgia logs 278,028 awards on $9.7B. Oklahoma logs 50,460 awards on $5.5B. Oklahoma’s thinner file on a still-large stock implies a heavier typical booking. Georgia’s busier file on a larger stock is consistent with more actions, not necessarily smaller ones. The $9.7B versus $5.5B ranking is a dollar ranking, not a row ranking.

Georgia’s 278,028 awards on $9,693,034,475 versus Oklahoma’s 50,460 awards on $5,456,947,205 is a scale gap inside one aircraft-manufacturing family. People of 11,180,878 versus 4,095,393 produce $95.66 versus $205.98. FY2026 of $1,069,558,753 versus $843,573,742 stays with Georgia by a smaller ratio than the stacked ranking. Finished aircraft versus parts is mix. Related NAICS labels are not interchangeable files.

Oklahoma’s $205.98 versus Georgia’s $95.66

Georgia’s 11,180,878 residents against $9.7B produce $95.66 per capita. Oklahoma’s 4,095,393 residents against $5.5B produce $205.98. Intensity in Oklahoma is more than double Georgia’s even though Georgia holds the much larger stacked total.

A $205.98 per-person reading is an intensity fact attached to $5.5B, not a household payment. Georgia’s $95.66 is attached to $9.7B. This table scores USAspending place of performance, not GDP. Georgia can lead stacked dollars while trailing on a per-resident basis because 11,180,878 people spread $9.7B more thinly than 4,095,393 people spread $5.5B.

Finished aircraft in Georgia, parts in Oklahoma

Georgia’s top industry is aircraft manufacturing. Oklahoma’s is other aircraft parts and auxiliary equipment manufacturing. Those NAICS labels mark the largest grouping in each file. Finished-aircraft awards and parts awards are related lead products, not identical ones, sitting on $9.7B and $5.5B stocks.

An aircraft-manufacturing lead inside Georgia’s 278,028-award file can concentrate airframe work without explaining every dollar. An aircraft-parts lead inside Oklahoma’s 50,460-award file can concentrate auxiliary equipment without making Oklahoma a single-product state. Shared industry family does not mean shared files. Neither label is the entire stock.

FY2026: $1.07B in Georgia vs $843.6M in Oklahoma

FY2026 obligations are $1,069,558,753 in Georgia and $843,573,742 in Oklahoma. Georgia remains ahead in the latest year, but the recency gap is smaller than the stacked gap. Recency questions belong in FY2026. The $9.7B and $5.5B totals remain the full USAspending.gov aggregate this comparison uses. Both years are obligations, not outlays.

Do not divide those FY figures by Georgia’s 278,028 or Oklahoma’s 50,460 all-years awards. Per capita of $95.66 on 11,180,878 residents versus $205.98 on 4,095,393 residents is the intensity comparison. FY2026 answers how the latest year booked. Stacked totals still favor Georgia by a wide margin.

Georgia’s $1,069,558,753 FY2026 versus Oklahoma’s $843,573,742 is a smaller ratio than $9,693,034,475 versus $5,456,947,205. 278,028 awards versus 50,460 awards and 11,180,878 residents versus 4,095,393 residents produce $95.66 versus $205.98. Aircraft manufacturing versus aircraft parts remains mix. Recency does not erase the intensity inversion.

Scale in Georgia, intensity in Oklahoma

Georgia leads stacked dollars ($9.7B vs $5.5B), award count (278,028 vs 50,460), population (11,180,878 vs 4,095,393), and FY2026 ($1.07B vs $843.6M). Oklahoma leads per capita ($205.98 vs $95.66). Those splits are why an aircraft-family pair cannot be reduced to one ranking.

Aircraft manufacturing versus other aircraft parts and auxiliary equipment manufacturing is mix inside files that contain many other industries. Use the Georgia and Oklahoma hubs for agencies and recipients. Keep both stocks labeled as USAspending.gov obligations.

Aircraft family does not erase the scale gap

Aircraft manufacturing in Georgia and other aircraft parts and auxiliary equipment manufacturing in Oklahoma sit in the same industry family. They sit on different stocks: $9,693,034,475 versus $5,456,947,205. Georgia’s 278,028 awards and 11,180,878 residents versus Oklahoma’s 50,460 awards and 4,095,393 residents are the scale facts. Per capita of $95.66 versus $205.98 is the intensity inversion.

FY2026 of $1,069,558,753 versus $843,573,742 stays with Georgia but by a smaller ratio than the stacked gap. Related NAICS labels are not interchangeable files. Both figures are USAspending.gov obligations, not Treasury outlays. Place of performance is the scoring rule.

Questions

Which state has more federal spending, Georgia or Oklahoma?

Georgia leads in stacked USAspending.gov obligations: $9,693,034,475 versus Oklahoma’s $5,456,947,205. Georgia has more awards (278,028 vs 50,460) and more people (11,180,878 vs 4,095,393). Spending per capita is $95.66 in Georgia and $205.98 in Oklahoma. FY2026 obligations are $1.07B and $843.6M. These are obligations, not Treasury outlays.

Do Georgia and Oklahoma share the same top federal industry?

They share an aircraft-manufacturing family, not the same NAICS label. Georgia’s top industry is aircraft manufacturing. Oklahoma’s is other aircraft parts and auxiliary equipment manufacturing. Those slices sit on $9.7B and $5.5B stocks. Award counts are 278,028 in Georgia and 50,460 in Oklahoma.

Why is Oklahoma’s per-capita spending higher than Georgia’s?

Oklahoma’s $5.5B stock sits on 4,095,393 residents, which produces $205.98 per capita. Georgia’s $9.7B stock sits on 11,180,878 residents, which produces $95.66. Intensity more than doubles in Oklahoma. The stacked ranking still favors Georgia. FY2026 is $843.6M versus $1.07B.

Are Georgia vs Oklahoma figures Treasury outlays?

No. SpendingVault uses USAspending.gov obligations. Outlays are cash payments and can lag. The $9.7B and $5.5B stacked totals and FY2026 amounts of $1.07B and $843.6M measure award commitments by place of performance, not Monthly Treasury Statement payments.