Idaho vs West Virginia on USAspending: $1.2B vs $1.7B

More Idaho residents, a smaller Idaho stock

Idaho’s 2,001,619 residents outnumber West Virginia’s 1,769,979, and Idaho files more than twice as many awards (29,667 vs 14,302). Neither cut wins the stacked ranking. West Virginia’s $1.7B still exceeds Idaho’s $1.2B. Intensity follows the larger stock: $113.44 per capita in West Virginia versus $80.33 in Idaho.

That pattern—fewer people, fewer rows, more dollars—is the West Virginia side of the pair. Idaho’s file is busier in actions and cooler in ratio. Cite USAspending.gov. Row count is not average award size; the packet does not report means from 29,667 or 14,302.

Building construction versus ammunition manufacturing

Idaho’s lead NAICS is commercial and institutional building construction. West Virginia’s is ammunition (except small arms) manufacturing. A construction peak on $1.2B and an ammunition peak on $1.7B are different obligation mixes. Building construction is a first read on Idaho. Ammunition manufacturing is a first read on West Virginia.

The 29,667 Idaho awards and 14,302 West Virginia awards include many actions outside those labels. Agency and recipient detail lives on the Idaho and West Virginia state hubs. Both peaks are USAspending.gov obligation mixes. Outlays are not listed.

Idaho’s commercial and institutional building construction peak sits on 29,667 awards and $80.33 per capita. West Virginia’s ammunition (except small arms) manufacturing peak sits on 14,302 awards and $113.44 per capita. The construction file is busier; the ammunition file is heavier in stacked dollars ($1.7B vs $1.2B). Cite USAspending.gov. Those NAICS labels are first reads, not the entire mix.

FY2026: $160.8M versus $200.8M

Fiscal year 2026 obligations are $160.8M in Idaho and $200.8M in West Virginia. Recency preserves West Virginia’s stacked dollar lead. Treat the year as a recency slice of obligations, not as Treasury cash already paid.

Do not divide $160.8M or $200.8M by 29,667 or 14,302 all-years awards. Spending per capita of $80.33 and $113.44 already sits beside Census counts of 2,001,619 and 1,769,979. Cite USAspending.gov for both cuts.

West Virginia’s $200.8M FY2026 obligations versus Idaho’s $160.8M preserve the stacked ranking. Idaho’s extra people (2,001,619 vs 1,769,979) and extra awards do not flip recency. Treat the year as an obligation slice, not Treasury cash. Do not divide $160.8M or $200.8M by 29,667 or 14,302. Keep $80.33 and $113.44 labeled as Census-based packet figures.

Ammunition intensity on fewer West Virginia awards

West Virginia’s 14,302 awards on $1.7B sit next to Idaho’s 29,667 awards on $1.2B. The thinner log carries the larger stock and the $113.44 per-capita reading. Ammunition (except small arms) manufacturing as the lead industry is the mix label on that concentration. Idaho’s commercial and institutional building construction peak sits on the thicker log and the cooler $80.33 ratio.

Population (2,001,619 vs 1,769,979) is close enough that Idaho’s extra people do not close the dollar gap. Read stock, ratio, and mix together. Keep every dollar figure labeled as a USAspending.gov obligation.

How to read Idaho versus West Virginia

Read West Virginia first on stacked dollars ($1.7B vs $1.2B), spending per capita ($113.44 vs $80.33), and FY2026 ($200.8M vs $160.8M). Read Idaho first on population (2,001,619 vs 1,769,979) and awards (29,667 vs 14,302). Note commercial and institutional building construction versus ammunition (except small arms) manufacturing.

The comparison hub holds the tables. The Idaho and West Virginia hubs hold agencies and recipients. Outlays are a different series. Keep $80.33 and $113.44 labeled as Census-based packet figures on USAspending.gov obligations.

Reading a busier Idaho log against a heavier West Virginia stock

Idaho’s 29,667 awards and 2,001,619 residents look like the larger state on two Census-and-row cuts. West Virginia still holds $1.7B, $113.44 per capita, and $200.8M in FY2026. The ammunition (except small arms) manufacturing peak is the mix label on that heavier stock. Idaho’s commercial and institutional building construction peak is the mix label on the busier log and the cooler $80.33 ratio.

An obligation is a commitment recorded in USAspending.gov. Outlays can lag and are not published here. Do not divide $1.2B or $1.7B by 29,667 or 14,302. Cite USAspending.gov. The comparison hub holds the tables; the Idaho and West Virginia hubs hold agencies and recipients.

Idaho’s extra 29,667 awards versus 14,302 do not close West Virginia’s $1.7B versus $1.2B gap. Ammunition manufacturing versus building construction is mix. Cite USAspending.gov. Keep $113.44 and $80.33 labeled as Census-based obligation ratios.

Questions

Does Idaho or West Virginia have more federal spending?

West Virginia leads stacked USAspending.gov obligations $1.7B to Idaho’s $1.2B. West Virginia also leads spending per capita, $113.44 versus $80.33, on 1,769,979 residents against Idaho’s 2,001,619. Idaho has more awards (29,667 vs 14,302). FY2026 obligations are $160.8M in Idaho and $200.8M in West Virginia.

Why does Idaho have more awards but a smaller stock?

The packet reports 29,667 awards in Idaho and 14,302 in West Virginia. Stacked stocks are $1.2B versus $1.7B. Award count is a row total, not average size. Population is 2,001,619 versus 1,769,979. These figures are USAspending.gov obligations, not outlays. Idaho’s $80.33 per capita versus West Virginia’s $113.44 is the intensity cut that follows the larger stock.

What industries lead in Idaho and West Virginia?

Idaho’s top industry is commercial and institutional building construction. West Virginia’s is ammunition (except small arms) manufacturing. Those labels are the largest NAICS slices on $1.2B and $1.7B. Award counts are 29,667 in Idaho and 14,302 in West Virginia. The rest of each mix sits outside those peaks.

Are Idaho vs West Virginia figures Treasury outlays?

No. The $1.2B and $1.7B totals, and FY2026 amounts of $160.8M and $200.8M, are USAspending.gov obligations. Outlays are cash payments and can lag. Spending per capita ($80.33 vs $113.44) uses Census population where present. This packet does not publish outlays or average award size.