Indiana vs Mississippi on USAspending: $3.83B vs $2.88B

Indiana’s dollars on a much larger Census count

Indiana’s $3.83B stacked total is about 1.33 times Mississippi’s $2.88B. Indiana’s Census count of 6,924,275 is about 2.35 times Mississippi’s 2,943,045. Intensity therefore runs against the stock: $80.53 per capita in Indiana and $115.31 in Mississippi. The larger Midwest state spreads more dollars across more than twice the people. The smaller Gulf state concentrates $2.88B. Those ratios are packet figures of USAspending.gov obligations beside Census population, not outlays per resident.

Award counts also favor Mississippi, 233,003 against 58,316, about 4.0 times. Ship building and repairing as a lead NAICS can generate a long action list on a smaller stock. Indiana’s 58,316 awards on $3.83B are fewer rows on more dollars.

This pair splits three ways: Indiana on stacked stock and FY2026, Mississippi on awards and per capita, Indiana on population.

Commercial construction versus ship building and repairing

Indiana’s lead NAICS is commercial and institutional building construction. Mississippi’s lead NAICS is ship building and repairing. Construction is Indiana’s peak on $3.83B and 58,316 awards. Shipyard work is Mississippi’s peak on $2.88B and 233,003 awards. The shipyard label helps explain the row inversion. The construction label sits on the larger dollar stock.

Those peaks are the largest NAICS slices, not complete profiles. The Indiana and Mississippi state hubs list agencies and recipients. Both peaks are USAspending.gov obligation mixes.

FY2026: Indiana’s $557.6M versus Mississippi’s $339.4M

Fiscal year 2026 obligations are $557.6M in Indiana and $339.4M in Mississippi. Recency follows the stacked ranking. $557.6M is about 1.64 times $339.4M, a wider relative gap than the all-years $3.83B versus $2.88B. Indiana’s dollar lead is larger in the latest year than in the stacked file.

Read FY2026 as an obligation year slice. Do not divide $557.6M or $339.4M by 58,316 or 233,003 all-years awards. Spending per capita of $80.53 and $115.31 already uses Census counts of 6,924,275 and 2,943,045.

Four times the awards on two-thirds of the people

Mississippi’s 233,003 awards versus Indiana’s 58,316 is the sharpest inversion in this pair. Mississippi also has fewer residents, 2,943,045 versus 6,924,275. More actions on fewer people still sit on a smaller $2.88B stock. Indiana’s $3.83B and $557.6M FY2026 remain the larger dollar columns.

A searcher ranking by award volume will put Mississippi first. A searcher ranking by obligation stock will put Indiana first. A searcher ranking by dollars per resident will put Mississippi first again. The packet reports all three.

Indiana’s $3.83B on 6,924,275 residents produces $80.53 per capita. Mississippi’s $2.88B on 2,943,045 residents produces $115.31. The smaller Gulf state is hotter on the published ratio and busier on awards, 233,003 versus 58,316. The larger Midwest state leads stacked dollars and FY2026, $557.6M versus $339.4M. Commercial and institutional building construction versus ship building and repairing is the remaining industrial contrast. Rank by people or dollars and Indiana leads. Rank by rows or intensity and Mississippi leads. Keep the definition as obligations.

How to read Indiana versus Mississippi

Read Indiana first on stacked stock ($3.83B vs $2.88B), population (6,924,275 vs 2,943,045), and FY2026 ($557.6M vs $339.4M). Read Mississippi first on spending per capita ($115.31 vs $80.53) and awards (233,003 vs 58,316). Note commercial construction versus ship building. All cuts are obligations.

The comparison hub holds the tables. The Indiana and Mississippi hubs hold state detail. Outlays stay off this page.

A Midwest construction stock versus a Gulf shipyard list

Indiana’s commercial and institutional building construction peak on $3.83B and 58,316 awards is the larger dollar file. Mississippi’s ship building and repairing peak on $2.88B and 233,003 awards is the longer action list. Indiana’s 6,924,275 residents versus Mississippi’s 2,943,045 explain why $3.83B becomes $80.53 per capita while $2.88B becomes $115.31. Construction dollars on a large Census count cool the ratio. Shipyard rows on a smaller Census count heat it.

FY2026 obligations of $557.6M in Indiana and $339.4M in Mississippi follow the stacked ranking. Keep every cut labeled as USAspending.gov obligations. Outlays can lag both construction and shipyard awards. The Indiana and Mississippi state hubs list agencies and recipients. This page does not invent employment or output figures. Indiana’s $3.83B and Mississippi’s $2.88B stay comparable only as USAspending.gov obligations, not as outlays.

Questions

Does Indiana or Mississippi have more federal spending?

Indiana leads stacked USAspending.gov obligations $3.83B to Mississippi’s $2.88B. Mississippi leads spending per capita, $115.31 versus $80.53, on 2,943,045 residents against Indiana’s 6,924,275. Mississippi has far more awards (233,003 vs 58,316). FY2026 obligations are $557.6M in Indiana and $339.4M in Mississippi.

Why does Mississippi outrank Indiana per capita?

Mississippi’s $2.88B sits on 2,943,045 residents; Indiana’s $3.83B sits on 6,924,275. The smaller Census count produces $115.31 per capita against $80.53. The ratios are packet figures on USAspending.gov obligations, not outlays per resident. Cite only the packet ratios; do not treat them as cash per resident or as a forecast.

What industries lead in Indiana and Mississippi?

Indiana’s top industry is commercial and institutional building construction. Mississippi’s is ship building and repairing. Those labels sit on $3.83B and $2.88B. Award counts are 58,316 in Indiana and 233,003 in Mississippi. Both mixes are USAspending.gov obligations. Those NAICS labels are the largest slices on the stacked stocks, not complete industrial profiles.

Are Indiana vs Mississippi figures Treasury outlays?

No. The $3.83B and $2.88B totals, and FY2026 amounts of $557.6M and $339.4M, are USAspending.gov obligations. Outlays are cash payments and can lag. Spending per capita ($80.53 vs $115.31) uses Census population where present. Spending per capita uses Census population where present and should not be read as cash per resident.