Kentucky vs Texas on USAspending: $3.8B against $72.7B

Nineteen times the dollars, seven times the people

Texas’s $72.7B sits on 31,290,831 residents. Kentucky’s $3.8B sits on 4,588,372. The population multiple is roughly seven to one; the dollar multiple is about nineteen to one. That gap is why Texas’s spending per capita of $686.1 is far above Kentucky’s $142.1. Headcount explains part of the ranking. It does not explain the intensity gap.

Kentucky still files a busy award tape: 140,157 actions against Texas’s 530,634. That is more than a quarter of Texas’s row count on about one-nineteenth of the dollars. Kentucky’s file is dense in awards relative to its $3.8B stock. Texas’s 530,634 rows sit on a much larger average booking.

Couriers in Kentucky, pharmaceutical preparations in Texas

Kentucky’s lead NAICS is couriers and express delivery services. Texas’s lead NAICS is pharmaceutical preparation manufacturing. Those peaks sit on $3.8B and $72.7B. A logistics peak on the Kentucky side is a first read of mix, not a claim that every Kentucky award is a parcel contract. A drug-manufacturing peak on the Texas side is the same kind of label: the largest industry slice, not the whole 530,634-row file.

Courier work and pharmaceutical manufacturing are different federal buying patterns. One tends toward high-frequency logistics awards; the other toward large manufacturing obligations. The packet does not split those peaks into dollar shares. It only names the top industry in each state. Use the Kentucky and Texas state hubs for agencies and recipients.

FY2026 recency: $21.5B versus $652.0M

Fiscal year 2026 obligations are $21.5B in Texas and $652.0M in Kentucky. Recency preserves Texas’s stacked lead, and the latest-year multiple is wider than the all-years stock. Treat FY2026 as a recency slice of the same USAspending.gov obligation series, not as cash paid by Treasury.

Do not divide $21.5B or $652.0M by the all-years award counts of 530,634 and 140,157. Those row totals cover the full aggregate. Spending per capita of $686.1 and $142.1 already uses Census denominators of 31,290,831 and 4,588,372 against the stacked stocks.

What 140,157 Kentucky awards imply next to $3.8B

Kentucky’s 140,157 awards on $3.8B are a volume story. Texas’s 530,634 awards on $72.7B are a scale story. Kentucky’s courier-led mix is consistent with many discrete shipping actions. Texas’s pharmaceutical-preparation peak is consistent with fewer, larger manufacturing bookings mixed into a huge file. Neither average can be computed from the packet alone, because the packet does not publish mean award size. The comparison is still useful: Kentucky’s award count is large relative to its dollar stock, while Texas’s dollar stock is large relative to everything else in this pair.

Cite USAspending.gov for both the stacked totals and the FY2026 cut. Outlays would be a different series and can lag obligations by months or years. A reader who wants cash paid, not legal commitments, needs that other USAspending.gov table. This page stays on obligations: $3.8B versus $72.7B stacked, and $652.0M versus $21.5B in FY2026.

Census denominators and the $142.1 reading

Kentucky’s $142.1 per capita uses 4,588,372 residents against $3.8B. Texas’s $686.1 uses 31,290,831 residents against $72.7B. Those Census counts are the only population figures in the packet. They are not a claim about who received the money; place-of-performance obligations can sit in a state while recipients live elsewhere. The per-capita line is still the cleanest intensity comparison this aggregate offers.

Kentucky’s 4,588,372 residents would need a much larger stock to match Texas’s $686.1 reading. They do not have it. Texas’s 31,290,831 residents would still lead on dollars even if per capita were equal, because the Census gap is about seven to one and the dollar gap is about nineteen to one. Intensity and scale both favor Texas here.

How to read Kentucky versus Texas

Read Texas first on stacked dollars ($72.7B vs $3.8B), spending per capita ($686.1 vs $142.1), award count (530,634 vs 140,157), and FY2026 ($21.5B vs $652.0M). Read Kentucky for the courier peak against Texas’s pharmaceutical-preparation peak, and for a relatively busy 140,157-row tape on a $3.8B stock. The two lead industries are the mix labels; they do not override the dollar ranking.

The comparison hub holds the tables. The Kentucky and Texas hubs hold agencies and recipients. Keep every dollar labeled as an obligation. Census population of 4,588,372 and 31,290,831 is the per-capita denominator where present. Outlays are not listed in this packet.

Questions

Does Kentucky or Texas have more federal spending?

Texas leads stacked USAspending.gov obligations $72.7B to Kentucky’s $3.8B. Texas also leads spending per capita, $686.1 versus $142.1, on 31,290,831 residents against Kentucky’s 4,588,372. Award counts are 530,634 in Texas and 140,157 in Kentucky. FY2026 obligations are $21.5B in Texas and $652.0M in Kentucky.

Why is Texas’s per-capita figure higher than Kentucky’s?

The packet reports $686.1 per capita in Texas on 31,290,831 residents and $142.1 in Kentucky on 4,588,372. Stacked stocks are $72.7B versus $3.8B, a larger multiple than the population gap. Award counts are 530,634 versus 140,157. These figures are USAspending.gov obligations, not outlays.

What industries lead in Kentucky and Texas?

Kentucky’s top industry is couriers and express delivery services. Texas’s is pharmaceutical preparation manufacturing. Those labels are the largest NAICS slices on $3.8B and $72.7B. Award counts are 140,157 in Kentucky and 530,634 in Texas. Those peaks are mix labels on the stacked stocks, not inventories of every award.

Are Kentucky vs Texas figures Treasury outlays?

No. The $3.8B and $72.7B totals, and FY2026 amounts of $652.0M and $21.5B, are USAspending.gov obligations. Outlays are cash payments and can lag. Spending per capita ($142.1 vs $686.1) uses Census population where present. Award counts in the packet are all-years totals, not a single fiscal year’s actions.