Mississippi vs New Mexico on USAspending: $2.88B vs $3.93B

A Gulf shipyard file against a thin, high-dollar New Mexico file

New Mexico’s $3.93B is about 1.36 times Mississippi’s $2.88B. Mississippi has more residents, 2,943,045 versus 2,130,256. Intensity follows dollars, not headcount: $945.82 per capita in New Mexico and $115.31 in Mississippi. Those ratios are packet figures of USAspending.gov obligations beside Census population. They are not outlays per person.

The award column is the shock in this pair. Mississippi’s 233,003 awards are about 12.1 times New Mexico’s 19,233. Ship building and repairing as a lead NAICS can generate a long action list. New Mexico’s 19,233 rows on $3.93B are sparse by comparison. A long Mississippi file still trails on stacked dollars.

Keep $2.88B and $3.93B on the obligation definition. A searcher who equates more awards with more spending will misread this pair.

Ship building and repairing versus commercial construction

Mississippi’s lead NAICS is ship building and repairing. New Mexico’s lead NAICS is commercial and institutional building construction. Shipyard work helps explain why 233,003 awards can sit on $2.88B. Construction as New Mexico’s peak helps explain how 19,233 awards can sit on $3.93B. Neither peak is the full mix.

The Mississippi and New Mexico state hubs list agencies and recipients. This page only names the top industry in each packet. Both peaks are obligation mixes from USAspending.gov.

FY2026: New Mexico’s $2.01B versus Mississippi’s $339.4M

Fiscal year 2026 obligations are $2.01B in New Mexico and $339.4M in Mississippi. Recency is even more lopsided than the stacked stocks. $2.01B is about 5.9 times $339.4M, versus 1.36 times on the all-years $3.93B versus $2.88B. A large piece of New Mexico’s stacked total lands in the latest fiscal year in this packet.

Read FY2026 as an obligation year slice. Do not divide $2.01B or $339.4M by 19,233 or 233,003 all-years awards. Spending per capita of $945.82 and $115.31 already uses Census counts of 2,130,256 and 2,943,045.

233,003 awards still lose the dollar column

Mississippi’s 233,003 awards and 2,943,045 residents look like the larger operation on two counts. $2.88B versus $3.93B is a loss on stock. $115.31 versus $945.82 is a loss on intensity. FY2026 $339.4M versus $2.01B is a loss on recency. The shipyard file is busy. It is not the hotter or larger obligation stock in this pair.

That is the analytical use of the comparison: award volume, dollar stock, and per-capita ratio can point three different directions, and the packet reports all three.

Place the two files on one screen before ranking either state. Mississippi’s 233,003 awards and 2,943,045 residents look larger until $2.88B is set next to New Mexico’s $3.93B, 19,233 awards, and 2,130,256 residents. Spending per capita of $115.31 versus $945.82 then follows the dollar ranking rather than the row ranking. FY2026 obligations of $339.4M versus $2.01B do the same. Ship building and repairing versus commercial and institutional building construction is the remaining industrial contrast. All of those cuts are USAspending.gov obligations, not outlays.

How to read Mississippi versus New Mexico

Read New Mexico first on stacked stock ($3.93B vs $2.88B), spending per capita ($945.82 vs $115.31), and FY2026 ($2.01B vs $339.4M). Read Mississippi first on awards (233,003 vs 19,233) and population (2,943,045 vs 2,130,256). Note ship building versus commercial construction. All cuts are obligations.

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

A 12-to-1 award gap is not a 12-to-1 dollar gap

Mississippi’s 233,003 awards against New Mexico’s 19,233 is about a 12-to-1 row gap. The dollar gap runs the other way, $2.88B versus $3.93B. Ship building and repairing as Mississippi’s peak helps explain a long action list. Commercial and institutional building construction as New Mexico’s peak helps explain a short list on a larger stock. Neither explanation is a claim about employment, shipyard output, or square footage. Those quantities are not in the packet.

FY2026 obligations of $339.4M in Mississippi and $2.01B in New Mexico widen the dollar ranking in the latest year. Spending per capita of $115.31 versus $945.82 uses Census counts of 2,943,045 and 2,130,256. All of those figures are USAspending.gov obligations. Outlays remain a separate series. The Mississippi and New Mexico hubs list agencies and recipients behind the peaks.

Questions

Does Mississippi or New Mexico have more federal spending?

New Mexico leads stacked USAspending.gov obligations $3.93B to Mississippi’s $2.88B. New Mexico also leads spending per capita, $945.82 versus $115.31, on 2,130,256 residents against Mississippi’s 2,943,045. Mississippi has far more awards (233,003 vs 19,233). FY2026 obligations are $339.4M in Mississippi and $2.01B in New Mexico.

Why does Mississippi have so many more awards than New Mexico?

Mississippi’s award count is 233,003 against New Mexico’s 19,233. Mississippi’s top industry is ship building and repairing, a category that can generate many actions. Stacked obligations still favor New Mexico, $3.93B to $2.88B. Spending per capita is $115.31 versus $945.82. These figures are USAspending.gov obligations, not outlays.

What industries lead in Mississippi and New Mexico?

Mississippi’s top industry is ship building and repairing. New Mexico’s is commercial and institutional building construction. Those labels sit on $2.88B and $3.93B. Award counts are 233,003 in Mississippi and 19,233 in New Mexico. Both mixes are USAspending.gov obligations. Those NAICS labels are the largest slices on the stacked stocks, not complete industrial profiles.

Are Mississippi vs New Mexico figures outlays?

No. The $2.88B and $3.93B totals, and FY2026 amounts of $339.4M and $2.01B, are USAspending.gov obligations. Outlays are cash payments and can lag. Spending per capita ($115.31 vs $945.82) uses Census population where present. Spending per capita uses Census population where present and should not be read as cash per resident.