North Dakota vs Texas on USAspending: $700.4M against $72.7B

7,218 awards on $700.4M

North Dakota’s award count is the distinctive fact. 7,218 actions on $700.4M is a concentrated construction-led file. Texas’s 530,634 actions on $72.7B is a broad pharmaceutical-preparation-led file. The packet does not publish average award size. The row contrast is enough to flag how few federal actions the $700.4M stock is spread across.

Population is 796,568 versus 31,290,831. North Dakota is small on people, small on dollars, and cool on intensity at $63.75 versus $686.1. The thin tape does not invert any ranking. It describes booking concentration.

Federal buildings on the prairie, drug manufacturing in Texas

North Dakota’s lead NAICS is commercial and institutional building construction. Texas’s lead NAICS is pharmaceutical preparation manufacturing. A facilities peak on $700.4M is a different mix than a manufacturing peak on $72.7B. Construction awards can be lumpy. The packet does not split projects.

Use the North Dakota and Texas state hubs for agencies and recipients. Cite USAspending.gov. Do not treat either peak as an outlay category. The 7,218 and 530,634 rows include many other NAICS codes.

FY2026: $50.8M versus $21.5B

Fiscal year 2026 obligations are $50.8M in North Dakota and $21.5B in Texas. North Dakota’s latest-year amount is a modest slice of $700.4M. Texas’s $21.5B is a large slice of $72.7B. Recency restates Texas’s lead.

Do not divide $50.8M or $21.5B by 7,218 or 530,634 all-years awards. Spending per capita of $63.75 and $686.1 already uses Census denominators of 796,568 and 31,290,831. FY2026 is obligations, not Treasury cash.

A $63.75 reading on 796,568 residents

North Dakota’s $63.75 on 796,568 residents is far below Texas’s $686.1 on 31,290,831. The Census gap is about thirty-nine to one. The dollar gap ($700.4M vs $72.7B) is larger. Intensity follows the dollars, not the oil-patch reputation a reader might bring to the page. The packet lists obligations only.

Keep those per-capita figures labeled as Census-based packet figures on USAspending.gov obligations. They are not outlays per resident. Place-of-performance for construction can sit at a job site. The packet does not reallocate.

The thinnest award tape in the Texas pairings

North Dakota’s 7,218 awards on $700.4M is the thinnest tape in this Texas slice. Commercial and institutional building construction as the lead industry is consistent with a few large facilities rather than thousands of small actions. Texas’s 530,634 awards on $72.7B with a pharmaceutical-preparation peak is the opposite pattern: a broad file. Spending per capita of $63.75 on 796,568 residents trails Texas’s $686.1 on 31,290,831.

FY2026 of $50.8M versus $21.5B restates Texas’s recency lead. North Dakota’s latest-year amount is a modest slice of $700.4M. Cite USAspending.gov. Outlays are a different series. Do not divide $50.8M by 7,218 all-years awards. The $63.75 and $686.1 readings already use Census denominators against the stacked stocks.

Place-of-performance for construction can sit at a job site. The packet does not reallocate. Use the North Dakota and Texas hubs for agencies and recipients. The comparison hub holds the $700.4M versus $72.7B tables. Keep 7,218 versus 530,634 labeled as all-years award counts. Construction as a peak does not convert $700.4M into cash paid.

North Dakota’s 7,218 awards on 796,568 residents under $63.75 per capita describe the thinnest tape in this Texas slice. Commercial construction on $700.4M is not Texas’s $72.7B pharmaceutical-preparation file. FY2026 of $50.8M versus $21.5B restates recency. Texas’s 530,634 awards and 31,290,831 residents stay the scale side. Obligations, not outlays. Cite USAspending.gov.

How to read North Dakota versus Texas

Read Texas first on stacked dollars ($72.7B vs $700.4M), spending per capita ($686.1 vs $63.75), award count (530,634 vs 7,218), and FY2026 ($21.5B vs $50.8M). Read North Dakota for a concentrated 7,218-row tape and a commercial-construction peak.

The comparison hub holds the tables. The North Dakota and Texas hubs hold agencies and recipients. Outlays are not listed.

North Dakota’s 796,568 residents and Texas’s 31,290,831 residents set the $63.75 versus $686.1 denominators on $700.4M versus $72.7B. Award counts of 7,218 versus 530,634 and FY2026 of $50.8M versus $21.5B complete the comparison. Commercial construction versus pharmaceutical preparation manufacturing remains the mix contrast. Cite USAspending.gov. Keep every dollar labeled as an obligation, not an outlay.

Questions

Does North Dakota or Texas have more federal spending?

Texas leads stacked USAspending.gov obligations $72.7B to North Dakota’s $700.4M. Texas also leads spending per capita, $686.1 versus $63.75, on 31,290,831 residents against North Dakota’s 796,568. Award counts are 530,634 in Texas and 7,218 in North Dakota. FY2026 obligations are $21.5B in Texas and $50.8M in North Dakota.

Why does North Dakota have so few awards?

The packet reports 7,218 awards in North Dakota on $700.4M versus 530,634 in Texas on $72.7B. North Dakota’s lead industry is commercial and institutional building construction, a mix that can concentrate dollars in fewer actions. Spending per capita is $63.75 versus $686.1. These figures are USAspending.gov obligations, not outlays.

What industries lead in North Dakota and Texas?

North Dakota’s top industry is commercial and institutional building construction. Texas’s is pharmaceutical preparation manufacturing. Those labels are the largest NAICS slices on $700.4M and $72.7B. Award counts are 7,218 in North Dakota and 530,634 in Texas. Those peaks are mix labels on the stacked stocks, not inventories of every award.

Are North Dakota vs Texas figures Treasury outlays?

No. The $700.4M and $72.7B totals, and FY2026 amounts of $50.8M and $21.5B, are USAspending.gov obligations. Outlays are cash payments and can lag. Spending per capita ($63.75 vs $686.1) uses Census population where present. Award counts in the packet are all-years totals, not a single fiscal year’s actions.