New Hampshire vs Virginia on USAspending: few awards, an ordnance-led $2.5B

Nine thousand awards carrying $2.5B

USAspending.gov obligations, not Treasury outlays, put New Hampshire at $2.5B and Virginia at $110.8B. New Hampshire’s 9,224 awards are sparse next to Virginia’s 1,116,647. Dividing $2.5B across 9,224 actions implies a much larger typical booking than a high-count, low-dollar state would show.

Small-arms and ordnance manufacturing often concentrates dollars in a modest number of production awards. Virginia’s other computer related services slice does the opposite: many professional-services actions stacked into $110.8B. Count and dollars travel together in Virginia; in New Hampshire, dollars outrun count.

Per capita $284.15 is the New England wrinkle

At $284.15 per resident, New Hampshire sits above many $2–3B states in this set and still well below Virginia’s $1,344.24. The denominators are 1,409,032 and 8,811,195. A small population plus a $2.5B ordnance-tinged file produces a mid-pack per-capita rate, not a Virginia-like one.

Readers who only rank by total dollars will put New Hampshire far behind. Readers who rank by per person will still put Virginia first, but they will not put New Hampshire in the $60–$90 band that several larger-population states occupy.

New Hampshire’s 9,224 awards on $2.5B are the lumpiness marker. Small arms, ordnance, and ordnance accessories manufacturing as the top industry fits a file with few rows and a mid-pack $284.15 per capita on 1,409,032 residents. Virginia’s $1,344.24 on 8,811,195 residents and $110.8B on 1,116,647 awards remains a different density. FY2026’s $400.4M versus $11.8B is a large share of New Hampshire’s stack, which is why recency matters more here than in states whose latest year is a thin slice. Production lots can pay out after the obligation posts. That lag is exactly why this page stays on USAspending.gov obligations and does not import Treasury outlays.

Small arms and ordnance vs computer services

New Hampshire’s top industry is small arms, ordnance, and ordnance accessories manufacturing. Virginia’s is other computer related services. Firearms and munitions production for federal customers is a different industrial base than IT services around federal agencies.

Those labels sit on 9,224 versus 1,116,647 awards and on $2.5B versus $110.8B. An ordnance-led mix helps explain why New Hampshire’s file is lumpy. A computer-services mix helps explain why Virginia’s file is crowded.

FY2026: $400.4M vs $11.8B

FY2026 obligations are $400.4M in New Hampshire and $11.8B in Virginia. New Hampshire’s latest year is a large share of the $2.5B stack — more recent-year concentrated than some peers. Virginia’s $11.8B is one year inside $110.8B. Production contracts can span years, so stacked totals and FY2026 remain different questions. Both are obligations.

New Hampshire’s $400.4M in FY2026 is a large share of $2.5B, which is consistent with lumpy production lots rather than a smooth services stream. Virginia’s $11.8B inside $110.8B is a large current layer of a much larger stock. Do not divide $400.4M by New Hampshire’s 9,224 all-years awards, even though that count is already thin. Per capita of $284.15 on 1,409,032 residents versus $1,344.24 on 8,811,195 residents is the intensity comparison. Both cuts are USAspending.gov obligations.

A small-state manufacturing file vs a services superfile

This page does not score weapons programs or IT programs. It reports $2.5B vs $110.8B from USAspending.gov. Outlays can lag, especially on production lots. Open the New Hampshire and Virginia state hubs for agencies and recipients. Ordnance production lots can be large, few, and multi-year. That is a different rhythm than Virginia’s 1,116,647 computer-services actions under $110.8B. Both still count as USAspending.gov obligations, not Treasury outlays.

Small arms, ordnance, and ordnance accessories manufacturing as a lead slice explains lumpiness. It does not convert $2.5B into a weapons-policy argument. Virginia’s $110.8B and 1,116,647 awards remain a services-volume file. Production lots can pay out after the obligation is recorded, which is why outlays can lag. Open the New Hampshire and Virginia hubs for agencies and recipients rather than inferring them from the industry labels.

How to read a lumpy New Hampshire file

Start with 9,224 awards on $2.5B, then $284.15 per capita on 1,409,032 residents, then Virginia’s $110.8B, 1,116,647 awards, and $1,344.24 on 8,811,195 residents. New Hampshire is not almost Virginia per person. It is a small, specialized manufacturing file with a mid-pack per-capita rate.

FY2026 ($400.4M vs $11.8B) is a large share of New Hampshire’s $2.5B stack, which makes recency more important here than in states whose latest year is a thin slice. Mix remains small arms, ordnance, and ordnance accessories manufacturing versus other computer related services. Keep the unit as obligations.

Questions

How do New Hampshire and Virginia compare on federal spending?

New Hampshire has $2.5B in USAspending.gov obligations and 9,224 awards; Virginia has $110.8B and 1,116,647 awards. Spending per capita is $284.15 versus $1,344.24 on populations of 1,409,032 and 8,811,195. FY2026 obligations are $400.4M and $11.8B. These are obligations, not Treasury outlays. Those figures remain USAspending.gov obligations by place of performance, not Treasury outlays and not a score of which state deserves more work.

Why does New Hampshire have so few awards for $2.5B?

New Hampshire’s 9,224 awards on $2.5B imply a high dollar-per-award mix. The top industry is small arms, ordnance, and ordnance accessories manufacturing, which often concentrates dollars in production actions. Virginia’s $110.8B sits on 1,116,647 awards led by other computer related services — a high-count services pattern.

Is New Hampshire’s per-capita federal spending close to Virginia’s?

No. New Hampshire is at $284.15; Virginia is at $1,344.24. New Hampshire’s rate is higher than several larger states with similar headline totals because only 1,409,032 residents share $2.5B. Virginia’s $110.8B across 8,811,195 residents still produces a much higher per-person figure. Those figures remain USAspending.gov obligations by place of performance, not Treasury outlays and not a score of which state deserves more work.

Are New Hampshire vs Virginia figures outlays?

No. They are obligations from USAspending.gov. Treasury outlays are cash payments and can lag on multi-year production awards. The $2.5B and $110.8B totals and FY2026 amounts of $400.4M and $11.8B are commitment aggregates by place of performance. Those figures remain USAspending.gov obligations by place of performance, not Treasury outlays and not a score of which state deserves more work.