South Dakota vs Texas on USAspending: $1.0B against $72.7B

8,274 awards on a $1.0B stock

South Dakota’s award count is the distinctive fact. 8,274 actions on $1.0B is a concentrated file, consistent with an electronic-computer-manufacturing peak rather than a high-frequency logistics tape. Texas’s 530,634 actions on $72.7B is a broad file with a pharmaceutical-preparation peak. The packet does not publish average award size. The contrast in counts is enough to flag concentration on the South Dakota side.

Population is 924,669 versus 31,290,831. South Dakota is small on people, small on dollars, and cool on intensity at $79.92 versus $686.1. The thin award tape does not reverse any of those rankings. It describes how the $1.0B is booked.

South Dakota’s $1.0B computer-manufacturing stock on 924,669 residents is a concentrated 8,274-row file; Texas’s $72.7B pharmaceutical-preparation stock on 31,290,831 residents is a 530,634-row file. FY2026 of $73.9M versus $21.5B does not reorder that ranking.

Computer manufacturing versus pharmaceutical preparations

South Dakota’s lead NAICS is electronic computer manufacturing. Texas’s lead NAICS is pharmaceutical preparation manufacturing. Two manufacturing peaks, two products, two scales: $1.0B versus $72.7B. The computer-manufacturing label is a first read of South Dakota’s mix. It is not a census of every one of the 8,274 awards.

Use the South Dakota and Texas state hubs for agencies and recipients. Cite USAspending.gov. Do not convert either peak into an outlay category.

FY2026: $73.9M versus $21.5B

Fiscal year 2026 obligations are $73.9M in South Dakota and $21.5B in Texas. South Dakota’s latest-year amount is a modest slice of $1.0B. Texas’s $21.5B is a large slice of $72.7B. Recency restates Texas’s lead.

Do not divide $73.9M or $21.5B by 8,274 or 530,634 all-years awards. Spending per capita of $79.92 and $686.1 already uses Census denominators of 924,669 and 31,290,831. FY2026 is obligations, not Treasury cash.

A cool $79.92 reading on fewer than a million people

South Dakota’s $79.92 on 924,669 residents is far below Texas’s $686.1 on 31,290,831. The Census gap is about thirty-four to one. The dollar gap ($1.0B vs $72.7B) is larger still. Intensity follows the dollars.

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 computer manufacturing can sit at a plant. The packet does not reallocate suppliers.

Computer manufacturing on 8,274 actions

South Dakota’s electronic-computer-manufacturing peak on $1.0B with 8,274 awards is a concentration signature. Few actions, a $1.0B stock, and $79.92 per capita on 924,669 residents describe a specialty manufacturing file. Texas’s 530,634 awards on $72.7B with $686.1 per capita on 31,290,831 describe a broad manufacturing-and-mix file with a pharmaceutical-preparation peak.

FY2026 of $73.9M versus $21.5B restates Texas’s recency lead. South Dakota’s latest-year amount is a modest slice of $1.0B. Cite USAspending.gov for obligations. Do not convert computer-manufacturing dollars into outlays, and do not divide $73.9M by 8,274 all-years awards.

Place-of-performance for electronic computer manufacturing can sit at a plant. The packet does not reallocate suppliers. Use the South Dakota and Texas hubs for agencies and recipients. The comparison hub holds the $1.0B versus $72.7B tables. Keep Census counts of 924,669 and 31,290,831 as the per-capita denominators where present.

South Dakota’s 8,274 awards on 924,669 residents under $79.92 per capita describe one of the most concentrated tapes in this slice. Electronic computer manufacturing on $1.0B is not Texas’s $72.7B pharmaceutical-preparation file. FY2026 of $73.9M versus $21.5B restates recency. Texas’s 530,634 awards and 31,290,831 residents stay the scale side. Outlays are not listed.

How to read South Dakota versus Texas

Read Texas first on stacked dollars ($72.7B vs $1.0B), spending per capita ($686.1 vs $79.92), award count (530,634 vs 8,274), and FY2026 ($21.5B vs $73.9M). Read South Dakota for a concentrated 8,274-row tape and an electronic-computer-manufacturing peak.

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

South Dakota’s 924,669 residents and Texas’s 31,290,831 residents set the $79.92 versus $686.1 denominators on $1.0B versus $72.7B. Award counts of 8,274 versus 530,634 and FY2026 of $73.9M versus $21.5B complete the comparison. Electronic computer manufacturing versus pharmaceutical preparation manufacturing remains the mix contrast. Cite USAspending.gov. Obligations, not outlays.

Questions

Does South Dakota or Texas have more federal spending?

Texas leads stacked USAspending.gov obligations $72.7B to South Dakota’s $1.0B. Texas also leads spending per capita, $686.1 versus $79.92, on 31,290,831 residents against South Dakota’s 924,669. Award counts are 530,634 in Texas and 8,274 in South Dakota. FY2026 obligations are $21.5B in Texas and $73.9M in South Dakota.

Why does South Dakota have so few awards?

The packet reports 8,274 awards in South Dakota on $1.0B versus 530,634 in Texas on $72.7B. South Dakota’s lead industry is electronic computer manufacturing, a mix that can concentrate dollars in fewer actions. Spending per capita is $79.92 versus $686.1. These figures are USAspending.gov obligations, not outlays.

What industries lead in South Dakota and Texas?

South Dakota’s top industry is electronic computer manufacturing. Texas’s is pharmaceutical preparation manufacturing. Those labels are the largest NAICS slices on $1.0B and $72.7B. Award counts are 8,274 in South Dakota and 530,634 in Texas. Those peaks are mix labels on the stacked stocks, not inventories of every award.

Are South Dakota vs Texas figures Treasury outlays?

No. The $1.0B and $72.7B totals, and FY2026 amounts of $73.9M and $21.5B, are USAspending.gov obligations. Outlays are cash payments and can lag. Spending per capita ($79.92 vs $686.1) uses Census population where present. Award counts in the packet are all-years totals, not a single fiscal year’s actions.