Data study · manufacturing and supplies

Where federal manufacturing and supplies contract money moved

Federal manufacturing and supplies obligations rose +59% between Feb–May 2024 and Feb–May 2026, against +40% for federal contracting as a whole. The Department of Defense is the largest buyer, at $102B.

Federal manufacturing and supplies obligations $119B Feb–May 2026 from $74.8B in Feb–May 2024 · +59%
Share of all federal contracting 38.0% Feb–May 2026 from 33.3% in Feb–May 2024 · +4.7 pts
Reserved for small business 2.5% Feb–May 2026 from 3.2% in Feb–May 2024 · −0.8 pts
Largest buyer: Department of Defense $102B Feb–May 2026 from $63.2B in Feb–May 2024 · +61%

USAspending.gov, manufacturing and supplies contract obligations (NAICS 31–33) by action date · Feb–May 2024 vs Feb–May 2026 · snapshot 2026-09-24

Federal manufacturing and supplies contracting went from $74.8B to $119B in matching four-month windows — +59% — while federal contracting as a whole rose +40%. Manufacturing and supplies went from 33.3% of every federal contract dollar to 38.0%, so it is a larger slice of what the government buys than it was.

Everything the government buys from manufacturers — aircraft, ships, vehicles and munitions as much as medical, electronic and general supplies — sectors 31 to 33. Everything below is filtered to that scope throughout; the methodology note says exactly which measure was used and what it can and cannot support.

Who buys federal manufacturing and supplies

The Department of Defense is the largest buyer, at $102B in Feb–May 2026 — about 85% of the sector. The largest gain was the Department of Defense's, $63.2B to $102B; the largest fall, the Department of Agriculture's, $1.9B to $1.2B.

Change in federal contract obligations by agency, Feb–May 2024 compared with Feb–May 2026.
AgencyDollar change, as a barDollar changeFeb–May 2024Feb–May 2026
Department of Defense+$38.5B$63.2B$102B
Department of Veterans Affairs+$1.8B$4.2B$6.1B
Department of Homeland Security+$2.0B$431M$2.4B
Department of Energy+$1.8B$101M$1.9B
General Services Administration+$839M$847M$1.7B
Department of Agriculture−$656M$1.9B$1.2B
National Aeronautics and Space Administration−$499M$1.4B$902M
Department of the Treasury−$150M$973M$823M
Department of Health and Human Services+$185M$526M$711M
Department of Transportation+$492M$178M$670M
Department of Justice+$78M$317M$395M
Department of Commerce+$117M$109M$226M
Department of State−$54M$252M$198M
Department of the Interior−$39M$167M$128M

NAICS 31–33. Agencies below $50M in both windows are omitted.

Who gets paid

Every one of the ten largest manufacturing and supplies contractors in Feb–May 2026 was already among the 100 largest of Feb–May 2024. One climbed into the top ten from lower in the ranking, and one of the baseline's top ten dropped out of it. The ten largest took 55% of the sector's dollars in Feb–May 2026, against 45% in Feb–May 2024.

The ten largest federal manufacturing and supplies recipients in Feb–May 2026, with the rank and total each held in Feb–May 2024.
RecipientRank Feb–May 2024Feb–May 2024Rank Feb–May 2026Feb–May 2026
LOCKHEED MARTIN CORPORATION#1$8.3B#1$23.3B
THE BOEING COMPANY#2$6.7B#2$11.1B
RAYTHEON COMPANY#9$1.7B#3$9.3B
MCKESSON CORPORATION#5$2.8B#4$5.0B
HUNTINGTON INGALLS INCORPORATED#4$3.7B#5$4.0B
NORTHROP GRUMMAN SYSTEMS CORP#3$3.8B#6$3.9B
ELECTRIC BOAT CORPORATION#16$588M#7$3.3B
RTX CORPORATION#7$1.7B#8$2.0B
BATH IRON WORKS CORPORATION#8$1.7B#9$1.9B
AMERISOURCEBERGEN DRUG CORP#10$1.4B#10$1.9B

Names are the source's own. Recipients are rolled up from its per-UEI rows, because reading those rows as published understates every large contractor several times over; see the methodology note.

The same churn, drawn as ranks

Feb–May 2024Feb–May 20261LOCKHEED MARTIN CORPORATION$8.3B2THE BOEING COMPANY$6.7B3NORTHROP GRUMMAN SYSTEMS CORP$3.8B4HUNTINGTON INGALLS INCORPORAT…$3.7B5MCKESSON CORPORATION$2.8B6SIKORSKY AIRCRAFT CORPORATION$2.3B7RTX CORPORATION$1.7B8BATH IRON WORKS CORPORATION$1.7B9RAYTHEON COMPANY$1.7B10AMERISOURCEBERGEN DRUG CORP$1.4Branked 11–100 in Feb–May 202416ELECTRIC BOAT CORPORATION$588M1LOCKHEED MARTIN CORPORATION$23.3B2THE BOEING COMPANY$11.1B3RAYTHEON COMPANY$9.3B4MCKESSON CORPORATION$5.0B5HUNTINGTON INGALLS INCORPORAT…$4.0B6NORTHROP GRUMMAN SYSTEMS CORP$3.9B7ELECTRIC BOAT CORPORATION$3.3B8RTX CORPORATION$2.0B9BATH IRON WORKS CORPORATION$1.9B10AMERISOURCEBERGEN DRUG CORP$1.9Bout of the top 10
  • held a place in both
  • rose from 11–100
  • outside the top 100
  • left the top 10

Grey lines join firms that held a place in both windows. Blue lines rise from the band under the divider: one firm ranked in Feb–May 2024 but below the top ten, each drawn at the rank it actually held. Amber lines converge from “outside the top 100”: the no true arrivals. The one dashed lines are firms that dropped out of the top ten, most of them still ranked, simply lower.

When it turned

Monthly manufacturing and supplies obligations, January 2023 to May 2026, for the sector's largest buyers and its largest movers. The annual shape dominates — every September is the fiscal-year close and every October the trough after it — which is why the windows on this page are matched February to May.

The series stops at May 2026 rather than at the present because Defense and the Army Corps of Engineers withhold contract actions for 90 days — see the note on the defence hold. Months after that read near zero for defence, which is an embargo and not a decline.

Department of Defense 1.2×

peak $55B/mo

Department of Veterans Affairs 1.2×

peak $1.9B/mo

Department of Homeland Security 1.9×

peak $1.9B/mo

Department of Energy 4.7×

peak $918M/mo

General Services Administration 1.4×

peak $645M/mo

Department of Agriculture −25%

peak $994M/mo

National Aeronautics and Space Administration −1%

peak $785M/mo

Department of the Treasury −34%

peak $581M/mo

Department of State −37%

peak $416M/mo

Department of the Interior −26%

peak $180M/mo

The figure beside each agency compares its average month after January 2025 with its average month before — a different span from the inauguration-to-date window comparisons elsewhere on this page, and so a different number.

Where the work moved

Change in manufacturing and supplies obligations by place of performance, Feb–May 2024 to Feb–May 2026. Texas gained the most, going from $10.3B to $29.4B. 18 states and territories obligated less than in the baseline window.

  • DC +$102M
  • PR +$74M
  • VI $0
  • GU +$14M
  • AS $0
  • MP −$4M
Federal manufacturing and supplies contract obligations by state or territory in Feb–May 2024 and Feb–May 2026, with the change between them.
State or territoryFeb–May 2024Feb–May 2026Change%
Texas$10.3B$29.4B+$19.1B+184%
Arizona$1.8B$6.6B+$4.8B+262%
Washington$1.9B$6.0B+$4.1B+209%
Florida$4.3B$7.4B+$3.1B+73%
Virginia$4.6B$7.4B+$2.8B+61%
Massachusetts$1.4B$3.8B+$2.4B+169%
California$5.4B$7.0B+$1.6B+30%
Connecticut$4.8B$6.1B+$1.3B+27%
Pennsylvania$3.7B$5.0B+$1.2B+32%
Maryland$1.4B$2.3B+$913M+68%
Oregon$105M$688M+$583M6.6×
Colorado$974M$1.4B+$464M+48%
Ohio$1.1B$1.5B+$433M+40%
Indiana$890M$1.3B+$365M+41%
Georgia$666M$1.0B+$339M+51%
Alabama$2.2B$2.5B+$336M+16%
Louisiana$355M$627M+$272M+77%
Missouri$2.5B$2.8B+$269M+11%
New Hampshire$450M$687M+$237M+53%
Maine$1.7B$1.9B+$195M+11%
South Carolina$380M$546M+$166M+44%
Oklahoma$703M$829M+$126M+18%
Kentucky$374M$496M+$122M+33%
Nevada$136M$256M+$120M+88%
District of Columbia$221M$323M+$102M+46%
Montana$30M$114M+$84M+280%
Puerto Rico$105M$179M+$74M+70%
Tennessee$271M$339M+$68M+25%
New Mexico$100M$167M+$67M+67%
Rhode Island$96M$159M+$63M+66%
New Jersey$1.2B$1.3B+$54M+4%
Wyoming$9M$32M+$23M+256%
West Virginia$43M$62M+$19M+44%
Guam$55M$69M+$14M+25%
North Dakota$27M$32M+$5M+19%
Illinois$1.8B$1.8B+$4M+0%
U.S. Virgin Islands$0$0$0—
American Samoa$0$0$0—
South Dakota$35M$34M−$1M−3%
Northern Mariana Islands$5M$1M−$4M−80%
Nebraska$44M$34M−$10M−23%
Vermont$98M$83M−$15M−15%
Iowa$497M$472M−$25M−5%
Delaware$57M$20M−$37M−65%
Michigan$2.0B$2.0B−$41M−2%
Alaska$199M$157M−$42M−21%
North Carolina$553M$486M−$67M−12%
Kansas$288M$220M−$68M−24%
Hawaii$176M$94M−$82M−47%
Idaho$177M$63M−$114M−64%
Arkansas$254M$101M−$153M−60%
New York$2.1B$1.9B−$205M−10%
Minnesota$649M$435M−$214M−33%
Mississippi$2.8B$2.6B−$264M−9%
Utah$2.6B$2.3B−$325M−12%
Wisconsin$2.0B$1.2B−$768M−39%

What the money buys

Two views of the same dollars: the industry the recipient is classified in, and the product or service code the government bought. Both are read within NAICS 31–33, so these are shares of manufacturing and supplies rather than of federal contracting.

Largest industries

NAICS industryFeb–May 2024Feb–May 2026
Guided Missile and Space Vehicle Manufacturing$6.7B$23.9B
Aircraft Manufacturing$13.2B$20.4B
Ship Building and Repairing$9.5B$15.2B
Other Aircraft Parts and Auxiliary Equipment Manufacturing$4.5B$7.6B
Search, Detection, Navigation, Guidance, Aeronautical, and Nautical System and Instrument Manufacturing$4.6B$6.1B
Pharmaceutical Preparation Manufacturing$3.0B$5.4B
Petroleum Refineries$4.0B$5.3B
Ammunition (except Small Arms) Manufacturing$1.9B$3.1B
Aircraft Engine and Engine Parts Manufacturing$2.9B$3.1B
Military Armored Vehicle, Tank, and Tank Component Manufacturing$3.0B$2.1B

Largest product & service codes

PSCFeb–May 2024Feb–May 2026
Guided Missiles$1.4B$15.6B
Aircraft, Fixed Wing$5.1B$12.3B
Combat Ships and Landing Vessels$7.1B$10.8B
Drugs and Biologicals$4.4B$7.3B
Liquid Propellants and Fuels, Petroleum Base$3.3B$4.2B
Miscellaneous Aircraft Accessories and Components$1.5B$3.5B
Guided Missile Components$975M$2.6B
Guided Missile Systems, Completenot in top 20$2.5B
National Defense R&D Services; Atomic Energy Defense Activities; R&D Administrative Expenses$2.3B$2.0B
Aircraft, Rotary Wing$2.8B$1.9B

Small-business manufacturing and supplies dollars grew more slowly than the sector

Obligations on manufacturing and supplies contracts reserved for small business went from $2.4B to $3.0B — +22%, against the sector as a whole rising +59%. As a share of federal manufacturing and supplies dollars, set-asides went from 3.2% to 2.5%.

That is the dollars. The opportunity count is a different story. Of the 4,992 manufacturing and supplies solicitations open on SAM.gov right now, at least 1,694 — 34% — are explicitly reserved for small business.

  • 1,359 Small business
  • 206 Women-owned
  • 101 Veteran-owned
  • 22 HUBZone
  • 4 8(a)
  • 2 Tribal & Native

Open SAM.gov notices classified under NAICS 31–33 — the same codes as every other figure on this page. “At least”, because 2,910 of those 4,992 notices do not publish a set-aside field at all, and are counted here as unreserved rather than guessed at. Among the 2,082 that do state a status, 81% are reserved for small business. Open-notice counts confirmed Oct 1, 2026, 9:49 PM UTC.

What this means if you bid

This section is our reading of the figures above, not a finding of the data: the award record describes what happened, and this is what we would do with it. Every number here is computed from the same snapshot as the rest of the page.

Larger firms and primes

  • Federal manufacturing and supplies rose +59% between Feb–May 2024 and Feb–May 2026, against +40% for federal contracting as a whole.

    This market is taking a larger slice of what the government buys. Capacity, past performance and teaming built now meet more demand than they would have in Feb–May 2024.

  • The buyers adding the most: Department of Defense (+$38.5B), Department of Homeland Security (+$2.0B) and Department of Veterans Affairs (+$1.8B). Falling most: Department of Agriculture (−$656M) and National Aeronautics and Space Administration (−$499M).

    Point capture effort at the gaining agencies. A contract with a falling buyer is the one most likely to be cut back, merged or not recompeted.

  • The ten largest recipients took 55% of the dollars in Feb–May 2026, up from 45% in Feb–May 2024.

    The money is concentrating into fewer, larger awards. A seat on the large contract vehicles — or a teaming agreement with a firm that holds one — matters more than it did.

  • None of the ten largest recipients in Feb–May 2026 is new — every one was already in the top hundred in Feb–May 2024.

    The same firms hold the top of this market, so the openings come at recompete. Know when the leaders’ contracts expire, and whether they are subcontracting parts of the work.

  • The work grew most in Texas (+$19.1B), Arizona (+$4.8B) and Washington (+$4.1B), by place of performance.

    For work done on site, that is where people, subcontractors and local suppliers are worth having in place before the solicitation drops.

Small businesses

  • Contracts reserved for small business were 2.5% of the dollars in Feb–May 2026, from 3.2% in Feb–May 2024 (−0.8 pts) — $2.4B to $3.0B.

    Reserved work was outgrown, not cut: the growth landed on unreserved contracts. Reach it through the primes winning them — large primes on big contracts must file small-business subcontracting plans and need partners to meet them — or bid it together through a joint venture or a mentor-protégé agreement.

  • Right now at least 1,694 of the 4,992 open manufacturing and supplies solicitations on SAM.gov (34%) are explicitly reserved for small business.

    The shrinking dollar share and the count of opportunities are different things: the reserved work is still there in volume. The practical question is which of it is worth the bid.

  • The agencies adding the most here: Department of Defense, Department of Homeland Security and Department of Veterans Affairs.

    Each has an Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization and publishes a procurement forecast. Both exist to connect small firms with upcoming buys, and both cost nothing to use.

  • The product and service codes growing fastest: “Guided Missiles”, “Aircraft, Fixed Wing” and “Combat Ships and Landing Vessels”. New to the top twenty: “Guided Missile Systems, Complete”, “Miscellaneous Chemical Specialties” and “Bombs”.

    Make sure the codes on your SAM.gov registration and your capability statement match what is being bought now, not what was bought when you registered. That is what search and matching read.

Other sectors in this study

The same study, on the same windows and the same snapshot, for the rest of federal contracting.

How this was measured

Every figure comes from USAspending.gov's own aggregation endpoints, queried directly. No estimate, model or projection is involved, and any number here can be reproduced against the same source. Snapshot taken 2026-09-24.

Everything on this page is manufacturing and supplies — NAICS 31–33
Everything the government buys from manufacturers — aircraft, ships, vehicles and munitions as much as medical, electronic and general supplies — sectors 31 to 33. Every chart, table, map and share here is filtered to NAICS 31, 32, 33, which the source accepts as prefixes so no industry beneath them is left out — the map, the industry and product-code tables, the monthly timeline, the small-business share and the count of open solicitations alike. The five sectors of this study never overlap, so no dollar is counted in two of them. The same study across all federal contracting is a separate page.
Obligations, not contracts signed
Amounts are contract obligations by action date, which includes money added to awards signed in earlier years. It measures where federal dollars went in a period, not how many new contracts were let. Award types A, B, C and D only — definitive contracts, purchase orders, delivery orders and BPA calls. Grants, loans and direct payments are a different question and are excluded.
Matched February–May windows
The federal year ends 30 September and the quarter before it is always the largest of the year by a wide margin, so any comparison that includes September in one year and not another is measuring the calendar. February is also the first full month after a 20 January inauguration. May is the ceiling, for the reason in the next note.
The defence hold, and why it bounds every window here
The Department of Defense and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers withhold contract actions from the Federal Procurement Data System — and so from USAspending — for 90 days after the action, under an operational-security rule that applies to no civilian agency. Nothing in the data marks it. A month inside the hold simply shows almost no defence activity, and nothing distinguishes that from a real collapse except knowing the rule exists. For scale, defence obligated a median of $39.8B a month across the most recent eighteen months charted here; a month still inside the hold reads at a small fraction of that, then fills in as the actions are released. Every window and the monthly series on this page therefore stop at May 2026, the most recent month for which the defence record is complete, rather than at the present. Anyone reproducing these figures over a more recent period should expect defence to look absent there, and should not read that as a decline. Because the Army Corps is one of the largest federal construction buyers, the effect lands twice on anything measuring construction. It weighs on this report more than on any other: Defense is most of what the government buys from manufacturers.
Recipients are rolled up from per-UEI rows
The source returns one row per registered entity, not one per company — LOCKHEED MARTIN CORPORATION alone comes back as eight separate rows. They are summed here by normalised legal name, so a parent's total is the sum of its registered entities. Reading the rows as published would understate the largest contractors several times over.
“Outside the top 100” does not mean zero
Each ranking is read 100 rows deep. A firm described as arriving from outside that list had no place in it, which is not the same as having had no federal work at all.
Place of performance is where the source says the work happens
Not where the benefit lands, and not always where the work physically occurs. Federal records skew toward the contracting office — the same bias described on our coverage map, where Navy supply depots in Mechanicsburg and Philadelphia and DLA Columbus post nationwide contracts from their own addresses.
Recent months are provisional
Separately from the defence hold, obligations for recent months revise upward for several weeks as modifications post, so the right-hand end of the monthly series will grow slightly after this snapshot was taken. Both effects push the same way: the most recent figures here are floors.
Grants are excluded, so the infrastructure law is invisible here
This matters more than it sounds. Money from the 2021 infrastructure act mostly reaches contractors as grants and formula funds passed to state departments of transportation, which then let their own contracts. None of that is a federal prime contract, so none of it appears anywhere on this page. Its absence here is a fact about the measure, not about the spending. The Census Bureau's construction series is the instrument for that channel.
What is not claimed
This is a description of the award record, not an explanation of it. Appropriations, procurement lead times and contract vehicles all sit between a policy and a number on this page, and none of them are visible here.

Get told when something opens

Save a search — a state, a category, a keyword — and we'll email you when a matching solicitation is published. Free account, no card.

Watch up to ten notices and keep three saved searches on a weekly digest, plus the whole catalogue signed in — every filter, no result cap, the contracting officer and the attachments on every notice, your size under each code, and reminders before deadlines. Unsubscribe in one click.

Ready when you are

Win more public tenders, with a fraction of the effort.

Upload your first tender and get a review-ready checklist of requirements, gaps and deadlines in minutes.

Free account, no card. Add a card when you run your first bid — you're not charged.