America’s Munitions Production

Funding by year

Annual funding nearly tripled in FY2023

Federal funding for munitions and energetics production rose from $2.1 billion in FY2022 to $6.0 billion in FY2023. Before FY2023, it never surpassed $3 billion annually. Since then, annual spending has hovered between $4.7 billion and $6.2 billion.

Who receives the funding

Five companies receive 80% of the funding

Of the $37.16 billion obligated since FY2015, the top ten companies receive 90%. Lockheed Martin alone receives more than half, mostly for guided rocket production (GMLRS). The Department of the Army provides 93% of the funding.

Small businesses are half the field and 4% of the dollars

More than half of the organizations doing this work are small businesses, but together they receive less than 4% of the funding. Many of the new propellant ingredients come from small firms, often funded by the Missile Defense Agency, which has the lowest single-vendor share of any major buyer in this field.

New capacity

Funding increases have expanded production capacity

Of the $22.5 billion obligated since FY2023, about 95% went to established suppliers. The remaining $1.12 billion went to 132 organizations that won their first federal award in this field. The largest of these awards focused on building production capacity on U.S. soil, including new U.S. operations for two European producers.

Solid rocket motors

A new rocket motor supplier grew out of a $100,000 research award

Solid rocket motors are one of the tightest bottlenecks in missile production. SHELDON’s data highlights that 70% of solid rocket motor and propellant spending went to a single supplier, and two long-established producers, ATK Launch Systems (now part of Northrop Grumman) and Aerojet Rocketdyne (now part of L3Harris), account for $2.25 billion. However, by tracing award records, we can also highlight how small suppliers, like X-Bow, broke in.

Raw materials

Mining and chemistry are now part of the munitions budget

The Defense Production Act permits the government to invest directly in industrial capacity. From FY2022 to FY2025, Title III of the Act funded $255 million in this field, including $216 million to Aerojet Rocketdyne for solid rocket motor capacity (FY2023-FY2025) and $34 million to Perpetua Resources, which is developing an antimony mine in Idaho (FY2024).

University research

The Army buys the munitions. The Air Force funds most of the university science.

University research follows a different funding pattern than production. The Army pays for 93% of munitions and energetics production, but the Air Force is the largest funder of university research, responsible for about $90 million of the total $233 million, compared with $56 million from the Army and $41 million from the Navy. Although 110 universities are involved in related research, funding is concentrated: the University of Dayton and Purdue University collectively received 44% of university research dollars.

These figures cover funding awarded to universities only. Most federal energetics research is performed in-house at government laboratories, such as Naval Surface Warfare Center Indian Head and the Army's DEVCOM Armaments Center, which are funded directly rather than through awards.

Geography

More than half of the work is performed in Texas

Federal contracts record where work is performed. By that measure, Texas accounts for 58% of munitions and energetics funding, followed by Pennsylvania (9%), Iowa (5%), and Arizona (5%). Early-stage research organizations are most common in California, Texas, and Massachusetts.

Sources and method

• Sources: federal contracts (FPDS), grants and other assistance (USAspending), SBIR/STTR, NSF, and DTIC research records, plus sub-award data.
• An award is included when its description references munitions or energetics production.
• Awards recorded in more than one system are counted once. Sub-award dollars are excluded from totals because they are already part of the prime award.