This index is the new standard companies can rely on because it is based on trusted government data and computed by algorithms refined over 40 years of assisting companies pursue and win government contracts.
Why is there a need for a Competitiveness Index for Federal Contractors?
The Competitiveness Index
Highlights and Findings
Figure 1 • Potential value of competitive awards by all US Government Agencies not including the General Services Administration from April 1, 2023 through March 31, 2024.
Figure 2 • Number of competitive awards by all US Government Agencies not including the General Services Administration from April 1, 2023 through March 31, 2024.
Figure 3 • Average days from Initial Solicitation Notice to Award by Federal Spending Category based on a representative sample of competitive awards from April 1, 2023 through March 31, 2024.
Figure 4 • Average increase in Competitive Gain by SMA defined cohorts based on a representative sample of competitive awards between April 1, 2023 through March 31, 2024 and the prior 24 months.
Figure 5 • SMA Reference Porfolio of Federal Contractors.
Figure 6 • Competitiveness ranking for companies listed in the 2023 Bloomberg Top 200 Companies (BGOV). (Pages 11–12)
Figure 7 • Competitiveness ranking for companies listed in the 2023 Washington Technology Top 100. (Pages 13–14)
Figure 8 • Competitiveness ranking for companies listed in the 2023 Defense News Top 100
Figure 9 • Competitiveness rankings for SMA’s Portfolio competing for US Government contracts (Pages 16–19)
Figure 10 • Figure 10. Competitiveness rankings for Broadly Diversified Primes in SMA’s Reference Portfolio competing for Department of Defense and Department of Homeland Security contracts
Figure 11 • Figure 11. Competitiveness rankings for Broadly Diversified Primes in SMA’s Reference Portfolio competing for civilian agency contracts
Figure 12 • Competitiveness rankings for SMA’s Reference Portfolio competing for US Air Force contracts. (Pages 21–23)
Figure 13 • Competitiveness rankings for SMA’s Reference Portfolio competing for US Army contracts. (Pages 24–25)
Figure 14 • Competitiveness rankings for SMA’s Reference Portfolio competing for US Navy contracts. (Pages 26–27)
Figure 15 • Competitiveness rankings for Concentrated Plaforms and Systems Primes in SMA’s Reference Portfolio competing for Department of Defense and Department of Homeland Security contracts
Figure 16 • Competitiveness rankings for Subsystems Primes in SMA’s Reference Portfolio competing for Department of Defense and Department of Homeland Security contracts
Figure 17 • Competitiveness rankings for Management, Technical and other Professional Services Companies in SMA’s Portfolio competing for US Government contracts
Figure 18 • Competitiveness rankings for SMA’s Portfolio competing for Department of Defense and Department of Homeland Security Aircraft, Ships/Submarines & Land Vehicles, Weapons & Ammunition and Sustainment contracts
Figure 19 • Competitiveness rankings for SMA’s Portfolio competing for Department of Defense and Department of Homeland Security Professional Services and Information Technology contracts. (Pages 32–33)
Figure 20 • Competitiveness rankings for SMA’s Portfolio competing for Department of Defense and Department of Homeland Security Electronic & Communication Equipment, Modification, Repair and related contracts. (Pages 34–35)
About us
