Top 20 defense contractors

Defense contractors lead Washington Technology's 2011 Top 100 list

Defense contractors are facing a market that on the macro level is contracting.

The budget-cutting knives are out for military spending, and no contractor is immune. In fact, the biggest names in the market – Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, Boeing, General Dynamics and Raytheon – have all gone through rounds of layoffs, buyouts and other moves to reduce costs and streamline operations.

But even in a market that overall might be shrinking there are bright spots.

First, there is the sheer size of the market. The contractors on the 2011 Washington Technology Top 100 did $84.6 billion in prime defense contracts during fiscal 2010. The annual rankings analyze government procurement data in areas of information technology, systems integration, engineering services and professional services.

Even a reduction of 10 percent would still leave one of the largest markets in the world.

A second bright spot is the fact that there are pockets of growth within the defense market. And here is where you see many of the top players investing resources. These areas include cybersecurity, command and control systems, health IT, cloud computing and intelligence systems.

The rush toward these markets is driving many companies to make acquisitions to bolster their portfolios and you see the shedding of business units that are in less attractive segments of the market.

Below is a list of the top 20 defense contractors, derived from the 2011 Washington Technology Top 100 list, based on their 2010 defense contract revenue.

Rank   Top Defense Companies
(follow links for complete company profiles) 

Defense Revenue 

1 Lockheed Martin Corp.


2 Northrop Grumman Corp.


3 Boeing Co.


4 General Dynamics Corp.


5 Raytheon Co.


6 KBR Inc


7 L-3 Communications Corp.


8 Science Applications International Corp.


9 DynCorp International Inc.


10 Hewlett-Packard Co.


11 Booz Allen Hamilton


12 CACI International Inc.


13 Harris Corp.


14 Computer Sciences Corp.


15 ITT Corp.


16 Fluor Corp.


17 BAE Systems Inc.


18 Dell Inc.


18 ManTech International Corp.


20 United Technologies Corp.


Reader Comments

Sun, Jan 15, 2012 Robert E Fisher, MSW 7717 Church Ave#192 Highland, CA 92346-4363

CONTACT YOUR FEDERAL REPS RE:I seek SPONSORSHIP of federal legislation that would PROHIBIT the Congress from bypassing the normal Committee process, including conference committees, and establishing "unconstitutional:" (Section 1 of the U. S. Constitution) super committees on the deficit etc., and across the boards spending cuts to all departments, in particular, the Defense Department, (Section 8 of the U. S. Constitution) and the Health and Human Services Department.

Also, I would SUPPORT legislation to amend the Budget Control Act of 2011 to Delete provisions of the Super Committee on Deficit Spending Reductions, and the automatic trigger 10% across the boards spending cuts.

by; Robert Edward Fisher MSW, Retired Legislative Analyst
California ID K007

cc: House Armed Services Committee

Sat, Jan 14, 2012 Robert E Fisher, MSW 7717 Church Ave#192 Highland, CA 92346-4363

I maintain that the Budget Control Act of 2011 is unconstitutional. Also, I maintain that a consortium of defense idutries must bring a legal challenge to its constitutionality:VIOLATION OF SECTIONS 1 & 8 OF THE U. S. CONSTITUTION

Section. 8.
The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the "common Defence and general Welfare of the United States...."

On 11/14/2011, Leon Panetta, Secretary of Defense, testified before the Super Committee on Deficit REDUCTION Spending Cuts that should the 10% across the boards automatic trigger go into effect in 2013, it would shrink the U. S. Armed Forces to less the size of WWII (1940) forces.

Therefore, hire an attorney, and challege the legality of the 10% across the boards defense cuts!

Wed, Jan 11, 2012 Robert e. Fisher, MSW 7717 Church Ave#192 Highland, CA 92346-4363

(Revised pl forward to your email links)OBAMA, et al., LED CONSPIRACY TO "OVERTHROW" THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT???

The10 Year $450 Billion Obama Proposed Defense Department "Budget Cuts" including 40%reductions in the army, navy, and marine corps active duty personnel, and the cut back of the Air Force's F-35 stealth supersonic jet fighter Due To The Budget Control Act Of 2011, (WHICH IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL), Are Acts of "Treason," And Must Be Canceled Due To National Security.

Treason is defined as attempts to overthrow the Government of the United States of America(USA), when the USA is at war.

The USA has been at war with terrorists since September 11, 2001, when the USA was attacked by bin Laden Agents in airplanes in New York City, the Pentagon, and another attempt, when a plane that would have struck USA government buildings in Washington, DC., but was downed by USA courageous citizens on board.

Fisher says,"Obama is young inexperienced, naive, with 3rd world leanings at the expense of Israel, and is "over his head" in identifying priorities that involve national security, because he refuses to realize that national ***security 'trumps" the deficit, as well as, he mistakenly believes that pleasing the international credit rating agencies and Wall Street will provide him victory in the November 2012 Election.'''

How soon the 4th estate, (the press) and the members of Congress and the traitor, Obama, would like to dismiss the above, and, instead, concentrate on the deficit to justify the putting the USA at risk of an attack from foreign nations, such as, North Korea, Russia, Iran, and terrorists.

The press fails to do its job of presenting the news with analysis of possible treason, but instead concentrates its energies on matters, such as, the Iowa Caucuses, and Republican primaries, and the deficit, while ignoring threats to our country.

by: a black man and former Obama supporter

Thu, Oct 13, 2011 Isaac Mihaeli New York

I came across the list of defense contractors and wonder how many of them sales the government products made overseas. For example, computer companies like HP and Dell that outsource production to Asia Pacific. Why shouldn’t the government insist of products that are made in the USA? If we want to have jobs, then let the Government start by example and lead. I don’t see any vision in that direction not from local as well the federal government. If companies want to sale here, let them make it here, plain and simple.

Mon, Sep 12, 2011

Did somebody not edit this page? Seriously?

Please post your comments here. Comments are moderated, so they may not appear immediately after submitting. We will not post comments that we consider abusive or off-topic.

Your Name:(optional)
Your Email:(optional)
Your Location:(optional)
Please type the letters/numbers you see above