BLS Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages data for the first quarter of 2026 show a very uneven distribution of establishments across the 50 states and the District of Columbia. California leads with 1,990,701 establishments, followed by Florida with 894,107, Texas with 868,766, and New York with 710,513. The median across all 51 jurisdictions is 162,989, while Alaska has the smallest count at 25,401.
The measure needs a careful label. In QCEW, the quarterly establishment count is the number of establishments whose activities were reported to the Unemployment Insurance system for the quarter. BLS defines an establishment as an economic unit, typically at one physical location and mainly engaged in one type of economic activity. A company with many locations can therefore contribute multiple establishments. These values should not be presented as counts of firms, entrepreneurs, business owners, or business registrations.
Table of Contents
What QCEW counts as an establishment
QCEW is a BLS program built around employment and wage records from the Unemployment Insurance system. The data used here are the 2026 first-quarter state-level values for industry code 10, the all-industries total in the BLS CSV slices. The field qtrly_estabs is the quarterly establishment count. That makes the series useful for comparing the scale of reported physical economic units across states, but it is not interchangeable with every statistic that uses the word business.
This distinction is especially important for multi-location firms. A retail chain, bank, manufacturer, or service company can operate many establishments while remaining one firm. Conversely, some forms of work or business activity may not appear in the same way within the QCEW coverage framework. The safest description is therefore the BLS term: establishments reported through the covered system in that quarter.
How establishments were distributed across states in Q1 2026
The 51 jurisdiction counts sum to 12,381,750. The arithmetic mean is 242,779, well above the median of 162,989. That difference reflects a right-skewed distribution in which a small group of very large states accounts for a large share of the total. California alone represents about 16.1% of the 51-jurisdiction sum. California, Florida, Texas, and New York together account for 36.1%, and the top ten account for 54.2%.
There are 12 jurisdictions with at least 300,000 establishments and 16 with fewer than 100,000. The District of Columbia has 51,365, placing it 44th among the 51 observations. These raw counts should be interpreted mainly as scale measures. Population size, employment, urban structure, industry mix, and the number of physical operating locations differ sharply across states, but this single-quarter file by itself does not identify which factor caused any specific gap.
The 15 largest state establishment counts
| State | Establishments | Rank |
|---|---|---|
| California | 1,990,701 | 1 |
| Florida | 894,107 | 2 |
| Texas | 868,766 | 3 |
| New York | 710,513 | 4 |
| Georgia | 397,430 | 5 |
| Pennsylvania | 394,057 | 6 |
| Illinois | 389,406 | 7 |
| North Carolina | 375,319 | 8 |
| Ohio | 344,589 | 9 |
| New Jersey | 343,397 | 10 |
| Virginia | 324,758 | 11 |
| Michigan | 312,614 | 12 |
| Massachusetts | 296,429 | 13 |
| Colorado | 264,727 | 14 |
| Missouri | 263,493 | 15 |
California stands apart from every other state, with almost two million establishments. Florida and Texas form a second tier just below 900,000, while New York is above 700,000. The fifth-ranked value drops below 400,000. Georgia, Pennsylvania, Illinois, and North Carolina are clustered between roughly 375,000 and 397,000, and Ohio, New Jersey, Virginia, and Michigan also exceed 300,000.
That ranking is not a ranking of productivity, business quality, entrepreneurship, or economic efficiency. A raw establishment count naturally tends to be larger in places with larger populations and broader economic bases. A per-capita establishment rate, establishments per 1,000 workers, or an industry-specific share would answer a different question and would require an additional denominator or a narrower NAICS slice.
What the middle and lower end of the distribution look like
When the 51 values are grouped, 14 jurisdictions are below 75,000 establishments, 10 are between 75,000 and 150,000, 15 are between 150,000 and 300,000, 8 are between 300,000 and 600,000, 3 are between 600,000 and one million, and only 1 is above one million. The median, 162,989, is exactly Kentucky’s value in this dataset.
| Jurisdiction | Establishments | Rank |
|---|---|---|
| Alaska | 25,401 | 51 |
| Wyoming | 31,811 | 50 |
| Vermont | 33,374 | 49 |
| North Dakota | 36,905 | 48 |
| South Dakota | 41,117 | 47 |
| Delaware | 47,081 | 46 |
| Rhode Island | 49,057 | 45 |
| District of Columbia | 51,365 | 44 |
| West Virginia | 62,989 | 43 |
| Montana | 63,172 | 42 |
The smallest raw totals occur in Alaska, Wyoming, Vermont, North Dakota, and South Dakota. Delaware, Rhode Island, the District of Columbia, West Virginia, and Montana also appear near the lower end. Many of these places have relatively small populations, which illustrates why a small absolute establishment count should not be interpreted as a low business density. Raw scale and density are separate concepts.
What this single-quarter comparison can and cannot answer
- It can show: the absolute QCEW establishment count for each state and the District of Columbia in 2026 Q1.
- It can show: how concentrated the counts are among the largest states and how skewed the 51-jurisdiction distribution is.
- It cannot show: the number of firms, startups, self-employed workers, or business registrations without additional data.
- It cannot show: whether a state gained or lost establishments from 2025 because this comparison uses one quarter only.
- Interpretation rule: a QCEW establishment is a reported economic unit and is not necessarily a one-to-one match with a firm.
A trend analysis would need earlier quarters using the same QCEW concept. A density comparison would need a denominator such as population or employment. An industry-structure comparison would need separate NAICS files instead of the all-industries total. Without those additions, it is better to describe the spatial scale and concentration visible in the data rather than assign causal explanations.
Source and measurement notes
The official sources are the BLS QCEW Open Data CSV Data Slices documentation and the QCEW field definitions. BLS identifies industry code 10 as the total, all-industries slice and qtrly_estabs as the count of establishments for the quarter. This article limits the comparison to the 50 states and the District of Columbia.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is a QCEW establishment the same as a firm?
No. BLS generally defines an establishment as an economic unit at a physical location. One firm can operate multiple establishments.
Which state had the most establishments in Q1 2026?
California had the largest count at 1,990,701, followed by Florida and Texas.
Can these counts be used as a business-density ranking?
Not directly. They are absolute counts. A density comparison needs a denominator such as population or employment.
Related Articles
Green Map creates custom-edited map images using open geographic data sources such as geoBoundaries, Natural Earth, OpenStreetMap, and government open data. These maps are edited visual materials, not raw data files, and are provided for education, documents, presentations, and graphic reference.
