← All 1792 Insights

High Risk Government Contractors

1792 Exchange Avatar
1792 Exchange

Companies rated High Risk in the 1792 Exchange Government Contractors database, with total federal dollars committed to each.

What “High Risk” means: 1792 Exchange rates a company High Risk when it finds the company yields to DEI activism and/or ESG when shaping its corporate governance, in ways that potentially alienate consumers, divide employees, and harm shareholders.

31
High Risk Companies
$186,649,108,331.53
Total Dollars Committed to Them
# Company Sector Dollars Committed
1RTXDefense$25,433,238,417.40
2BoeingDefense$24,758,962,470.98
3Northrop GrummanDefense$19,669,506,853.35
4UnitedHealth GroupHealthcare$18,783,399,941.99
5LeidosDefense$11,789,258,066.34
6McKessonHealthcare$9,050,183,507.18
7Booz Allen HamiltonConsulting$8,547,722,731.23
8BAE SystemsDefense$8,333,110,321.96
9Honeywell InternationalIndustrial$7,633,213,844.45
10CencoraHealthcare$6,091,697,826.62
11SAICDefense$5,445,175,403.27
12Battelle Memorial Institute DBA BattelleResearch$4,304,630,074.74
13Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu Limited (DTTL)Consulting$3,983,960,278.41
14Dell TechnologiesTechnology$3,428,343,073.05
15OptumHealthcare$3,309,894,581.24
16General ElectricIndustrial$2,997,604,742.81
17MerckPharma$2,893,140,940.16
18Jacobs SolutionsEngineering$2,592,607,376.35
19ParsonsEngineering$2,533,637,222.80
20SanofiPharma$1,635,380,052.05
21United Launch AllianceAerospace$1,629,701,239.01
22FedExLogistics$1,548,586,594.63
23Oshkosh CorporationDefense$1,467,782,961.82
24PfizerPharma$1,345,771,301.30
25CGITechnology$1,220,705,109.58
26GlaxoSmithKline (GSK)Pharma$1,165,068,791.97
27AECOMEngineering$1,114,301,261.95
28Chemonics InternationalConsulting$1,010,818,294.96
29BP (The British Petroleum Co. PLC)Energy$1,002,758,142.15
30Rolls-Royce HoldingsAerospace$978,368,459.37
31OracleTechnology$950,578,448.41

Source: 1792 Exchange Government Contractors database. Companies rated High Risk, with total federal dollars committed to each. Compiled August 26, 2026

Related Insights

Insights
Op-Ed

Two DEI Settlements, One Clear Warning for Federal Contractors

DEI
September 3, 2026

As the saying goes, “To be forewarned is to be forearmed.” American companies doing business with the federal government have once again been forewarned about the risks of engaging in DEI practices. To ignore these warnings can be very costly for the company, its shareholders, and employees.  Just four months ago, IBM paid more than $17 million to resolve allegations that it maintained illegal diversity, equity, and inclusion practices while performing federal contract work. That settlement was the first resolution under the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Fraud Initiative. It was also a clear warning. Last week, President Donald Trump’s DOJ announced that another top federal contractor has agreed to pay $21.5 million to settle similar allegations. The Justice Department alleged that Deloitte violated the False Claims Act by certifying compliance with federal nondiscrimination rules while applying race and sex preferences in hiring, promotions, and staffing. Business units tracked “demographic goals” with color-coded scorecards, and roughly 150 of the firm’s most senior leaders were evaluated, and in some cases compensated, based in part on progress toward those targets.  The government further alleged that promotion classes for partners were assigned racial and sex targets, that staffing for federal contracts was managed with a priority toward demographic parity …

Read More
Insights

Allen Mendenhall raises an important question this week: Whose interest is the RSA voting?

ESG Proxy Voting
August 27, 2026

Mendenhall argues that the Retirement Systems of Alabama should commission an independent audit of its proxy votes to confirm they serve beneficiaries’ financial interests. He notes that public pensions often delegate voting to asset managers and proxy advisers such as ISS and Glass Lewis with little public verification of how shares are actually cast. The question is especially timely in Alabama, home to the Southern Poverty Law Center, which was recently indicted by a federal grand jury in the state. Mendenhall asks whether RSA opposed shareholder proposals urging companies to stop using the SPLC’s discredited “hate map” in charitable-matching programs that discriminates against mainstream advocacy organizations, including Focus on the Family and Moms for Liberty. Alabamians have a right to know how their retirement funds voted on those and similar resolutions. RSA is uniquely opaque. It does not publish proxy records, does not use outside investment managers to vote its shares, and, in response to a public-records request, said it does not possess proxy voting data, past or present. 1792 Exchange has identified Alabama as the only state that discloses none of this information. This is not the first time RSA’s voting has drawn scrutiny. In 2023, a 1792 Exchange review of 2022 shareholder resolutions raised questions about how Alabama pension capital was being voted …

Read More
Insights
Op-Ed

The EEOC’s mission is opportunity for all, not demographic bean-counting 

DEI EEOC
August 24, 2026

In the Superman comics, Bizarro World is a place where everything is exactly backward. It is a cube-shaped planet where ugliness is admired, failure is celebrated, lies are preferred to truth, and the normal rules of logic are turned upside down. What is obviously true on Earth becomes false, and what is plainly false is treated as a self-evident fact.   Donna Brazile recently accused the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission of abandoning its purpose by proposing to end mandatory annual race-and-sex workforce reporting. Her argument reads like a dispatch from Bizarro World.  In truth, the commission’s July 21 Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to rescind the EEO-1 and related demographic reports is a long-overdue course correction that reorients the agency to the actual text and original intent of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.  Title VII forbids discrimination against any individual based on race, color, religion, sex or national origin. It does not authorize the government to compel every covered employer, regardless of whether a single discrimination charge has been filed, to annually sort its workforce into racial and sex categories and submit the tallies to Washington. That regime, in place for decades, imposed nearly $275 million in annual compliance costs on employers and roughly …

Read More
Insights
Referenced

The Federal Bureaucracy Helped Build DEI’s Infrastructure. A New Rule Seeks to Change That.

DEI
August 19, 2026

1792 Exchange Executive Vice President Greg Scott was referenced by the Daily Signal regarding a proposed rule from the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) that would rescind some of the required annual reporting from businesses categorizing employees’ race and sex. 1792 Exchange supports the Commission’s proposal as a long-overdue course correction that reorients the agency to the actual text and original intent of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. This change would reduce unnecessary regulatory burden, reaffirm equal opportunity for all, and allow businesses to get back to the work of creating value. Every American business has been treated as a potential suspect, and every employee has been reduced to an overly simplified data point in a group identity spreadsheet. Read the full story at the Daily Signal

Read More
Insights

As You Sow Misleads Readers about Anti-DEI Proposals

DEI ESG Proxy Voting
July 31, 2026

Earlier this summer, as the 2025-2026 proxy season came to a close, leading progressive shareholder group As You Sow intentionally misled readers about the success of anti-DEI proposals. As You Sow suggested that voting results on anti-DEI shareholder proposals at 43 companies this season, including Disney, Costco, Visa, and Apple, proved that 99% of investors are opposed to anti-DEI measures.  As You Sow claimed that the universal failure of these proposals sends an “unmistakable message” to corporate boards that DEI is a “financial asset” that directors need to prioritize for the needs of the company, labelling anti-DEI efforts as a “political threat.” A 0-43 record for anti-DEI proposals does appear striking at first. However, no ESG proposals won majority support in the 2025-2026 proxy season, which includes pro-DEI proposals at 0-10 with an average support around 13%.  According to Broadridge’s 2025 ProxyPulse report, voting by retail investors “declined to 28% of their shares owned in 2025,” which is the lowest level of participation in 9 years. Low retail investor participation is the historical norm, as proxy votes are disproportionately cast by large institutions on their behalf, not by individual investors. As You Sow knows this. Furthermore, for As You Sow to suggest that “[d]iversity is not a liability to be managed, it is a dividend to be captured” when companies like IBM and Nike have recently faced intense scrutiny for their DEI practices is absurd.  To learn more about the Myth of Shareholder Democracy, consider reading Stefan Padfield’s piece titled: Proxy Voting and the Myth About Shareholder Democracy. 

Read More
Insights

DEI by Another Name

DEI
July 30, 2026

In response to legal, political, consumer, or shareholder pressures, companies are increasingly replacing “DEI” terminology with broader terms such as “Inclusion,” “Culture,” or “Belonging,” while providing little explanation as to whether the changes are substantive or primarily cosmetic.  For example, CVS Health renamed its public-facing DEI page to ”Inclusion & Belonging” without issuing a public statement explaining the change. The company also stopped referencing a diversity pay metric for leadership in their annual 10-K filing. Similarly, Home Depot quietly removed its DEI webpage and replaced it with a ”Living Our Values“ section. While these changes alter the public branding, they do not necessarily clarify whether the companies’ underlying policies or priorities have materially changed.  From a shareholder perspective, this lack of transparency can create uncertainty about a company’s strategic direction and how it intends to approach politically and socially contentious issues going forward. It is in companies’ best fiduciary interest to clearly communicate whether they are maintaining, modifying, or discontinuing DEI-related initiatives rather than simply changing terminology. Providing that clarity allows shareholders and other stakeholders to better understand the company’s priorities and evaluate whether its policies remain focused on advancing its core business objectives and long-term fiduciary responsibilities.  Home Depot’s Previous DEI Page vs Its “Rebranded” Page

Read More