Wedge‐-shaped samples were manufactured by four different Additive Manufacturing (AM) processes, namely selective laser melting (SLM), electron beam melting (EBM), direct metal deposition (DMD), and wire and arc additive manufacturing (WAAM), using Ti‐-6Al‐-4V as the feed material. A high‐-resolution powder diffractometer was used to measure the diffraction patterns of the samples whilst rotated about two axes to collect detected neutrons from all possible lattice planes. The diffraction pattern of a LaB6 standard powder sample was also measured to characterize the instrumental broadening and peak shapes necessary for the Diffraction Line Profile Analysis. The line profile analysis was conducted using the extended Convolution Multiple Whole Profile (eCMWP) procedure. Once analyzed, it was found that there was significant variation in the dislocation densities between the SLMed and the EBMed samples, although having a similar manufacturing technique. While the samples fabricated via WAAM and the DMD processes showed almost similar dislocation densities, they were, however, different in comparison to the other two AM processes, as expected. The hexagonal (HCP) crystal structure of the predominant α‐-Ti phase allowed a breakdown of the percentage of the Burgers’ vectors possible for this crystal structure. All four techniques exhibited different combinations of the three possible Burgers’ vectors, and these differences were attributed to the variation in the cooling rates experienced by the parts fabricated using these AM processes.