Around 1930, both the USN and IJN are about equal in numbers of both battleships and carriers, at least in the Pacific, since the USN actually has more due to commitments in the Atlantic as well. The point in 1930 is that the USN is quite unballanced, compared to the IJN, namely a focus on capital ships only with a poor supporting fleet of medium sized combatants.
The IJN in 1930 outnuimbers the USN in the cruiser cathegory, since the USN only has its first two 8 inch cruisers in service, and another six or so on stocks, while the IJN already possesses twelve of them. In the light cruiser group, the USN has only the ten Onaha class ships, compared to the IJN with some 20 or so such light cruisers, which were deployed mainly as destroyerleaders in Japan and not scouting for the Fleet as in the USN.
In destroyers, the IJN had teh upperhand in quality, as the new Special Type Fibuki Class was already in service, as were some follow ups, as well as the numereous post WW1 period vessels of Kamikaze, Minekaze and Mutsuki class, plus several older ones still retained, pending on replacement by more modern types. The USN only had in 1930 the 200+ strong Flushdecker Four funneled type, plus a few older ones, all of an ancient and oldfashioned model, with limmited fightingpower in general. The only advantage of these vessels was their heavy load of torpedoes, comensating the poor quality of the USN torpedo iun this period.
In any case, a battle around 1930, or so would be fought with carriers as the primary weapon of choice, as the USN Lexingtons werer better suited in their original form, than the lesser Akagi and Kaga, who were not optimally reconstructed adn lacked a suitable sized airgroup, before their late 1930's refit. Only the smaller and instable IJN Riyuho and the even smaller IJN Hosho were available, as the USN only had the experimental USS Langley, which was of little fightingvalue, but could act as a supportship to replennish the airgroups of the Lexingtons.