How popular is the baby name Brandon in the United States right now? How popular was it historically? Find out using the graph below! Plus, check out all the blog posts that mention the name Brandon.

The graph will take a few seconds to load, thanks for your patience. (Don't worry, it shouldn't take nine months.) If it's taking too long, try reloading the page.


Popularity of the Baby Name Brandon


Posts that Mention the Name Brandon

Numerology & Baby Names: Number 5

baby names that add up to 5, numerologically

Here are hundreds of baby names that have a numerological value of “5.”

I’ve sub-categorized them by overall totals, because I think that some of the intermediate numbers could have special significance to people as well.

Within each group, I’ve listed up to ten of the most popular “5” names per gender (according to the current U.S. rankings).

Beneath all the names are some ways you could interpret the numerological value of “5,” including descriptions from two different numerological systems.

5 via 14

The following baby names add up to 14, which reduces to five (1+4=5).

  • “14” girl names: Ida, Adah, Caia, Becca, Dia, Adi, Abbi, Ala, Edda, Kc
  • “14” boy names: Ahad, Adi, Kc, Dj, Dade, Jd, Jac, Bach, Dee, Acai

5 via 23

The following baby names add up to 23, which reduces to five (2+3=5).

  • “23” girl names: Mia, Alia, Cara, Aila, Adela, Addie, Edie, Laia, Jaci, Mai
  • “23” boy names: Caleb, Adem, Acen, Coda, Han, Adael, Cane, Emad, Mj, Aadhi

5 via 32

The following baby names add up to 32, which reduces to five (3+2=5).

  • “32” girl names: Emma, Bella, Lena, Sage, Eve, Avah, Lara, Rhea, Veda, Giana
  • “32” boy names: Leo, Lane, Reed, Sage, Dash, Aldo, Avi, Leif, Jakai, Elan

5 via 41

The following baby names add up to 41, which reduces to five (4+1=5).

  • “41” girl names: Amelia, Abigail, Isla, Amaya, Adelaide, Evie, Mira, Jayda, Dream, Saige
  • “41” boy names: Amir, King, Nico, Elian, Alijah, Duke, Clay, Kye, Madden, Jadiel

5 via 50

The following baby names add up to 50, which reduces to five (5+0=5).

  • “50” girl names: Sofia, Adeline, Lyla, Kayla, Elise, Mariah, June, Elsie, Haven, Lexi
  • “50” boy names: Ezra, Paul, Colt, Brady, Marco, Frank, Kasen, Drew, Landen, Donald

5 via 59

The following baby names add up to 59, which reduces to five (5+9=14; 1+4=5).

  • “59” girl names: Kaylee, Melanie, Brianna, Briella, Kendall, Makenna, Carly, Renata, Janelle, Lillie
  • “59” boy names: Jayden, Jason, Ismael, Zaiden, Bowen, Jonas, Mohamed, Rayan, Zaire, Kellen

5 via 68

The following baby names add up to 68, which reduces to five (6+8=14; 1+4=5).

  • “68” girl names: Olivia, Sophia, Valeria, Juliana, Morgan, Blakely, Izabella, Madeleine, Cataleya, Kaydence
  • “68” boy names: Benjamin, Brandon, Carlos, Kyrie, Zander, Killian, Ricardo, Eduardo, Cruz, Derrick

5 via 77

The following baby names add up to 77, which reduces to five (7+7=14; 1+4=5).

  • “77” girl names: Caroline, Samantha, Vivian, Alyssa, Molly, Juliet, Harlow, Kelsey, Coraline, Braelyn
  • “77” boy names: Jameson, Ryker, Ashton, Kenneth, Kameron, Fernando, Braylen, Scott, Marvin, Fletcher

5 via 86

The following baby names add up to 86, which reduces to five (8+6=14; 1+4=5).

  • “86” girl names: Skylar, Jordyn, Mckenzie, Paisleigh, Hunter, Saoirse, Alyson, Ellison, Bryleigh, Julianne
  • “86” boy names: Hunter, Santiago, Arthur, Johnny, Cyrus, Rodrigo, Tommy, Terry, Skylar, Jordyn

5 via 95

The following baby names add up to 95, which reduces to five (9+5=14; 1+4=5).

  • “95” girl names: Kinsley, Peyton, Kimberly, Bristol, Promise, Joslyn, Rowyn, Brynnlee, Yvonne, Estefany
  • “95” boy names: Everett, Peyton, Gregory, Huxley, Wesson, Viktor, Abdulrahman, Yousif, Hussein, Summit

5 via 104

The following baby names add up to 104, which reduces to five (1+0+4=5).

  • “104” girl names: Yaretzi, Tinsley, Rosalyn, Whitney, Sterling, Violetta, Emmylou, Huntleigh, Jesslyn, Giulietta
  • “104” boy names: Sterling, Marcellus, Quintin, Braxtyn, Truett, Shaquille, Michelangelo, Sebastion, Trevyn, Weylyn

5 via 113

The following baby names add up to 113, which reduces to five (1+1+3=5).

  • “113” girl names: Roselyne, Primrose, Brittney, Constanza, Sumayyah, Emersynn, Tziporah, Ivyrose, Augustina, Anavictoria
  • “113” boy names: Salvatore, Cristofer, Woodrow, Bryston, Alexandros, Jaxstyn, Greysyn, Athanasius, Braxston, Antonius

5 via 122

The following baby names add up to 122, which reduces to five (1+2+2=5).

  • “122” girl names: Roselynn, Zerenity, Krislynn, Rosslyn, Chrislynn, Scotlynn, Jacquelynn, Marylynn, Kaytlynn, Sincerity
  • “122” boy names: Chukwuemeka, Righteous, Dimitrius, Ebubechukwu, Xzayvian, Antavious, Kenechukwu, Ayomiposi, Joanthony, Stetsyn

5 via 131

The following baby names add up to 131, which reduces to five (1+3+1=5).

  • “131” girl names: Brookelynn, Brooklynne, Monserrath, Kerrington, Roosevelt, Temiloluwa, Oluwaseun, Amythyst
  • “131” boy names: Cristopher, Roosevelt, Wellington, Hutchinson, Maximillion, Tryston, Imisioluwa, Christoper, Temiloluwa

5 via 140

The following baby names add up to 140, which reduces to five (1+4+0=5).

  • “140” girl names: Marymargaret, Summerlyn, Marycatherine, Evelynrose, Maryevelyn, Quinnlynn, Testimony, Violetrose
  • “140” boy names: Dontavious, Markanthony, Fitzwilliam, Prometheus

5 via 149

The boy name Montavious adds up to 149, which reduces to five (1+4+9=14; 1+4=5).

What Does “5” Mean?

First, we’ll look at the significance assigned to “5” by two different numerological sources. Second, and more importantly, ask yourself if “5” or any of the intermediate numbers above have any special significance to you.

Numerological Attributes

“5” (the pentad) according to the Pythagoreans:

  • “They called the pentad ‘lack of strife,’ not only because aether, the fifth element, which is set apart on its own, remains unchanging, while there is strife and change among the things under it, from the moon to the Earth, but also because the primary two different and dissimilar kinds of number, even and odd, are as it were reconciled and knitted together by the pentad”
  • “The pentad is the first number to encompass the specific identity of all number[s], since it encompasses 2, the first even number, and 3, the first odd number. Hence it is called ‘marriage,’ since it is formed of male and female.”
  • “The pentad is highly expressive of justice, and justice comprehends all the other virtues […] it is a kind of justice, on the analogy of a weighing instrument.” (i.e., It is the central number in the row of numbers from 1 to 9.)
  • “Because it levels out inequality, they call it ‘Providence’ and ‘justice’ (division, as it were) […] Likewise, it is called ‘nuptial’ and ‘androgyny’ and ‘demigod’ – the latter not only because it is half of ten, which is divine, but also because in its special diagram it is assigned the central place. And it is called ‘twin’ because it divides in two the decad, which is otherwise indivisible […] and ‘heart-like’ because of the analogy of the heart being assigned the center in living creatures.”
  • “Nature separated each of the extremities of our bodily part (I mean, the extremities of our feet and hands) in a five-fold way, into fingers and toes.”

“5” according to Edgar Cayce:

  • “Five – a change imminent, ever, in the activities of whatever influence with which it may be associated” (reading 261-14).
  • “Five – as seen, a change” (reading 5751-1).
  • “Five always active – and double the two, and one – or three and two, which it is the sum of. Hence, as is questioned here, no factor is more active than would be that of a five…in any activity. Five being the active number” (reading 137-119).
Personal/Cultural Significance

Does “5” — or do any of the other numbers above (e.g., 23, 50, 77, 131) — have any special significance to you?

Think about your own preferences and personal experiences: lucky numbers, birth dates, music, sports, and so on. Maybe you like how “23” reminds you of chromosomes and genetics, for example.

Also think about associations you may have picked up from your culture, your religion, or society in general.

If you have any interesting insights about the number 5, or any of the other numbers above, please leave a comment!

Source: Theologumena Arithmeticae, attributed to Iamblichus (c.250-c.330).

Popular and Unique Baby Names by State, 2018

Sampling of baby names that appeared in the SSA state-specific baby name data for one state only.

We know what the top names in the country were last year, but what about the top names in each state? Here’s the list, released just yesterday by the SSA. I’ve also included each state’s most popular unique names (i.e., names that only appeared in the data for that particular state).

StateTop Names (f & m)Top Unique Names (f & m)
AlabamaAva & WilliamCrimson & Kendarius, Walton (tie)
AlaskaAurora & Oliver(none) & Paxson
ArizonaEmma & LiamSedona & Yadier
ArkansasAva & Noah(none) & Timber
CaliforniaEmma & NoahAni & Aram
ColoradoOlivia & LiamVail & Redding
ConnecticutOlivia & Noah(none) & (none)
DelawareAva & Liam(none) & (none)
D.C.Ava & William(none) & (none)
FloridaIsabella & LiamAbigaelle & Miron
GeorgiaAva & WilliamKaylei & Taylin
HawaiiEmma & LiamMahina & Kaimana
IdahoOlivia & LiamQuincey & Roczen
IllinoisOlivia & NoahJamaya & Laron
IndianaEmma & OliverDawt, Elma (tie) & Jamin
IowaHarper & OliverHuxley & Kinnick
KansasOlivia & LiamMacklyn & Creighton, Whit (tie)
KentuckyEmma & WilliamAnnlee, Terri (tie) & Jansen
LouisianaAva & NoahJaicee, Jersi (tie) & Colston
MaineOliver & Charlotte(none) & (none)
MarylandAva & LiamAnjolaoluwa & Adon, Murtaza (tie)
MassachusettsEmma & BenjaminVittoria & Henrique
MichiganOlivia & NoahLayal & Eldon
MinnesotaEvelyn & HenryMaida & Muhsin
MississippiAva & JohnSwayze & Jadarius
MissouriOlivia & LiamCharlea & Daxten, Zebulun (tie)
MontanaHarper & Liam(none) & (none)
NebraskaOlivia & Liam(none) & (none)
NevadaEmma & Liam(none) & (none)
New HampshireOlivia & Oliver (none) & (none)
New JerseyEmma & LiamTzipora & Binyomin
New MexicoIsabella & Noah(none) & (none)
New YorkEmma & LiamGitty & Mendel
North CarolinaAva & NoahHolden & Nahmir
North DakotaOlivia & Oliver(none) & (none)
OhioAva & LiamWilma & Grayden
OklahomaEmma & LiamDim, Jadyn (tie) & Thang
OregonEmma & OliverRuna & (none)
PennsylvaniaEmma & LiamBarbie, Surah (tie) & Joniel
Rhode IslandAmelia, Olivia (tie) & Liam(none) & (none)
South CarolinaAva & WilliamEmmagrace, Mills (tie) & Drayton, Mills (tie)
South DakotaHarper & Grayson, Henry, Liam (3-way tie)(none) & Ryken
TennesseeEmma & WilliamAnnaclaire, Caylen, Eulalia, Jakyra, Kamri, Parthenia, Tamari, Tylee (8-way tie) & Neyland
TexasEmma & LiamJessi & Eliud
UtahOlivia & OliverMable & Ammon
VermontHarper & Oliver(none) & (none)
VirginiaAva & WilliamTyasia & Alexi, Javonte, Mckinley (3-way tie)
WashingtonOlivia & LiamCallista & Ruvim
West VirginiaEmma & Mason(none) & Bransen
WisconsinEvelyn & Oliver(none) & Broxton, Kelby (tie)
WyomingAmelia, Emma (tie) & Oliver(none) & (none)

A few final thoughts…

  • I love that Aurora is now #1 in Alaska. :)
  • What’s up with Wilma in Ohio? Nine baby girls is nearly a quarter (23%) of the total national usage. Interesting.
  • One of the other unique Utah boy names was Kaladin, which comes from a character in the Stormlight Archive book series by Utah-based fantasy writer Brandon Sanderson.

How about you — what are your thoughts/observations?

More Top Baby Name Drops

A couple of weeks a go we checked out the list of top raw-number rises in the U.S. baby name data, so today let’s balance things out with the list of top raw-number drops.

Just remember that the SSA data doesn’t become very accurate until the mid-to-late 20th century, so many of the numbers below don’t reflect reality all that well.

Same format as usual: Girl names on the left, boy names on the right. Numbers represent single-year decreases in usage. From 1880 to 1881, for instance, usage of the girl name Mary dropped by 146 babies and usage of the boy name William dropped by 1,008 babies.

  • 1881: Mary, -146; William, -1,008
  • 1882: Lulu, -34; Garfield, -78
  • 1883: Mary, -136; William, -911
  • 1884: Mina, -33; Albert, -61
  • 1885: Sarah, -94; William, -853
  • 1886: Nancy, -35; Grover, -361
  • 1887: Minnie, -157; John, -916
  • 1888: Dorothea, -24; Rudolph, -17
  • 1889: Emma, -203; William, -933
  • 1890: Mollie, -53; William, -278
  • 1891: Mary, -375; John, -821
  • 1892: Jennie, -26; Enoch & Irving, -16 each (tie)
  • 1893: Mary, -390; John, -990
  • 1894: Ruth, -286; Grover, -171
  • 1895: Laura, -87; Charles, -155
  • 1896: Jessie, -197; John, -182
  • 1897: Anna, -431; John, -589
  • 1898: Sophie, -49; Hobart, -63
  • 1899: Mary, -1,234; William, -1,314
  • 1900: Manila, -24; Dewey, -154
  • 1901: Mary, -3,572; John, -2,931
  • 1902: Sophie, -45; Manuel, -32
  • 1903: Mary, -211; William, -305
  • 1904: Lillie, -121; Leo, -83
  • 1905: Florence, -94; Alton, -138
  • 1906: Minnie, -173; Theodore, -146
  • 1907: Bessie & Alice, -85 each (tie); Austin, -27
  • 1908: Evelyn, -178; Theodore, -69
  • 1909: Mae, -154; Ernest, -115
  • 1910: Allie, -35; Delmar & Bruce, -24 each (tie)
  • 1911: Annie, -220; Willie, -405
  • 1912: Dessie, -20; Lawyer & Blas, -12 each (tie)
  • 1913: Carrie, -62; Emerson, -28
  • 1914: Tomasa, -27; Woodrow, -547
  • 1915: Juana, -32; Kermit, -79
  • 1916: Mollie, -88; Willard, -476
  • 1917: Edna, -204; Woodrow, -239
  • 1918: Rose, -215; Frederick, -103
  • 1919: Helen, -2,447; John, -3,029
  • 1920: Sophie, -234; Woodrow, -1,033
  • 1921: Gertrude, -449; Willie, -391
  • 1922: Helen, -2,314; Warren, -3,315
  • 1923: Helen, -1,017; George, -321
  • 1924: Elizabeth, -512; Warren, -1,231
  • 1925: Mary, -2,910; John, -1,878
  • 1926: Mary, -2,773; William, -1,358
  • 1927: Helen, -1,582; William, -479
  • 1928: Mary, -3,756; William, -2,360
  • 1929: Mary, -3,361; John, -1,652
  • 1930: Ruth, -1,079; Herbert, -2,187
  • 1931: Dorothy, -3,884; John, -4,026
  • 1932: Betty, -1,688; Robert, -1,255
  • 1933: Mary, -4,381; Robert, -5,052
  • 1934: Dorothy, -761; Franklin, -1,209
  • 1935: Betty, -2,408; Franklin, -1,543
  • 1936: Shirley, -7,202; Donald, -1,025

(From the SSA: “Note that many people born before 1937 never applied for a Social Security card, so their names are not included in our data.”)

  • 1937: Shirley, -8,337; Donald, -771
  • 1938: Shirley, -3,048; Donald, -1,207
  • 1939: Shirley, -3,320; Robert, -2,630
  • 1940: Shirley, -2,573; Donald, -962
  • 1941: Betty, -1,172; Wendell, -533
  • 1942: Deanna, -408; Billy, -352
  • 1943: Carole, -1,900; Douglas, -3,001
  • 1944: Barbara, -4,242; Robert, -4,008
  • 1945: Mary, -3,184; James, -2,497
  • 1946: Victoria, -280; Victor, -492
    • Top 5 boy-name drops of ’46, in order: Victor, Truman, Franklin, Delano, Roosevelt/Homer (tie)
  • 1947: Carole, -793; Richard, -369
  • 1948: Patricia, -5,144; Richard, -7,570
  • 1949: Linda, -5,192; Ronald, -2,026
  • 1950: Linda, -10,549; John, -1,642
  • 1951: Linda, -6,553; Larry, -1,016
  • 1952: Linda, -6,808; Larry, -2,224
  • 1953: Linda, -5,819; Larry, -3,081
  • 1954: Linda, -5,884; Dennis, -2,860
  • 1955: Mary, -4,830; Gary, -3,499
  • 1956: Deborah, -4,476; David, -4,588
  • 1957: Deborah, -7,778; Gary, -2,286
  • 1958: Cynthia, -8,311; James, -5,502
  • 1959: Debra, -4,166; Michael, -5,209
  • 1960: Debra, -4,626; Richard, -3,619
  • 1961: Donna, -5,468; Richard, -2,432
  • 1962: Mary, -4,163; Mark, -4,234
  • 1963: Linda, -3,754; Mark, -4,150
  • 1964: Lori, -5,280; Mark, -4,073
  • 1965: Mary, -6,709; John, -10,972
  • 1966: Karen, -7,431; John, -6,519
  • 1967: Lisa, -4,483; James, -3,495
  • 1968: Mary, -3,592; David, -3,058
  • 1969: Lisa, -4,494; Timothy, -3,153
  • 1970: Lisa, -6,077; David, -1,953
  • 1971: Lisa, -6,053; David, -8,650
  • 1972: Lisa, -5,357; John, -8,340
  • 1973: Lisa, -4,883; David, -5,267
  • 1974: Lisa, -2,889; Robert, -1,681
  • 1975: Jennifer, -4,926; Brian, -3,864
  • 1976: Michelle, -3,116; Scott, -1,571
  • 1977: Amy, -4,613; Scott, -1,541
  • 1978: Amy, -3,509; Jason, -4,027
  • 1979: Kelly, -1,686; Kevin, -1,373
  • 1980: Melissa, -2,420; Jason, -2,203
  • 1981: Melissa, -3,623; Jason, -6,268
  • 1982: Brooke, -2,183; Jeremy, -2,643
  • 1983: Jennifer, -2,767; Jason, -5,512
  • 1984: Jennifer, -3,784; Jason, -5,167
  • 1985: Jennifer, -7,903; Jason, -3,905
  • 1986: Jennifer, -6,474; Joshua, -4,655
  • 1987: Jennifer, -3,483; Jason, -3,054
  • 1988: Ashley, -4,873; Jason, -3,441
  • 1989: Jennifer, -3,888; Jason, -3,292
  • 1990: Tiffany, -2,555; Adam, -2,216
  • 1991: Brittany, -7,446; Christopher, -5,219
  • 1992: Jessica, -5,047; Michael -6,409
  • 1993: Chelsea, -4,885; Michael, -4,821
  • 1994: Ashley, -4,571; Michael, -5,089
  • 1995: Jessica, -4,175; Michael, -3,060
  • 1996: Jessica, -3,752; Michael, -3,043
  • 1997: Jessica, -3,142; Cody, -2,660
  • 1998: Jessica, -2,816; Christopher, -2,104
  • 1999: Brittany, -1,903; Austin, -2,710
  • 2000: Brittany, -2,760; Austin, -4,824
  • 2001: Hannah, -2,366; Brandon, -2,445
  • 2002: Taylor, -2,220; Jacob, -1,968
  • 2003: Ashanti, -1,983; Austin, -2,850
  • 2004: Hannah, -2,034; Zachary, -1,832
  • 2005: Alexis, -1,503; Jacob, -2,059
  • 2006: Emily, -2,540; Ryan, -1,557
  • 2007: Emily, -2,050; Joshua, -1,664
  • 2008: Hannah, -3,738; Christopher, -2070
  • 2009: Emily, -2,084; Anthony, -2,099
  • 2010: Madison, -2,059; Joshua, -2,219
  • 2011: Isabella, -3,032; Jacob, -1,783
  • 2012: Chloe, -1,361; Jacob, -1,370
  • 2013: Isabella, -1,536; Ethan, -1,494
  • 2014: Sophia, -2,657; Jayden, -1,834
  • 2015: Isabella, -1,523; Jase, -1,459
  • 2016: Sophia, -1,311; Logan, -1,697
  • 2017: Sophia, -1,281; Mason, -1,728
  • 2018: Emily, -1,125; Matthew, -1,747

I’ve already written about some of the names above (click the links to see the posts) and will write about others in the future. In the meanwhile, feel free to beat me to it! Comment below with the backstory on the fall of Shirley in the late ’30s, Linda in the early ’50s, etc.

More Top Baby Name Rises

Having déjà vu?

A couple of months ago, we looked at a long, year-by-year list of the top baby name rises. A month after that, we saw the corresponding list of top drops.

On that second post, Frank B. left a comment in which he asked about absolute rises and drops — because the lists only covered relative movement within the data. So I thought two more posts were in order: top raw-number rises, and top raw-number drops.

We’ll start with the rises again. Just keep in mind that the SSA numbers don’t become very accurate until the mid-to-late 20th century, so many of the numbers below don’t quite reflect reality.

Here’s the format: Girl names are on the left, boy names are on the right, and the numbers represent single-year rises in usage. From 1880 to 1881, for instance, the usage of the girl name Ethel increased by 155 babies and the usage of the boy name Chester increased by 106 babies.

  • 1881: Ethel, +155; Chester, +106
  • 1882: Mary, +1,229; John, +788
  • 1883: Bertha, +173; Grover, +71
  • 1884: Mary, +1,205; Grover, +675
  • 1885: Helen, +148; Willie, +36
  • 1886: Mary, +762; John, +270
  • 1887: Ethel, +208; Harold, +55
  • 1888: Mary, +1,866; William, +1,235
  • 1889: Ruth, +223; Russell, +52
  • 1890: Mary, +430; Charlie, +112
  • 1891: Ruth, +662; Theodore & Herbert, +34 (tie)
  • 1892: Mary, +1,471; John, +1,358
  • 1893: Esther, +558; Claude, +41
  • 1894: Marie, +437; John, +189
  • 1895: Anna, +385; James, +225
  • 1896: Helen, +369; William, +470
  • 1897: Thelma, +159; Dewey, +95
  • 1898: Mary, +994; Dewey, +957
  • 1899: Mildred, +188; Kenneth, +24
  • 1900: Mary, +3536; John, +2,840
  • 1901: Retha, +25; Theodore, +21
  • 1902: Mary, +1,350; John, +1,009
  • 1903: Dorothy, +371; Jack, +88
  • 1904: Mary, +687; John, +499
  • 1905: Mary, +1,105; Charles, +201
  • 1906: Alice, +581; Robert, +225
  • 1907: Mary, +1,211; James, +799
  • 1908: Mary, +1,085; William, +622
  • 1909: Helen, +813; James, +582
  • 1910: Mary, +3,589; John, +1,860
  • 1911: Dorothy, +1,551; John, +1,995
  • 1912: Mary, +7,910; John, +11,140
  • 1913: Mary, +4,342; John, +4,738
  • 1914: Mary, +8,705; John, +8,621
  • 1915: Mary, +12,842; John, +9,634
  • 1916: Mary, +3,246; Robert, +3,004
  • 1917: Mary, +2,847; Robert, +3,474
  • 1918: Dorothy, +3,179; Robert, +5,409
  • 1919: Betty, +1,304; Willie, +409
  • 1920: Mary, +5,141; Robert, +7,656
  • 1921: Betty, +3,618; Robert, +4,096
  • 1922: Betty, +3,259; Richard, +1,165
  • 1923: Betty, +5,097; Robert, +2,300
  • 1924: Betty, +4,605; Robert, +4,685
  • 1925: Gloria, +2,835; Richard, +2,034
  • 1926: Barbara, +1,917; Richard, +1,864
  • 1927: Mary, +2,787; Donald, +2,935
  • 1928: Dolores, +2,843; Herbert, +3,049
  • 1929: Joan, +3,806; Donald, +1,456
  • 1930: Joan, +3,812; Richard, +2,602
  • 1931: Joan, +3,633; Ronald, +1,086
  • 1932: Barbara, +4,514; Ronald, +4,411
  • 1933: Carol, +1,650; Franklin, +2,603
  • 1934: Shirley, +8,523; James, +3,124
  • 1935: Shirley, +19,514; David, +1,664
  • 1936: Carol, +2,785; Robert, +1,968

(From the SSA: “Note that many people born before 1937 never applied for a Social Security card, so their names are not included in our data.”)

  • 1937: Barbara, +3,230; David, +3,493
  • 1938: Judith, +4,729; James, +2,526
  • 1939: Judith, +5,748; David, +2,366
  • 1940: Linda, +7,657; John, +3,739
  • 1941: Linda, +5,355; James, +4,262
  • 1942: Linda, +7,882; James, +10,450
  • 1943: Linda, +6,831; James, +3,072
  • 1944: Cheryl, +5,092; Gary, +2,192
  • 1945: Linda, +3,065; Michael, +3,179
  • 1946: Linda, +11,239; Robert, +14,194
  • 1947: Linda, +46,978; David, +11,381
  • 1948: Deborah, +5,409; Mark, +2,503
  • 1949: Deborah, +7,953; Michael, +7,417
  • 1950: Deborah, +9,877; Michael, +5,220
  • 1951: Deborah, +12,954; Michael, +7,531
  • 1952: Debra, +9,782; David, +7,043
  • 1953: Debra, +10,015; Michael, +5,172
  • 1954: Debra, +9,029; Mark, +6,899
  • 1955: Debra, +4,653; David, +6,653
  • 1956: Karen, +6,843; Mark, +6,596
  • 1957: Cindy, +10,268; Mark, +4,020
  • 1958: Tammy, +5,618; Timothy, +4,011
  • 1959: Donna, +9,517; Mark, +4,260
  • 1960: Lisa, +8,013; Jeffrey, +2,564
  • 1961: Lisa, +8,983; Todd, +4,005
  • 1962: Lisa, +3,394; Scott, +6,790
  • 1963: Lisa, +9,951; Paul, +2,884
  • 1964: Dawn, +4,196; John, +3,900
  • 1965: Lisa, +5,990; Rodney, +5,013
  • 1966: Michelle, +10,937; Christopher, +3,228
  • 1967: Melissa, +4,114; Matthew, +2,778
  • 1968: Jennifer, +8,612; Matthew, +2,253
  • 1969: Jennifer, +6,858; Jason, +9,346
  • 1970: Jennifer, +12,455; Jason, +10,788
  • 1971: Jennifer, +10,626; Jason, +6,897
  • 1972: Jennifer, +6,820; Christopher, +3,954
  • 1973: Heather, +3,032; Jason, +9,236
  • 1974: Heather, +3,836; Jason, +8,082
  • 1975: Amanda, +5,177; Joshua, +2,968
  • 1976: Jamie, +8,306; Jeremy, +4,940
  • 1977: Jessica, +6,467; Joshua, +5,205
  • 1978: Crystal, +2,865; Nicholas, +10,274
  • 1979: Amanda, +11,406; Joshua, +5,921
  • 1980: Tiffany, +6,614; Justin, +9,355
  • 1981: Jessica, +8,602; Brandon, +6,048
  • 1982: Ashley, +5,971; Christopher, +8,995
  • 1983: Ashley, +18,435; Kyle, +4,161
  • 1984: Ashley, +5,478; Joshua, +3,551
  • 1985: Ashley, +8,242; Andrew, +4,252
  • 1986: Whitney, +5,699; Andrew, +3,682
  • 1987: Kayla, +5,917; Justin, +4,874
  • 1988: Brittany, +4,594; Justin, +3,545
  • 1989: Brittany, +10,969; Ethan, +3,162
  • 1990: Taylor, +3,188; Jordan, +5,257
  • 1991: Shelby, +6,703; Dylan, +5,349
  • 1992: Taylor, +4,696; Dylan, +5,298
  • 1993: Taylor, +6,318; Austin, +6,125
  • 1994: Alexis, +2,208; Austin, +5,616
  • 1995: Madison, +3,516; Austin, +2,714
  • 1996: Madison, +3,632; Noah, +3,360
  • 1997: Hannah, +1,993; Jacob, +2,237
  • 1998: Emma, +2,700; Noah, +4,137
  • 1999: Grace, +3,460; Seth, +1,718
  • 2000: Trinity, +2,803; Ethan, +3,783
  • 2001: Isabella, +2,587; Logan, +2,973
  • 2002: Isabella, +3,334; Ethan, +4,143
  • 2003: Emma, +6,170; Aidan, +3,108
  • 2004: Ava, +2,364; Aiden, +1,472
  • 2005: Ava, +4,959; Landon, +2,070
  • 2006: Addison, +4,595; Aiden, +2,492
  • 2007: Addison, +4,328; Jayden, +5,596
  • 2008: Peyton, +1,954; Aiden, +2,472
  • 2009: Isabella, +3,667; Liam, +2,582
  • 2010: Sophia, +3,680; Mason, +4,139
  • 2011: Harper, +2,032; Mason, +4,650
  • 2012: Harper, +2,496; Liam, +3,286
  • 2013: Sadie, +2,031; Jase, +3,410
  • 2014: Olivia, +1,308; Oliver, +2,116
  • 2015: Alexa, +1,786; Oliver, +2,181
  • 2016: Adeline, +1,700; Mateo, +1,516
  • 2017: Luna, +1,657; Logan, +2,748
  • 2018: Mila, +2,162; Theodore, +1,070

Some of these names I’ve written about already, and others I plan to write about in the future. If you can give explanations for any of those others right now, though, feel free! Just leave a comment…