Ainsley
#483 for girls in 2025, 621 births · #8,910 for boys in 2025, 8 births
Given to girls 98.0% of the time
- Peak · girls
- 2013 · 974 births
- Debut · girls
- 7 births
- In top 100 · girls
- neverof 146 years
- Total births · girls
- 20,470since 1961
Ainsley over time
Rank among girls' names. Ainsley has never cracked the top 300 here.
Gaps mean fewer than 5 babies received the name that year, so the SSA doesn't publish it.
Show data table
| Year | girls | boys | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| rank | births | rank | births | |
| 2025 | #483 | 621 | #8,910 | 8 |
| 2024 | #704 | 399 | — | |
| 2023 | #598 | 498 | #8,255 | 9 |
| 2022 | #507 | 622 | #7,262 | 11 |
| 2021 | #364 | 845 | #8,166 | 9 |
| 2020 | #355 | 872 | #7,502 | 10 |
| 2019 | #478 | 654 | — | |
| 2018 | #399 | 774 | #10,760 | 6 |
| 2017 | #352 | 902 | #7,095 | 11 |
| 2016 | #344 | 970 | #6,053 | 14 |
| 2015 | #338 | 967 | #5,289 | 17 |
| 2014 | #337 | 1,001 | #6,632 | 12 |
| 2013 | #332 | 974 | #7,026 | 11 |
| 2012 | #341 | 930 | #5,720 | 15 |
| 2011 | #363 | 891 | #5,945 | 14 |
| 2010 | #355 | 898 | #12,231 | 5 |
| 2009 | #412 | 772 | #8,985 | 8 |
| 2008 | #443 | 719 | #5,767 | 15 |
| 2007 | #458 | 704 | #9,788 | 7 |
| 2006 | #456 | 693 | #8,732 | 8 |
| 2005 | #440 | 691 | #9,115 | 7 |
| 2004 | #399 | 764 | #5,492 | 14 |
| 2003 | #437 | 686 | #6,258 | 11 |
| 2002 | #454 | 636 | #6,522 | 10 |
| 2001 | #483 | 578 | #5,667 | 12 |
| 2000 | #1,481 | 124 | #10,349 | 5 |
| 1999 | #1,548 | 109 | — | |
| 1998 | #1,508 | 112 | #6,314 | 9 |
| 1997 | #1,899 | 77 | #7,281 | 7 |
| 1996 | #1,792 | 82 | #6,496 | 8 |
| 1995 | #1,920 | 72 | #7,792 | 6 |
| 1994 | #2,188 | 61 | #8,800 | 5 |
| 1993 | #2,033 | 68 | #7,638 | 6 |
| 1992 | #1,908 | 73 | — | |
| 1991 | #1,857 | 76 | — | |
| 1990 | #1,733 | 84 | #6,415 | 7 |
| 1989 | #1,804 | 74 | #6,941 | 6 |
| 1988 | #1,839 | 67 | #4,786 | 9 |
| 1987 | #2,309 | 46 | #3,521 | 13 |
| 1986 | #2,512 | 39 | #5,926 | 6 |
| 1985 | #3,084 | 29 | #5,785 | 6 |
| 1984 | #3,726 | 21 | — | |
| 1983 | #3,242 | 25 | #4,141 | 9 |
| 1982 | #3,530 | 23 | #5,003 | 7 |
| 1981 | #4,344 | 17 | #5,468 | 6 |
| 1980 | #4,978 | 14 | #4,940 | 7 |
| 1979 | #4,420 | 16 | #4,842 | 7 |
| 1978 | #4,931 | 13 | — | |
| 1977 | #5,213 | 12 | #4,164 | 8 |
| 1976 | #5,601 | 10 | #4,418 | 7 |
| 1975 | #5,161 | 11 | #5,464 | 5 |
| 1974 | #8,775 | 5 | #4,634 | 6 |
| 1973 | #5,191 | 10 | — | |
| 1972 | #5,109 | 10 | #4,441 | 6 |
| 1971 | #8,324 | 5 | — | |
| 1970 | #6,362 | 7 | — | |
| 1969 | #7,471 | 5 | #4,404 | 5 |
| 1968 | — | — | ||
| 1967 | — | — | ||
| 1966 | — | — | ||
| 1965 | #6,539 | 5 | — | |
| 1964 | — | — | ||
| 1963 | — | #3,646 | 6 | |
| 1962 | — | — | ||
| 1961 | #5,309 | 7 | — | |
| 1960 | — | — | ||
| 1959 | — | — | ||
| 1958 | — | — | ||
| 1957 | — | — | ||
| 1956 | — | — | ||
| 1955 | — | — | ||
| 1954 | — | — | ||
| 1953 | — | — | ||
| 1952 | — | #3,734 | 5 | |
| 1951 | — | — | ||
| 1950 | — | #3,681 | 5 | |
| 1949 | — | — | ||
| 1948 | — | — | ||
| 1947 | — | — | ||
| 1946 | — | — | ||
| 1945 | — | — | ||
| 1944 | — | — | ||
| 1943 | — | — | ||
| 1942 | — | — | ||
| 1941 | — | — | ||
| 1940 | — | — | ||
| 1939 | — | — | ||
| 1938 | — | — | ||
| 1937 | — | — | ||
| 1936 | — | — | ||
| 1935 | — | — | ||
| 1934 | — | — | ||
| 1933 | — | — | ||
| 1932 | — | — | ||
| 1931 | — | — | ||
| 1930 | — | — | ||
| 1929 | — | — | ||
| 1928 | — | — | ||
| 1927 | — | — | ||
| 1926 | — | — | ||
| 1925 | — | — | ||
| 1924 | — | — | ||
| 1923 | — | — | ||
| 1922 | — | — | ||
| 1921 | — | — | ||
| 1920 | — | — | ||
| 1919 | — | — | ||
| 1918 | — | — | ||
| 1917 | — | — | ||
| 1916 | — | — | ||
| 1915 | — | — | ||
| 1914 | — | — | ||
| 1913 | — | — | ||
| 1912 | — | — | ||
| 1911 | — | — | ||
| 1910 | — | — | ||
| 1909 | — | — | ||
| 1908 | — | — | ||
| 1907 | — | — | ||
| 1906 | — | — | ||
| 1905 | — | — | ||
| 1904 | — | — | ||
| 1903 | — | — | ||
| 1902 | — | — | ||
| 1901 | — | — | ||
| 1900 | — | — | ||
| 1899 | — | — | ||
| 1898 | — | — | ||
| 1897 | — | — | ||
| 1896 | — | — | ||
| 1895 | — | — | ||
| 1894 | — | — | ||
| 1893 | — | — | ||
| 1892 | — | — | ||
| 1891 | — | — | ||
| 1890 | — | — | ||
| 1889 | — | — | ||
| 1888 | — | — | ||
| 1887 | — | — | ||
| 1886 | — | — | ||
| 1885 | — | — | ||
| 1884 | — | — | ||
| 1883 | — | — | ||
| 1882 | — | — | ||
| 1881 | — | — | ||
| 1880 | — | — | ||
The first year at least five girls were named Ainsley! It came in at #5,309, and was given to 7 baby girls.
Quietest stretch: 1962–1969, when fewer than 6 girls a year got the name.
Where Ainsley is popular in 2010
- Rank in state
- Top 10
- 11–50
- 51–100
- 101–500
- 501+
- Not published
Hover or tap a state for its numbers.
- Mississippi#173 · 1 in 687
- Louisiana#182 · 1 in 787
- Iowa#185 · 1 in 715
- Idaho#206 · 1 in 709
- South Dakota#208 · 1 in 604
Best ever in a state: #84 in Vermont, 2020.
Show every state
| State | Rank | Births | Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mississippi | #173 | 16 | 1 in 687 |
| Louisiana | #182 | 25 | 1 in 787 |
| Iowa | #185 | 18 | 1 in 715 |
| Idaho | #206 | 9 | 1 in 709 |
| South Dakota | #208 | 5 | 1 in 604 |
| Tennessee | #208 | 33 | 1 in 889 |
| Arkansas | #209 | 14 | 1 in 810 |
| Minnesota | #209 | 28 | 1 in 867 |
| Colorado | #221 | 26 | 1 in 879 |
| Maine | #226 | 5 | 1 in 770 |
| Missouri | #226 | 28 | 1 in 977 |
| Kansas | #227 | 15 | 1 in 891 |
| Michigan | #237 | 37 | 1 in 1,124 |
| Oklahoma | #242 | 17 | 1 in 995 |
| Pennsylvania | #249 | 45 | 1 in 1,176 |
| Massachusetts | #262 | 22 | 1 in 1,162 |
| South Carolina | #269 | 16 | 1 in 1,105 |
| Connecticut | #277 | 11 | 1 in 1,110 |
| Utah | #279 | 16 | 1 in 1,135 |
| Oregon | #282 | 14 | 1 in 1,077 |
| Arizona | #294 | 24 | 1 in 1,316 |
| Texas | #312 | 105 | 1 in 1,520 |
| Illinois | #316 | 40 | 1 in 1,520 |
| Indiana | #334 | 20 | 1 in 1,516 |
| Virginia | #335 | 24 | 1 in 1,485 |
| Washington | #335 | 21 | 1 in 1,444 |
| Nebraska | #348 | 6 | 1 in 1,314 |
| Ohio | #354 | 29 | 1 in 1,785 |
| Wisconsin | #355 | 15 | 1 in 1,565 |
| North Carolina | #395 | 25 | 1 in 1,798 |
| Florida | #432 | 37 | 1 in 2,151 |
| Alabama | #441 | 10 | 1 in 1,891 |
| Kentucky | #479 | 8 | 1 in 2,294 |
| Maryland | #520 | 10 | 1 in 2,433 |
| Nevada | #549 | 5 | 1 in 2,183 |
| California | #711 | 52 | 1 in 4,058 |
| New York | #823 | 20 | 1 in 4,652 |
| Georgia | #959 | 9 | 1 in 5,330 |
| New Jersey | #1,028 | 6 | 1 in 6,204 |
| Alaska | — | — | — |
| Delaware | — | — | — |
| District of Columbia | — | — | — |
| Hawaii | — | — | — |
| Montana | — | — | — |
| New Hampshire | — | — | — |
| New Mexico | — | — | — |
| North Dakota | — | — | — |
| Rhode Island | — | — | — |
| Vermont | — | — | — |
| West Virginia | — | — | — |
| Wyoming | — | — | — |
Ranks are within each state; “1 in N” is out of the girls born there that year. The SSA only publishes a name in a state when 5 or more babies of one sex got it.
See more about Ainsley
- 221 spots since 2024 (#704 → #483)
- 128 spots since 2020 (#355 → #483)
- 145 spots since 2015 (#338 → #483)
- Biggest jump: 998 spots in 2001 (#1,481 → #483)
- Biggest drop: 143 spots in 2022 (#364 → #507)
- Debuted 1961
- Peaked 2013 at #332 (974 births)
- Births halved by 2024, 11 yrs later
- Top 10: never
- Top 100: never
- Top 1,000: 25 yrs · run 2001–2025
- Highest: 1 in 1,785 girls born in 2014 were named Ainsley (0.06%)
- Latest: 1 in 2,588 girls born in 2025 (0.04%)
- Its best rank, #332 in 2013, was only 1 in 1,802 (0.06%) — a smaller share of a much bigger birth year
- 43.8% of all girls named Ainsley (8,961) were born in this decade
Show by decade
| Decade | Births | Best rank | Avg rank |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1960s | 17 | #5,309 (1961) | #6,440 |
| 1970s | 99 | #4,420 (1979) | #5,909 |
| 1980s | 355 | #1,804 (1989) | #3,137 |
| 1990s | 814 | #1,508 (1998) | #1,839 |
| 2000s | 6,367 | #399 (2004) | #546 |
| 2010s | 8,961 | #332 (2013) | #364 |
| 2020s | 3,857 | #355 (2020) | #502 |
All figures count published births only (names given to at least 5 girls in a year). Registrations before 1937 are incomplete, so early shares and totals run low.
Ainsley in 2010
Top girls' names in 2010
Top boys' names in 2010
More about 2010
girls
1,777,595 girls got a published name in 2010; 1 in 1,980 of them was named Ainsley, which outranked 98.2% of the 19,841 girls' names that year. The ten most popular names covered 8.9% of girls (24.6% in 1880, 7.0% in 2025).
Among names in the top 1,000 of either year.
boys
1,918,676 boys got a published name in 2010; 1 in 383,735 of them was named Ainsley, which outranked 14.3% of the 14,270 boys' names that year. The ten most popular names covered 9.0% of boys (44.2% in 1880, 8.0% in 2025).