Amal
- #1,241 for girls in 2025, 181 births
- #5,608 for boys in 2025, 16 births
- Given to girls 91.8% of the time
Showing
- Peak · girls
- 2021 · 241 births
- Debut · girls
- 6 births
- In top 100 · girls
- neverof 146 years
- Total births · girls
- 4,141since 1962
Amal over time
girlsboys
Rank within each sex, plotted together. Click any year to open it.
Hover or use arrow keys to read values by year; click or press Enter to open that year.
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 | #1,241 | 181 | #5,608 | 16 |
| 2024 | #1,223 | 192 | #7,765 | 10 |
| 2023 | #1,195 | 201 | #7,289 | 11 |
| 2022 | #1,206 | 200 | #5,874 | 15 |
| 2021 | #1,045 | 241 | #10,799 | 6 |
| 2020 | #1,120 | 215 | #7,502 | 10 |
| 2019 | #1,287 | 179 | #8,889 | 8 |
| 2018 | #1,262 | 183 | #9,670 | 7 |
| 2017 | #1,340 | 173 | #8,140 | 9 |
| 2016 | #1,614 | 136 | #8,816 | 8 |
| 2015 | #1,778 | 117 | #6,324 | 13 |
| 2014 | #2,176 | 87 | #12,108 | 5 |
| 2013 | #2,568 | 69 | #8,118 | 9 |
| 2012 | #2,286 | 82 | — | |
| 2011 | #2,763 | 63 | #8,767 | 8 |
| 2010 | #3,123 | 53 | — | |
| 2009 | #2,779 | 64 | #12,491 | 5 |
| 2008 | #2,630 | 70 | #7,698 | 10 |
| 2007 | #2,293 | 84 | #6,622 | 12 |
| 2006 | #2,887 | 60 | #7,998 | 9 |
| 2005 | #2,524 | 68 | #11,472 | 5 |
| 2004 | #2,370 | 72 | #5,492 | 14 |
| 2003 | #1,947 | 93 | #5,877 | 12 |
| 2002 | #2,605 | 59 | #4,703 | 16 |
| 2001 | #1,819 | 97 | #6,935 | 9 |
| 2000 | #2,213 | 71 | #7,416 | 8 |
| 1999 | #2,471 | 58 | #5,317 | 12 |
| 1998 | #2,221 | 64 | #4,873 | 13 |
| 1997 | #2,450 | 53 | #5,642 | 10 |
| 1996 | #2,207 | 61 | #5,982 | 9 |
| 1995 | #2,309 | 57 | #8,868 | 5 |
| 1994 | #2,701 | 45 | #6,968 | 7 |
| 1993 | #2,825 | 42 | #5,771 | 9 |
| 1992 | #2,239 | 59 | #6,670 | 7 |
| 1991 | #2,843 | 41 | #8,236 | 5 |
| 1990 | #2,571 | 46 | #7,178 | 6 |
| 1989 | #2,478 | 46 | #5,165 | 9 |
| 1988 | #2,803 | 37 | #6,426 | 6 |
| 1987 | #2,657 | 37 | — | |
| 1986 | #2,724 | 35 | #5,926 | 6 |
| 1985 | #3,419 | 25 | #6,523 | 5 |
| 1984 | #2,992 | 29 | — | |
| 1983 | #4,476 | 16 | #4,499 | 8 |
| 1982 | #3,172 | 27 | — | |
| 1981 | #2,847 | 31 | #5,468 | 6 |
| 1980 | #3,506 | 23 | — | |
| 1979 | #3,078 | 27 | — | |
| 1978 | #4,242 | 16 | #4,554 | 7 |
| 1977 | #3,176 | 24 | — | |
| 1976 | #3,963 | 16 | — | |
| 1975 | #3,637 | 18 | — | |
| 1974 | #3,863 | 16 | — | |
| 1973 | #5,191 | 10 | — | |
| 1972 | #4,091 | 14 | — | |
| 1971 | #6,619 | 7 | — | |
| 1970 | #3,872 | 15 | #3,836 | 7 |
| 1969 | #5,057 | 9 | — | |
| 1968 | #5,642 | 7 | — | |
| 1967 | #4,982 | 8 | — | |
| 1966 | — | — | ||
| 1965 | #5,817 | 6 | — | |
| 1964 | — | — | ||
| 1963 | — | — | ||
| 1962 | #5,860 | 6 | — | |
| 1961 | — | — | ||
| 1960 | — | — | ||
| 1959 | — | — | ||
| 1958 | — | — | ||
| 1957 | — | — | ||
| 1956 | — | — | ||
| 1955 | — | — | ||
| 1954 | — | — | ||
| 1953 | — | — | ||
| 1952 | — | — | ||
| 1951 | — | — | ||
| 1950 | — | — | ||
| 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 | — | — | ||
First appearance
1962
The first year at least five girls were named Amal! It came in at #5,860, and was given to 6 baby girls.
Quietest stretch: 1963–1964, when fewer than 5 girls a year got the name.
Where Amal is popular in 2025
- Rank in state
- Top 10
- 11–50
- 51–100
- 101–500
- 501+
- Not published
Hover or tap a state for its numbers.
Top states · girls
- Minnesota#459 · 1 in 1,953
- New York#585 · 1 in 2,797
- New Jersey#618 · 1 in 2,958
- Michigan#638 · 1 in 2,978
- Virginia#758 · 1 in 3,749
Best ever in a state: #375 in Minnesota, 2001.
Show every state
| State | Rank | Births | Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| Minnesota | #459 | 11 | 1 in 1,953 |
| New York | #585 | 28 | 1 in 2,797 |
| New Jersey | #618 | 12 | 1 in 2,958 |
| Michigan | #638 | 12 | 1 in 2,978 |
| Virginia | #758 | 9 | 1 in 3,749 |
| Maryland | #840 | 5 | 1 in 3,997 |
| Illinois | #927 | 9 | 1 in 4,925 |
| Pennsylvania | #1,015 | 8 | 1 in 5,836 |
| Texas | #1,117 | 24 | 1 in 6,689 |
| Ohio | #1,271 | 6 | 1 in 7,878 |
| California | #1,575 | 14 | 1 in 11,552 |
| Florida | #1,685 | 7 | 1 in 12,395 |
| Alabama | — | — | — |
| Alaska | — | — | — |
| Arizona | — | — | — |
| Arkansas | — | — | — |
| Colorado | — | — | — |
| Connecticut | — | — | — |
| Delaware | — | — | — |
| District of Columbia | — | — | — |
| Georgia | — | — | — |
| Hawaii | — | — | — |
| Idaho | — | — | — |
| Indiana | — | — | — |
| Iowa | — | — | — |
| Kansas | — | — | — |
| Kentucky | — | — | — |
| Louisiana | — | — | — |
| Maine | — | — | — |
| Massachusetts | — | — | — |
| Mississippi | — | — | — |
| Missouri | — | — | — |
| Montana | — | — | — |
| Nebraska | — | — | — |
| Nevada | — | — | — |
| New Hampshire | — | — | — |
| New Mexico | — | — | — |
| North Carolina | — | — | — |
| North Dakota | — | — | — |
| Oklahoma | — | — | — |
| Oregon | — | — | — |
| Rhode Island | — | — | — |
| South Carolina | — | — | — |
| South Dakota | — | — | — |
| Tennessee | — | — | — |
| Utah | — | — | — |
| Vermont | — | — | — |
| Washington | — | — | — |
| West Virginia | — | — | — |
| Wisconsin | — | — | — |
| 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 Amal
Momentum · girls
Holding steady
- 121 spots since 2020 (#1,120 → #1,241)
- 537 spots since 2015 (#1,778 → #1,241)
Rise & fade · girls
59 yrs to peak
- Debuted 1962
- Peaked 2021 at #1,045 (241 births)
- Not yet halved from its peak
Top of the charts · girls
Never in the top 1,000
- Top 10: never
- Top 100: never
- Top 1,000: never
Share of babies · girls
1 in 6,809
- Highest: 1 in 6,809 girls born in 2021 were named Amal (0.01%)
- Latest: 1 in 8,880 girls born in 2025 (0.01%)
Era · girls
The 2020s
- 29.7% of all girls named Amal (1,230) were born in this decade
Girls or boys?
Never flipped
- The majority has never changed
Show by decade
| Decade | Births | Best rank | Avg rank |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1960s | 36 | #4,982 (1967) | #5,472 |
| 1970s | 163 | #3,078 (1979) | #4,173 |
| 1980s | 306 | #2,478 (1989) | #3,107 |
| 1990s | 526 | #2,207 (1996) | #2,484 |
| 2000s | 738 | #1,819 (2001) | #2,407 |
| 2010s | 1,142 | #1,262 (2018) | #2,020 |
| 2020s | 1,230 | #1,045 (2021) | #1,172 |
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.
Want to check a specific year?
See where Amal ranked and which names it was up against. Click a point on the chart, or pick a year: