Beverley
#8,362 for girls in 2025, 12 births · Last seen for boys in 1963 at #3,646
Given to girls 97.0% of the time
- Peak · girls
- 1938 · 407 births
- Debut · girls
- 6 births
- In top 100 · girls
- neverof 146 years
- Total births · girls
- 13,062since 1912
Beverley over time
Rank among girls' names. Beverley 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 | #8,362 | 12 | — | |
| 2024 | #12,161 | 7 | — | |
| 2023 | #8,055 | 13 | — | |
| 2022 | #8,542 | 12 | — | |
| 2021 | #11,146 | 8 | — | |
| 2020 | #12,142 | 7 | — | |
| 2019 | #10,473 | 9 | — | |
| 2018 | #9,806 | 10 | — | |
| 2017 | #11,615 | 8 | — | |
| 2016 | #12,876 | 7 | — | |
| 2015 | #16,419 | 5 | — | |
| 2014 | #16,513 | 5 | — | |
| 2013 | #10,235 | 10 | — | |
| 2012 | #16,869 | 5 | — | |
| 2011 | — | — | ||
| 2010 | — | — | ||
| 2009 | #17,294 | 5 | — | |
| 2008 | #17,504 | 5 | — | |
| 2007 | — | — | ||
| 2006 | #12,420 | 8 | — | |
| 2005 | #14,502 | 6 | — | |
| 2004 | #16,099 | 5 | — | |
| 2003 | #11,325 | 8 | — | |
| 2002 | — | — | ||
| 2001 | — | — | ||
| 2000 | #15,031 | 5 | — | |
| 1999 | #14,411 | 5 | — | |
| 1998 | #12,426 | 6 | — | |
| 1997 | #12,070 | 6 | — | |
| 1996 | #10,567 | 7 | — | |
| 1995 | #10,514 | 7 | — | |
| 1994 | #10,569 | 7 | — | |
| 1993 | #10,588 | 7 | — | |
| 1992 | #7,512 | 11 | — | |
| 1991 | #5,659 | 16 | — | |
| 1990 | #4,694 | 20 | — | |
| 1989 | #7,449 | 10 | — | |
| 1988 | #7,691 | 9 | — | |
| 1987 | #7,987 | 8 | — | |
| 1986 | #6,612 | 10 | — | |
| 1985 | #5,678 | 12 | — | |
| 1984 | #5,539 | 12 | — | |
| 1983 | #6,212 | 10 | — | |
| 1982 | #6,371 | 10 | — | |
| 1981 | #4,963 | 14 | — | |
| 1980 | #5,245 | 13 | — | |
| 1979 | #5,092 | 13 | — | |
| 1978 | #4,242 | 16 | — | |
| 1977 | #3,486 | 21 | — | |
| 1976 | #3,002 | 24 | — | |
| 1975 | #3,259 | 21 | — | |
| 1974 | #2,757 | 26 | — | |
| 1973 | #2,349 | 32 | — | |
| 1972 | #1,946 | 42 | — | |
| 1971 | #2,064 | 40 | — | |
| 1970 | #2,081 | 39 | — | |
| 1969 | #1,546 | 59 | — | |
| 1968 | #1,406 | 64 | — | |
| 1967 | #1,360 | 65 | — | |
| 1966 | #1,312 | 68 | — | |
| 1965 | #1,252 | 74 | — | |
| 1964 | #955 | 121 | — | |
| 1963 | #1,052 | 104 | #3,646 | 6 |
| 1962 | #925 | 131 | #4,033 | 5 |
| 1961 | #916 | 139 | #4,065 | 5 |
| 1960 | #782 | 171 | — | |
| 1959 | #789 | 167 | — | |
| 1958 | #686 | 206 | — | |
| 1957 | #638 | 236 | — | |
| 1956 | #630 | 231 | — | |
| 1955 | #599 | 237 | — | |
| 1954 | #557 | 253 | — | |
| 1953 | #554 | 249 | — | |
| 1952 | #539 | 251 | #3,373 | 6 |
| 1951 | #492 | 277 | #3,714 | 5 |
| 1950 | #482 | 283 | — | |
| 1949 | #498 | 265 | #3,019 | 7 |
| 1948 | #452 | 313 | #3,668 | 5 |
| 1947 | #421 | 373 | #2,356 | 11 |
| 1946 | #412 | 352 | #2,919 | 7 |
| 1945 | #420 | 286 | — | |
| 1944 | #364 | 367 | — | |
| 1943 | #363 | 394 | #2,074 | 13 |
| 1942 | #360 | 377 | #2,712 | 8 |
| 1941 | #355 | 348 | #3,505 | 5 |
| 1940 | #343 | 350 | #2,478 | 9 |
| 1939 | #344 | 341 | #2,609 | 8 |
| 1938 | #309 | 407 | #2,868 | 7 |
| 1937 | #322 | 371 | #2,680 | 8 |
| 1936 | #317 | 370 | #3,147 | 6 |
| 1935 | #341 | 350 | #2,246 | 11 |
| 1934 | #341 | 347 | #1,932 | 14 |
| 1933 | #356 | 310 | #2,542 | 9 |
| 1932 | #345 | 337 | #2,638 | 9 |
| 1931 | #361 | 318 | #2,101 | 13 |
| 1930 | #350 | 360 | #2,293 | 12 |
| 1929 | #378 | 315 | #2,589 | 10 |
| 1928 | #378 | 321 | #2,162 | 14 |
| 1927 | #418 | 272 | #2,121 | 15 |
| 1926 | #448 | 227 | #2,186 | 14 |
| 1925 | #516 | 187 | #2,755 | 10 |
| 1924 | #619 | 147 | #2,132 | 15 |
| 1923 | #642 | 131 | #2,224 | 14 |
| 1922 | #734 | 98 | #2,040 | 16 |
| 1921 | #757 | 93 | #2,376 | 13 |
| 1920 | #850 | 72 | #2,336 | 13 |
| 1919 | #925 | 58 | #2,665 | 10 |
| 1918 | #879 | 66 | #2,543 | 11 |
| 1917 | #1,013 | 48 | #2,091 | 14 |
| 1916 | #1,380 | 28 | #2,389 | 11 |
| 1915 | #1,439 | 25 | #2,070 | 13 |
| 1914 | #3,188 | 6 | #1,772 | 13 |
| 1913 | #2,827 | 6 | #2,821 | 5 |
| 1912 | #2,634 | 6 | #2,045 | 7 |
| 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 Beverley! It came in at #2,634, and was given to 6 baby girls.
Quietest stretch: 1999–2002, when fewer than 6 girls a year got the name.
Where Beverley is popular in 1936
- Rank in state
- Top 10
- 11–50
- 51–100
- 101–500
- 501+
- Not published
Hover or tap a state for its numbers.
- Idaho#144 · 1 in 628
- Montana#155 · 1 in 780
- Washington#161 · 1 in 942
- Connecticut#163 · 1 in 1,154
- California#172 · 1 in 856
Best ever in a state: #61 in Vermont, 1933.
Show every state
| State | Rank | Births | Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| Idaho | #144 | 6 | 1 in 628 |
| Montana | #155 | 5 | 1 in 780 |
| Washington | #161 | 10 | 1 in 942 |
| Connecticut | #163 | 8 | 1 in 1,154 |
| California | #172 | 43 | 1 in 856 |
| Nebraska | #180 | 8 | 1 in 1,222 |
| Maine | #181 | 6 | 1 in 1,031 |
| Iowa | #182 | 14 | 1 in 1,327 |
| South Dakota | #184 | 5 | 1 in 1,021 |
| Michigan | #186 | 27 | 1 in 1,436 |
| Minnesota | #191 | 14 | 1 in 1,420 |
| Ohio | #200 | 30 | 1 in 1,563 |
| Massachusetts | #215 | 11 | 1 in 2,476 |
| Indiana | #221 | 12 | 1 in 1,932 |
| Virginia | #223 | 14 | 1 in 1,624 |
| Colorado | #227 | 6 | 1 in 1,319 |
| New Jersey | #227 | 11 | 1 in 2,137 |
| Wisconsin | #249 | 9 | 1 in 2,525 |
| Maryland | #251 | 5 | 1 in 2,223 |
| Illinois | #258 | 21 | 1 in 2,407 |
| Kansas | #271 | 6 | 1 in 2,073 |
| New York | #322 | 22 | 1 in 3,723 |
| West Virginia | #337 | 6 | 1 in 3,061 |
| Pennsylvania | #378 | 13 | 1 in 5,465 |
| Oklahoma | #440 | 5 | 1 in 3,994 |
| Alabama | #474 | 5 | 1 in 5,670 |
| Texas | #731 | 7 | 1 in 7,842 |
| Alaska | — | — | — |
| Arizona | — | — | — |
| Arkansas | — | — | — |
| Delaware | — | — | — |
| District of Columbia | — | — | — |
| Florida | — | — | — |
| Georgia | — | — | — |
| Hawaii | — | — | — |
| Kentucky | — | — | — |
| Louisiana | — | — | — |
| Mississippi | — | — | — |
| Missouri | — | — | — |
| Nevada | — | — | — |
| New Hampshire | — | — | — |
| New Mexico | — | — | — |
| North Carolina | — | — | — |
| North Dakota | — | — | — |
| Oregon | — | — | — |
| Rhode Island | — | — | — |
| South Carolina | — | — | — |
| Tennessee | — | — | — |
| Utah | — | — | — |
| Vermont | — | — | — |
| 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 Beverley
- 3,799 spots since 2024 (#12,161 → #8,362)
- 3,780 spots since 2020 (#12,142 → #8,362)
- 8,057 spots since 2015 (#16,419 → #8,362)
- Biggest jump: 134 spots in 1918 (#1,013 → #879)
- Biggest drop: 297 spots in 1965 (#955 → #1,252)
- Debuted 1912
- Peaked 1938 at #309 (407 births)
- Births halved by 1959, 21 yrs later
- Top 10: never
- Top 100: never
- Top 1,000: 46 yrs · run 1918–1962
- Highest: 1 in 2,711 girls born in 1938 were named Beverley (0.04%)
- Latest: 1 in 133,939 girls born in 2025 (0.00%)
- 26.9% of all girls named Beverley (3,511) were born in this decade
Show by decade
| Decade | Births | Best rank | Avg rank |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1910s | 243 | #879 (1918) | #1,786 |
| 1920s | 1,863 | #378 (1928) | #574 |
| 1930s | 3,511 | #309 (1938) | #339 |
| 1940s | 3,425 | #343 (1940) | #399 |
| 1950s | 2,390 | #482 (1950) | #597 |
| 1960s | 996 | #782 (1960) | #1,151 |
| 1970s | 274 | #1,946 (1972) | #3,028 |
| 1980s | 108 | #4,963 (1981) | #6,375 |
| 1990s | 92 | #4,694 (1990) | #9,901 |
| 2000s | 42 | #11,325 (2003) | #14,882 |
| 2010s | 59 | #9,806 (2018) | #13,101 |
| 2020s | 59 | #8,055 (2023) | #10,068 |
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.
Beverley in 1936
Top girls' names in 1936
Top boys' names in 1936
More about 1936
girls
1,040,390 girls got a published name in 1936; 1 in 2,812 of them was named Beverley, which outranked 93.5% of the 4,856 girls' names that year. The ten most popular names covered 24.2% of girls (24.6% in 1880, 7.0% in 2025).
- #312Rhoda376
- #315Earline373
- #315Lenore373
- #317Beverley370
- #317Polly370
- #317Ruthie370
- #317Sybil370
- #321Lottie369
- #322Dorothea368
- #323Marlys367
Tied names share a rank, as in SSA's lists.
- ↓ 1,028Norita#713 → #1,741
- ↓ 506Vernetta#974 → #1,480
- ↓ 461Ozella#984 → #1,445
- ↓ 400Shirleyann#896 → #1,296
- ↓ 342Idell#925 → #1,267
Among names in the top 1,000 of either year.
boys
1,037,205 boys got a published name in 1936; 1 in 172,868 of them was named Beverley, which outranked 22.0% of the 4,037 boys' names that year. The ten most popular names covered 33.3% of boys (44.2% in 1880, 8.0% in 2025).
- #2,854Wood7
- #2,854Woodford7
- #2,854Zenas7
- #3,147Beverley6
- #3,147Abelino6
- #3,147Acey6
- #3,147Adair6
- #3,549Abdon5
- #3,549Adger5
- #3,549Adlai5
Tied with 401 names at #3,147; 3 shown. Tied names share a rank, as in SSA's lists.
Among names in the top 1,000 of either year.