Douglas
Last seen for girls in 2004 at #14,179 · #807 for boys in 2025, 308 births
Given to boys 99.6% of the time
- Peak · boys
- 1942 · 11,233 births
- Debut · boys
- 29 births
- In top 100 · boys
- 61 yrsof 146 years
- Total births · boys
- 560,013since 1880
Douglas over time
Rank among boys' names. Click any year to open it.
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 | — | #807 | 308 | |
| 2024 | — | #848 | 286 | |
| 2023 | — | #743 | 354 | |
| 2022 | — | #827 | 300 | |
| 2021 | — | #737 | 347 | |
| 2020 | — | #737 | 334 | |
| 2019 | — | #684 | 374 | |
| 2018 | — | #673 | 373 | |
| 2017 | — | #629 | 413 | |
| 2016 | — | #603 | 447 | |
| 2015 | — | #615 | 437 | |
| 2014 | — | #598 | 458 | |
| 2013 | — | #541 | 492 | |
| 2012 | — | #570 | 452 | |
| 2011 | — | #513 | 505 | |
| 2010 | — | #485 | 536 | |
| 2009 | — | #462 | 589 | |
| 2008 | — | #424 | 687 | |
| 2007 | — | #394 | 757 | |
| 2006 | — | #361 | 824 | |
| 2005 | — | #359 | 822 | |
| 2004 | #14,179 | 6 | #353 | 799 |
| 2003 | — | #307 | 976 | |
| 2002 | — | #305 | 953 | |
| 2001 | — | #282 | 1,081 | |
| 2000 | — | #274 | 1,173 | |
| 1999 | — | #247 | 1,290 | |
| 1998 | — | #227 | 1,403 | |
| 1997 | — | #201 | 1,586 | |
| 1996 | #13,518 | 5 | #181 | 1,793 |
| 1995 | — | #168 | 1,947 | |
| 1994 | #13,430 | 5 | #156 | 2,162 |
| 1993 | #7,038 | 12 | #139 | 2,461 |
| 1992 | #13,317 | 5 | #127 | 2,630 |
| 1991 | #7,987 | 10 | #109 | 3,156 |
| 1990 | #6,465 | 13 | #103 | 3,544 |
| 1989 | #5,049 | 17 | #92 | 3,700 |
| 1988 | #3,165 | 31 | #88 | 3,655 |
| 1987 | #3,624 | 24 | #85 | 3,804 |
| 1986 | #4,724 | 16 | #82 | 3,763 |
| 1985 | #2,704 | 35 | #76 | 4,021 |
| 1984 | #2,677 | 34 | #71 | 4,142 |
| 1983 | #2,783 | 31 | #69 | 4,182 |
| 1982 | #3,172 | 27 | #68 | 4,511 |
| 1981 | #2,657 | 34 | #64 | 4,788 |
| 1980 | #3,002 | 29 | #62 | 5,180 |
| 1979 | #2,931 | 29 | #58 | 5,167 |
| 1978 | #2,741 | 30 | #59 | 5,151 |
| 1977 | #2,715 | 30 | #59 | 5,297 |
| 1976 | #3,095 | 23 | #56 | 5,224 |
| 1975 | #2,456 | 32 | #55 | 5,345 |
| 1974 | #3,110 | 22 | #53 | 5,843 |
| 1973 | #2,753 | 25 | #47 | 6,595 |
| 1972 | #2,022 | 39 | #43 | 7,387 |
| 1971 | #1,966 | 43 | #39 | 8,737 |
| 1970 | #1,952 | 43 | #36 | 10,409 |
| 1969 | #1,955 | 41 | #34 | 11,237 |
| 1968 | #1,708 | 47 | #33 | 11,405 |
| 1967 | #1,537 | 53 | #33 | 11,434 |
| 1966 | #1,669 | 45 | #33 | 11,401 |
| 1965 | #1,575 | 50 | #32 | 12,787 |
| 1964 | #2,040 | 34 | #31 | 14,600 |
| 1963 | #2,172 | 30 | #28 | 15,086 |
| 1962 | #1,782 | 41 | #27 | 15,928 |
| 1961 | #1,598 | 50 | #28 | 15,978 |
| 1960 | #1,982 | 33 | #30 | 15,133 |
| 1959 | #1,478 | 53 | #30 | 15,290 |
| 1958 | #2,209 | 26 | #30 | 15,798 |
| 1957 | #1,842 | 35 | #30 | 16,730 |
| 1956 | #1,897 | 32 | #29 | 16,389 |
| 1955 | #1,978 | 29 | #29 | 15,311 |
| 1954 | #2,450 | 20 | #29 | 14,703 |
| 1953 | #2,173 | 23 | #27 | 14,138 |
| 1952 | #2,074 | 24 | #28 | 13,680 |
| 1951 | #1,740 | 31 | #27 | 13,902 |
| 1950 | #1,911 | 25 | #28 | 12,264 |
| 1949 | #2,212 | 20 | #29 | 11,322 |
| 1948 | #1,520 | 37 | #33 | 9,468 |
| 1947 | #2,354 | 18 | #31 | 9,895 |
| 1946 | #2,094 | 20 | #34 | 8,336 |
| 1945 | #1,825 | 21 | #29 | 7,394 |
| 1944 | #1,742 | 23 | #34 | 6,998 |
| 1943 | #1,591 | 28 | #28 | 8,236 |
| 1942 | #1,300 | 38 | #23 | 11,233 |
| 1941 | #2,018 | 17 | #53 | 4,146 |
| 1940 | #1,900 | 18 | #56 | 3,732 |
| 1939 | #2,922 | 9 | #58 | 3,564 |
| 1938 | #2,021 | 16 | #60 | 3,508 |
| 1937 | #3,146 | 8 | #74 | 2,610 |
| 1936 | #2,263 | 13 | #78 | 2,374 |
| 1935 | #2,006 | 16 | #75 | 2,529 |
| 1934 | #2,003 | 16 | #72 | 2,541 |
| 1933 | #2,161 | 14 | #81 | 2,252 |
| 1932 | #2,235 | 14 | #85 | 2,284 |
| 1931 | #1,803 | 19 | #85 | 2,203 |
| 1930 | #1,499 | 27 | #89 | 2,166 |
| 1929 | #1,704 | 22 | #97 | 1,965 |
| 1928 | #1,897 | 20 | #102 | 1,912 |
| 1927 | #2,339 | 15 | #104 | 1,821 |
| 1926 | #2,165 | 17 | #102 | 1,778 |
| 1925 | #1,795 | 23 | #103 | 1,677 |
| 1924 | #1,770 | 24 | #105 | 1,676 |
| 1923 | #2,091 | 18 | #108 | 1,613 |
| 1922 | #3,379 | 9 | #106 | 1,636 |
| 1921 | #2,282 | 16 | #111 | 1,566 |
| 1920 | #1,889 | 21 | #106 | 1,657 |
| 1919 | #1,604 | 25 | #121 | 1,328 |
| 1918 | #2,376 | 14 | #115 | 1,432 |
| 1917 | #1,847 | 19 | #138 | 981 |
| 1916 | #2,133 | 15 | #151 | 815 |
| 1915 | #2,255 | 13 | #158 | 734 |
| 1914 | #2,265 | 10 | #175 | 502 |
| 1913 | #2,164 | 9 | #163 | 428 |
| 1912 | #1,981 | 9 | #165 | 350 |
| 1911 | — | #181 | 169 | |
| 1910 | — | #172 | 169 | |
| 1909 | — | #181 | 126 | |
| 1908 | #2,101 | 5 | #190 | 111 |
| 1907 | — | #197 | 99 | |
| 1906 | — | #183 | 99 | |
| 1905 | — | #205 | 85 | |
| 1904 | #1,877 | 5 | #237 | 64 |
| 1903 | — | #168 | 100 | |
| 1902 | — | #204 | 76 | |
| 1901 | — | #176 | 83 | |
| 1900 | — | #189 | 107 | |
| 1899 | — | #187 | 73 | |
| 1898 | — | #207 | 71 | |
| 1897 | — | #222 | 58 | |
| 1896 | — | #209 | 72 | |
| 1895 | — | #223 | 61 | |
| 1894 | — | #207 | 66 | |
| 1893 | — | #226 | 56 | |
| 1892 | — | #235 | 57 | |
| 1891 | — | #283 | 33 | |
| 1890 | — | #279 | 38 | |
| 1889 | — | #266 | 39 | |
| 1888 | — | #245 | 50 | |
| 1887 | — | #276 | 34 | |
| 1886 | — | #288 | 35 | |
| 1885 | — | #307 | 30 | |
| 1884 | — | #288 | 36 | |
| 1883 | — | #284 | 33 | |
| 1882 | — | #307 | 32 | |
| 1881 | — | #431 | 16 | |
| 1880 | — | #314 | 29 | |
In the first year the SSA published name data, Douglas was already there! It came in at #314, and was given to 29 baby boys.
Quietest stretch: 1881, when fewer than 17 boys a year got the name.
Where Douglas is popular in 1921
- Rank in state
- Top 10
- 11–50
- 51–100
- 101–500
- 501+
- Not published
Hover or tap a state for its numbers.
- Utah#36 · 1 in 143
- Washington#64 · 1 in 281
- Minnesota#72 · 1 in 319
- Michigan#77 · 1 in 399
- Wyoming#78 · 1 in 335
Best ever in a state: #10 in South Dakota, 1951.
Show every state
| State | Rank | Births | Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| Utah | #36 | 35 | 1 in 143 |
| Washington | #64 | 36 | 1 in 281 |
| Minnesota | #72 | 69 | 1 in 319 |
| Michigan | #77 | 89 | 1 in 399 |
| California | #78 | 66 | 1 in 432 |
| Wyoming | #78 | 5 | 1 in 335 |
| Connecticut | #81 | 24 | 1 in 534 |
| District of Columbia | #83 | 6 | 1 in 517 |
| Virginia | #84 | 57 | 1 in 432 |
| Florida | #86 | 24 | 1 in 420 |
| New Hampshire | #86 | 7 | 1 in 483 |
| Massachusetts | #87 | 58 | 1 in 589 |
| Texas | #91 | 119 | 1 in 440 |
| Wisconsin | #93 | 53 | 1 in 453 |
| Tennessee | #94 | 44 | 1 in 562 |
| Maine | #95 | 15 | 1 in 417 |
| South Dakota | #95 | 15 | 1 in 426 |
| Louisiana | #96 | 43 | 1 in 442 |
| Vermont | #96 | 6 | 1 in 416 |
| Idaho | #98 | 11 | 1 in 379 |
| New York | #98 | 140 | 1 in 661 |
| Montana | #101 | 9 | 1 in 514 |
| South Carolina | #101 | 37 | 1 in 549 |
| Kentucky | #102 | 45 | 1 in 585 |
| North Dakota | #105 | 15 | 1 in 443 |
| New Jersey | #106 | 37 | 1 in 803 |
| Maryland | #111 | 17 | 1 in 790 |
| Georgia | #112 | 46 | 1 in 678 |
| Colorado | #114 | 15 | 1 in 586 |
| Oklahoma | #117 | 41 | 1 in 560 |
| West Virginia | #122 | 24 | 1 in 701 |
| Alabama | #126 | 37 | 1 in 705 |
| North Carolina | #132 | 43 | 1 in 774 |
| Nebraska | #133 | 16 | 1 in 770 |
| Arkansas | #135 | 25 | 1 in 715 |
| Mississippi | #140 | 24 | 1 in 776 |
| Oregon | #145 | 7 | 1 in 858 |
| Kansas | #149 | 17 | 1 in 963 |
| Ohio | #153 | 41 | 1 in 1,271 |
| Pennsylvania | #172 | 46 | 1 in 1,936 |
| Iowa | #182 | 16 | 1 in 1,363 |
| Illinois | #183 | 39 | 1 in 1,440 |
| Indiana | #207 | 13 | 1 in 1,977 |
| Missouri | #224 | 16 | 1 in 1,835 |
| Alaska | — | — | — |
| Arizona | — | — | — |
| Delaware | — | — | — |
| Hawaii | — | — | — |
| Nevada | — | — | — |
| New Mexico | — | — | — |
| Rhode Island | — | — | — |
Ranks are within each state; “1 in N” is out of the boys 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 Douglas
- 41 spots since 2024 (#848 → #807)
- 70 spots since 2020 (#737 → #807)
- 192 spots since 2015 (#615 → #807)
- Biggest jump: 124 spots in 1882 (#431 → #307)
- Biggest drop: 117 spots in 1881 (#314 → #431)
- Debuted 1880
- Peaked 1942 at #23 (11,233 births)
- Births halved by 1975, 33 yrs later
- Top 10: never
- Top 100: 61 yrs · run 1929–1989
- Top 1,000: 146 yrs · run 1880–2025
- Highest: 1 in 123 boys born in 1942 were named Douglas (0.81%)
- Latest: 1 in 5,546 boys born in 2025 (0.02%)
- 26.5% of all boys named Douglas (148,205) were born in this decade
Show by decade
| Decade | Births | Best rank | Avg rank |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1880s | 334 | #245 (1888) | #301 |
| 1890s | 585 | #187 (1899) | #228 |
| 1900s | 950 | #168 (1903) | #193 |
| 1910s | 6,908 | #115 (1918) | #154 |
| 1920s | 17,301 | #97 (1929) | #104 |
| 1930s | 26,031 | #58 (1939) | #76 |
| 1940s | 80,760 | #23 (1942) | #35 |
| 1950s | 148,205 | #27 (1953) | #29 |
| 1960s | 134,989 | #27 (1962) | #31 |
| 1970s | 65,155 | #36 (1970) | #51 |
| 1980s | 41,746 | #62 (1980) | #76 |
| 1990s | 21,972 | #103 (1990) | #166 |
| 2000s | 8,661 | #274 (2000) | #352 |
| 2010s | 4,487 | #485 (2010) | #591 |
| 2020s | 1,929 | #737 (2021) | #783 |
All figures count published births only (names given to at least 5 boys in a year). Registrations before 1937 are incomplete, so early shares and totals run low.
Douglas in 1921
Top girls' names in 1921
Top boys' names in 1921
More about 1921
girls
1,233,058 girls got a published name in 1921; 1 in 77,066 of them was named Douglas, which outranked 61.1% of the 5,871 girls' names that year. The ten most popular names covered 23.4% of girls (24.6% in 1880, 7.0% in 2025).
- #2,195Virdie17
- #2,195Wilberta17
- #2,195Wynell17
- #2,282Douglas16
- #2,282Aili16
- #2,282Akiko16
- #2,282Albena16
- #2,378Adrianna15
- #2,378Algie15
- #2,378Arabella15
Tied with 95 names at #2,282; 3 shown. Tied names share a rank, as in SSA's lists.
Among names in the top 1,000 of either year.
boys
1,101,449 boys got a published name in 1921; 1 in 703 of them was named Douglas, which outranked 97.8% of the 4,985 boys' names that year. The ten most popular names covered 31.7% of boys (44.2% in 1880, 8.0% in 2025).
Among names in the top 1,000 of either year.