Ethel
#4,172 for girls in 2025, 34 births · Last seen for boys in 1968 at #4,136
Given to girls 99.5% of the time
- Peak · girls
- 1896 · 3,502 births
- Debut · girls
- 633 births
- In top 100 · girls
- 60 yrsof 146 years
- Total births · girls
- 278,922since 1880
Ethel over time
Rank among girls' 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 | #4,172 | 34 | — | |
| 2024 | #4,893 | 27 | — | |
| 2023 | #5,390 | 23 | — | |
| 2022 | #4,793 | 28 | — | |
| 2021 | #4,833 | 27 | — | |
| 2020 | #4,880 | 26 | — | |
| 2019 | #5,449 | 23 | — | |
| 2018 | #4,357 | 32 | — | |
| 2017 | #4,811 | 28 | — | |
| 2016 | #5,284 | 25 | — | |
| 2015 | #8,931 | 12 | — | |
| 2014 | #5,993 | 21 | — | |
| 2013 | #8,135 | 14 | — | |
| 2012 | #7,804 | 15 | — | |
| 2011 | #8,196 | 14 | — | |
| 2010 | #8,271 | 14 | — | |
| 2009 | #8,058 | 15 | — | |
| 2008 | #8,965 | 13 | — | |
| 2007 | #7,394 | 17 | — | |
| 2006 | #8,715 | 13 | — | |
| 2005 | #5,999 | 20 | — | |
| 2004 | #5,377 | 23 | — | |
| 2003 | #5,092 | 24 | — | |
| 2002 | #4,280 | 29 | — | |
| 2001 | #5,822 | 19 | — | |
| 2000 | #7,158 | 14 | — | |
| 1999 | #4,718 | 23 | — | |
| 1998 | #5,583 | 18 | — | |
| 1997 | #6,483 | 14 | — | |
| 1996 | #3,831 | 28 | — | |
| 1995 | #4,099 | 25 | — | |
| 1994 | #4,521 | 22 | — | |
| 1993 | #3,877 | 27 | — | |
| 1992 | #3,343 | 33 | — | |
| 1991 | #3,097 | 36 | — | |
| 1990 | #2,571 | 46 | — | |
| 1989 | #2,304 | 51 | — | |
| 1988 | #3,225 | 30 | — | |
| 1987 | #3,169 | 29 | — | |
| 1986 | #2,228 | 46 | — | |
| 1985 | #1,997 | 54 | — | |
| 1984 | #2,081 | 48 | — | |
| 1983 | #1,585 | 70 | — | |
| 1982 | #1,461 | 82 | — | |
| 1981 | #1,767 | 63 | — | |
| 1980 | #1,570 | 74 | — | |
| 1979 | #1,410 | 87 | — | |
| 1978 | #1,186 | 106 | — | |
| 1977 | #1,170 | 106 | — | |
| 1976 | #1,071 | 114 | — | |
| 1975 | #889 | 149 | — | |
| 1974 | #950 | 130 | — | |
| 1973 | #755 | 181 | — | |
| 1972 | #769 | 180 | — | |
| 1971 | #698 | 218 | — | |
| 1970 | #689 | 228 | — | |
| 1969 | #600 | 275 | — | |
| 1968 | #568 | 283 | #4,136 | 5 |
| 1967 | #513 | 341 | — | |
| 1966 | #491 | 364 | #3,249 | 7 |
| 1965 | #457 | 440 | #3,930 | 5 |
| 1964 | #431 | 517 | — | |
| 1963 | #424 | 524 | #3,044 | 8 |
| 1962 | #398 | 581 | #4,033 | 5 |
| 1961 | #381 | 635 | — | |
| 1960 | #359 | 731 | — | |
| 1959 | #364 | 681 | — | |
| 1958 | #311 | 856 | — | |
| 1957 | #310 | 879 | #3,993 | 5 |
| 1956 | #256 | 1,076 | #3,216 | 7 |
| 1955 | #247 | 1,103 | #2,764 | 9 |
| 1954 | #235 | 1,176 | #3,452 | 6 |
| 1953 | #225 | 1,281 | — | |
| 1952 | #205 | 1,398 | #2,153 | 13 |
| 1951 | #191 | 1,492 | #3,066 | 7 |
| 1950 | #176 | 1,602 | #2,580 | 9 |
| 1949 | #164 | 1,753 | #2,606 | 9 |
| 1948 | #152 | 1,872 | #3,316 | 6 |
| 1947 | #144 | 2,085 | #2,862 | 8 |
| 1946 | #139 | 1,933 | #2,143 | 12 |
| 1945 | #134 | 1,817 | #2,242 | 10 |
| 1944 | #127 | 2,056 | #2,633 | 8 |
| 1943 | #126 | 2,217 | #2,405 | 10 |
| 1942 | #124 | 2,203 | #1,867 | 15 |
| 1941 | #116 | 2,273 | #1,759 | 16 |
| 1940 | #106 | 2,373 | #2,081 | 12 |
| 1939 | #100 | 2,496 | #1,238 | 28 |
| 1938 | #94 | 2,726 | #1,275 | 27 |
| 1937 | #88 | 2,763 | #1,403 | 23 |
| 1936 | #90 | 2,730 | #1,639 | 17 |
| 1935 | #82 | 3,003 | #1,295 | 27 |
| 1934 | #78 | 3,178 | #1,213 | 30 |
| 1933 | #71 | 3,217 | #1,103 | 35 |
| 1932 | #66 | 3,608 | #1,509 | 22 |
| 1931 | #67 | 3,760 | #1,194 | 33 |
| 1930 | #65 | 4,101 | #1,151 | 37 |
| 1929 | #56 | 4,519 | #1,237 | 32 |
| 1928 | #55 | 4,928 | #992 | 48 |
| 1927 | #47 | 5,483 | #1,080 | 43 |
| 1926 | #41 | 5,856 | #1,331 | 30 |
| 1925 | #43 | 6,176 | #1,246 | 33 |
| 1924 | #39 | 6,586 | #1,117 | 41 |
| 1923 | #38 | 6,541 | #1,300 | 31 |
| 1922 | #32 | 7,246 | #1,503 | 25 |
| 1921 | #32 | 7,603 | #1,296 | 32 |
| 1920 | #30 | 7,868 | #1,592 | 23 |
| 1919 | #28 | 7,809 | #1,082 | 40 |
| 1918 | #28 | 8,075 | #1,172 | 35 |
| 1917 | #24 | 7,865 | #1,092 | 37 |
| 1916 | #25 | 7,601 | #1,415 | 24 |
| 1915 | #23 | 7,379 | #1,181 | 30 |
| 1914 | #21 | 6,204 | #1,127 | 26 |
| 1913 | #20 | 5,369 | #950 | 27 |
| 1912 | #18 | 5,073 | #1,095 | 18 |
| 1911 | #15 | 4,141 | #793 | 17 |
| 1910 | #13 | 4,146 | #480 | 33 |
| 1909 | #13 | 3,661 | #519 | 25 |
| 1908 | #12 | 3,786 | #541 | 22 |
| 1907 | #12 | 3,698 | #778 | 12 |
| 1906 | #12 | 3,511 | #590 | 16 |
| 1905 | #12 | 3,401 | #636 | 14 |
| 1904 | #11 | 3,296 | #538 | 17 |
| 1903 | #9 | 3,257 | #470 | 20 |
| 1902 | #9 | 3,295 | #490 | 19 |
| 1901 | #9 | 3,067 | #487 | 16 |
| 1900 | #8 | 3,896 | #534 | 20 |
| 1899 | #9 | 2,999 | #502 | 15 |
| 1898 | #8 | 3,531 | #403 | 24 |
| 1897 | #8 | 3,182 | #473 | 17 |
| 1896 | #6 | 3,502 | #641 | 12 |
| 1895 | #8 | 3,391 | #529 | 15 |
| 1894 | #7 | 3,287 | #631 | 11 |
| 1893 | #8 | 3,119 | #572 | 12 |
| 1892 | #8 | 3,035 | #480 | 17 |
| 1891 | #7 | 2,689 | #635 | 9 |
| 1890 | #7 | 2,718 | #739 | 8 |
| 1889 | #8 | 2,463 | #498 | 14 |
| 1888 | #9 | 2,374 | #580 | 12 |
| 1887 | #11 | 1,907 | #583 | 10 |
| 1886 | #15 | 1,699 | #845 | 6 |
| 1885 | #15 | 1,495 | #521 | 13 |
| 1884 | #18 | 1,386 | #764 | 7 |
| 1883 | #20 | 1,132 | — | |
| 1882 | #24 | 989 | — | |
| 1881 | #25 | 788 | #866 | 5 |
| 1880 | #38 | 633 | #809 | 6 |
In the first year the SSA published name data, Ethel was already there! It came in at #38, and was given to 633 baby girls.
Quietest stretch: 2015, when fewer than 13 girls a year got the name.
Where Ethel is popular in 1914
- Rank in state
- Top 10
- 11–50
- 51–100
- 101–500
- 501+
- Not published
Hover or tap a state for its numbers.
- Mississippi#7 · 1 in 82
- Louisiana#8 · 1 in 77
- South Carolina#9 · 1 in 78
- Alabama#9 · 1 in 88
- North Carolina#10 · 1 in 82
Best ever in a state: #3 in Florida, 1910.
Show every state
| State | Rank | Births | Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mississippi | #7 | 175 | 1 in 82 |
| Louisiana | #8 | 185 | 1 in 77 |
| Alabama | #9 | 229 | 1 in 88 |
| South Carolina | #9 | 195 | 1 in 78 |
| North Carolina | #10 | 287 | 1 in 82 |
| Virginia | #14 | 223 | 1 in 82 |
| Florida | #15 | 86 | 1 in 85 |
| District of Columbia | #17 | 22 | 1 in 79 |
| Georgia | #17 | 248 | 1 in 101 |
| Kentucky | #17 | 181 | 1 in 95 |
| Arkansas | #18 | 121 | 1 in 102 |
| West Virginia | #20 | 107 | 1 in 101 |
| Hawaii | #21 | 14 | 1 in 85 |
| Montana | #21 | 30 | 1 in 94 |
| Tennessee | #21 | 158 | 1 in 106 |
| Washington | #21 | 56 | 1 in 100 |
| Delaware | #22 | 15 | 1 in 78 |
| Utah | #22 | 25 | 1 in 107 |
| New York | #23 | 684 | 1 in 107 |
| Oklahoma | #23 | 117 | 1 in 114 |
| Pennsylvania | #23 | 544 | 1 in 121 |
| Wyoming | #23 | 9 | 1 in 66 |
| Maryland | #24 | 82 | 1 in 112 |
| Idaho | #25 | 21 | 1 in 98 |
| Colorado | #26 | 37 | 1 in 119 |
| New Jersey | #26 | 169 | 1 in 119 |
| Kansas | #28 | 87 | 1 in 106 |
| Missouri | #28 | 143 | 1 in 134 |
| Illinois | #29 | 283 | 1 in 138 |
| Rhode Island | #30 | 32 | 1 in 119 |
| Texas | #30 | 228 | 1 in 155 |
| Wisconsin | #30 | 124 | 1 in 116 |
| Iowa | #32 | 98 | 1 in 133 |
| Massachusetts | #32 | 214 | 1 in 130 |
| Minnesota | #32 | 106 | 1 in 125 |
| Ohio | #32 | 256 | 1 in 129 |
| Connecticut | #33 | 77 | 1 in 125 |
| New Hampshire | #33 | 22 | 1 in 117 |
| North Dakota | #33 | 40 | 1 in 109 |
| Indiana | #37 | 105 | 1 in 150 |
| Nebraska | #37 | 56 | 1 in 132 |
| Oregon | #38 | 26 | 1 in 130 |
| Maine | #39 | 35 | 1 in 135 |
| South Dakota | #42 | 25 | 1 in 141 |
| Michigan | #43 | 119 | 1 in 154 |
| California | #44 | 73 | 1 in 189 |
| Vermont | #46 | 13 | 1 in 149 |
| Arizona | #57 | 8 | 1 in 180 |
| New Mexico | #73 | 8 | 1 in 231 |
| Alaska | — | — | — |
| Nevada | — | — | — |
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 Ethel
- 721 spots since 2024 (#4,893 → #4,172)
- 708 spots since 2020 (#4,880 → #4,172)
- 4,759 spots since 2015 (#8,931 → #4,172)
- Biggest jump: 61 spots in 1975 (#950 → #889)
- Biggest drop: 195 spots in 1974 (#755 → #950)
- Debuted 1880
- Peaked 1896 at #6 (3,502 births)
- Births halved by 1950, 54 yrs later
- Top 10: 16 yrs · run 1888–1903
- Top 100: 60 yrs · run 1880–1939
- Top 1,000: 96 yrs · run 1880–1975
- Highest: 1 in 68 girls born in 1894 were named Ethel (1.5%)
- Latest: 1 in 47,273 girls born in 2025 (0.00%)
- Its best rank, #6 in 1896, was only 1 in 68 (1.5%) — a smaller share of a much bigger birth year
- 22.8% of all girls named Ethel (63,662) were born in this decade
Show by decade
| Decade | Births | Best rank | Avg rank |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1880s | 14,866 | #8 (1889) | #18 |
| 1890s | 31,453 | #6 (1896) | #8 |
| 1900s | 34,868 | #8 (1900) | #11 |
| 1910s | 63,662 | #13 (1910) | #22 |
| 1920s | 62,806 | #30 (1920) | #41 |
| 1930s | 31,582 | #65 (1930) | #80 |
| 1940s | 20,582 | #106 (1940) | #133 |
| 1950s | 11,544 | #176 (1950) | #252 |
| 1960s | 4,691 | #359 (1960) | #462 |
| 1970s | 1,499 | #689 (1970) | #959 |
| 1980s | 547 | #1,461 (1982) | #2,139 |
| 1990s | 272 | #2,571 (1990) | #4,212 |
| 2000s | 187 | #4,280 (2002) | #6,686 |
| 2010s | 198 | #4,357 (2018) | #6,723 |
| 2020s | 165 | #4,172 (2025) | #4,827 |
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.
Ethel in 1914
Top girls' names in 1914
Top boys' names in 1914
More about 1914
girls
761,581 girls got a published name in 1914; 1 in 123 of them was named Ethel, which outranked 99.5% of the 4,206 girls' names that year. The ten most popular names covered 22.9% of girls (24.6% in 1880, 7.0% in 2025).
Among names in the top 1,000 of either year.
boys
654,762 boys got a published name in 1914; 1 in 25,183 of them was named Ethel, which outranked 70.0% of the 3,759 boys' names that year. The ten most popular names covered 30.8% of boys (44.2% in 1880, 8.0% in 2025).
- #1,101Rayburn27
- #1,101Takeo27
- #1,101Woodie27
- #1,127Ethel26
- #1,127Alonza26
- #1,127Andre26
- #1,127Burnell26
- #1,153Adolfo25
- #1,153Aleck25
- #1,153Algie25
Tied with 25 names at #1,127; 3 shown. Tied names share a rank, as in SSA's lists.
Among names in the top 1,000 of either year.