Hunter
#841 for girls in 2025, 323 births · #130 for boys in 2025, 2,761 births
Given to boys 94.8% of the time
- Peak · boys
- 2000 · 12,538 births
- Debut · boys
- 12 births
- In top 100 · boys
- 29 yrsof 146 years
- Total births · boys
- 262,238since 1880
Hunter over time
Rank within each sex, plotted together. 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 | #841 | 323 | #130 | 2,761 |
| 2024 | #878 | 307 | #128 | 2,852 |
| 2023 | #806 | 347 | #115 | 3,131 |
| 2022 | #782 | 364 | #101 | 3,605 |
| 2021 | #816 | 340 | #86 | 4,206 |
| 2020 | #830 | 329 | #68 | 4,786 |
| 2019 | #861 | 311 | #66 | 5,398 |
| 2018 | #825 | 329 | #56 | 6,117 |
| 2017 | #736 | 384 | #53 | 6,760 |
| 2016 | #842 | 338 | #45 | 7,681 |
| 2015 | #791 | 356 | #41 | 8,367 |
| 2014 | #768 | 364 | #40 | 8,841 |
| 2013 | #929 | 273 | #36 | 8,988 |
| 2012 | #1,179 | 208 | #45 | 8,053 |
| 2011 | #1,217 | 197 | #55 | 7,380 |
| 2010 | #1,317 | 178 | #58 | 7,334 |
| 2009 | #1,301 | 186 | #56 | 7,751 |
| 2008 | #1,257 | 200 | #54 | 8,045 |
| 2007 | #1,194 | 212 | #57 | 8,218 |
| 2006 | #1,050 | 244 | #54 | 8,574 |
| 2005 | #1,027 | 236 | #53 | 8,512 |
| 2004 | #742 | 354 | #49 | 8,902 |
| 2003 | #764 | 324 | #41 | 9,900 |
| 2002 | #561 | 472 | #38 | 11,085 |
| 2001 | #441 | 628 | #36 | 11,335 |
| 2000 | #402 | 714 | #35 | 12,538 |
| 1999 | #354 | 844 | #36 | 11,485 |
| 1998 | #304 | 997 | #36 | 11,078 |
| 1997 | #371 | 728 | #44 | 8,405 |
| 1996 | #355 | 782 | #47 | 7,603 |
| 1995 | #340 | 774 | #53 | 6,715 |
| 1994 | #327 | 822 | #67 | 5,585 |
| 1993 | #519 | 471 | #97 | 3,792 |
| 1992 | #1,381 | 119 | #135 | 2,541 |
| 1991 | #2,935 | 39 | #167 | 1,929 |
| 1990 | #3,022 | 37 | #219 | 1,391 |
| 1989 | #3,477 | 29 | #225 | 1,206 |
| 1988 | #2,867 | 36 | #243 | 980 |
| 1987 | #5,312 | 14 | #271 | 806 |
| 1986 | #3,360 | 26 | #306 | 671 |
| 1985 | #3,983 | 20 | #336 | 567 |
| 1984 | #4,478 | 16 | #380 | 459 |
| 1983 | #4,686 | 15 | #437 | 357 |
| 1982 | #9,237 | 6 | #474 | 317 |
| 1981 | #5,254 | 13 | #518 | 266 |
| 1980 | #6,789 | 9 | #548 | 242 |
| 1979 | #6,189 | 10 | #611 | 196 |
| 1978 | #5,958 | 10 | #695 | 145 |
| 1977 | #5,888 | 10 | #668 | 160 |
| 1976 | #5,215 | 11 | #732 | 130 |
| 1975 | — | #796 | 109 | |
| 1974 | — | #837 | 92 | |
| 1973 | #6,666 | 7 | #847 | 87 |
| 1972 | — | #877 | 84 | |
| 1971 | — | #811 | 99 | |
| 1970 | — | #776 | 113 | |
| 1969 | — | #778 | 98 | |
| 1968 | — | #765 | 94 | |
| 1967 | — | #811 | 80 | |
| 1966 | #6,564 | 5 | #888 | 66 |
| 1965 | — | #897 | 67 | |
| 1964 | — | #881 | 75 | |
| 1963 | — | #906 | 68 | |
| 1962 | — | #871 | 76 | |
| 1961 | — | #915 | 69 | |
| 1960 | — | #897 | 71 | |
| 1959 | — | #946 | 66 | |
| 1958 | — | #956 | 63 | |
| 1957 | #6,086 | 5 | #889 | 72 |
| 1956 | — | #946 | 62 | |
| 1955 | — | #1,011 | 55 | |
| 1954 | — | #892 | 68 | |
| 1953 | — | #1,155 | 41 | |
| 1952 | — | #1,002 | 51 | |
| 1951 | — | #1,005 | 49 | |
| 1950 | — | #989 | 49 | |
| 1949 | — | #967 | 51 | |
| 1948 | — | #1,001 | 49 | |
| 1947 | — | #839 | 68 | |
| 1946 | — | #848 | 60 | |
| 1945 | — | #916 | 49 | |
| 1944 | — | #1,018 | 41 | |
| 1943 | — | #1,037 | 42 | |
| 1942 | — | #1,054 | 41 | |
| 1941 | — | #1,152 | 33 | |
| 1940 | — | #1,090 | 36 | |
| 1939 | — | #1,015 | 39 | |
| 1938 | — | #1,149 | 32 | |
| 1937 | — | #1,094 | 35 | |
| 1936 | — | #1,417 | 22 | |
| 1935 | — | #956 | 44 | |
| 1934 | — | #942 | 45 | |
| 1933 | — | #1,124 | 34 | |
| 1932 | — | #888 | 52 | |
| 1931 | — | #910 | 50 | |
| 1930 | — | #1,093 | 40 | |
| 1929 | — | #836 | 61 | |
| 1928 | — | #902 | 55 | |
| 1927 | — | #911 | 56 | |
| 1926 | — | #855 | 60 | |
| 1925 | — | #1,201 | 35 | |
| 1924 | — | #823 | 67 | |
| 1923 | — | #803 | 69 | |
| 1922 | — | #928 | 56 | |
| 1921 | #5,099 | 5 | #1,011 | 48 |
| 1920 | — | #805 | 69 | |
| 1919 | — | #898 | 55 | |
| 1918 | — | #789 | 68 | |
| 1917 | — | #822 | 60 | |
| 1916 | — | #922 | 47 | |
| 1915 | — | #868 | 50 | |
| 1914 | — | #819 | 42 | |
| 1913 | — | #789 | 36 | |
| 1912 | — | #835 | 28 | |
| 1911 | — | #793 | 17 | |
| 1910 | — | #755 | 16 | |
| 1909 | — | #804 | 13 | |
| 1908 | — | #685 | 15 | |
| 1907 | — | #735 | 13 | |
| 1906 | — | #674 | 13 | |
| 1905 | — | #636 | 14 | |
| 1904 | — | #538 | 17 | |
| 1903 | — | #1,130 | 5 | |
| 1902 | #1,594 | 6 | #556 | 15 |
| 1901 | — | #779 | 8 | |
| 1900 | — | #743 | 12 | |
| 1899 | — | #661 | 10 | |
| 1898 | — | #701 | 10 | |
| 1897 | — | #787 | 8 | |
| 1896 | — | #534 | 15 | |
| 1895 | — | #872 | 7 | |
| 1894 | — | #730 | 9 | |
| 1893 | — | #572 | 12 | |
| 1892 | — | #641 | 11 | |
| 1891 | — | #564 | 11 | |
| 1890 | — | #739 | 8 | |
| 1889 | — | #581 | 11 | |
| 1888 | — | #484 | 16 | |
| 1887 | — | — | ||
| 1886 | — | #758 | 7 | |
| 1885 | — | #604 | 10 | |
| 1884 | — | #848 | 6 | |
| 1883 | — | #799 | 6 | |
| 1882 | — | #611 | 10 | |
| 1881 | — | #781 | 6 | |
| 1880 | — | #526 | 12 | |
In the first year the SSA published name data, Hunter was already there! It came in at #526, and was given to 12 baby boys.
Quietest stretch: 1887, when fewer than 5 boys a year got the name.
Where Hunter is popular in 2005
- Rank in state
- Top 10
- 11–50
- 51–100
- 101–500
- 501+
- Not published
Hover or tap a state for its numbers.
- West Virginia#3 · 1 in 56
- North Dakota#7 · 1 in 73
- Wyoming#10 · 1 in 79
- Montana#10 · 1 in 88
- Arkansas#14 · 1 in 103
Best ever in a state: #2 in North Dakota, 1999.
Show every state
| State | Rank | Births | Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| West Virginia | #3 | 161 | 1 in 56 |
| North Dakota | #7 | 48 | 1 in 73 |
| Montana | #10 | 45 | 1 in 88 |
| Wyoming | #10 | 26 | 1 in 79 |
| Arkansas | #14 | 146 | 1 in 103 |
| Idaho | #17 | 77 | 1 in 112 |
| Alabama | #18 | 211 | 1 in 112 |
| South Dakota | #18 | 42 | 1 in 99 |
| Alaska | #21 | 36 | 1 in 92 |
| Tennessee | #21 | 320 | 1 in 115 |
| Vermont | #22 | 25 | 1 in 88 |
| Iowa | #23 | 142 | 1 in 116 |
| Kentucky | #23 | 214 | 1 in 110 |
| Louisiana | #23 | 186 | 1 in 130 |
| Oklahoma | #23 | 162 | 1 in 127 |
| Minnesota | #26 | 254 | 1 in 118 |
| Maine | #27 | 62 | 1 in 90 |
| Mississippi | #27 | 110 | 1 in 134 |
| South Carolina | #30 | 155 | 1 in 137 |
| Utah | #31 | 151 | 1 in 148 |
| Missouri | #33 | 241 | 1 in 141 |
| Nebraska | #35 | 71 | 1 in 145 |
| Michigan | #36 | 376 | 1 in 146 |
| North Carolina | #36 | 333 | 1 in 157 |
| Oregon | #36 | 133 | 1 in 146 |
| Indiana | #37 | 244 | 1 in 157 |
| Wisconsin | #37 | 191 | 1 in 153 |
| Hawaii | #39 | 33 | 1 in 145 |
| Kansas | #39 | 107 | 1 in 154 |
| New Hampshire | #40 | 41 | 1 in 136 |
| Georgia | #44 | 324 | 1 in 184 |
| Virginia | #44 | 253 | 1 in 170 |
| Colorado | #45 | 162 | 1 in 185 |
| Ohio | #45 | 372 | 1 in 176 |
| Pennsylvania | #46 | 341 | 1 in 187 |
| Washington | #46 | 194 | 1 in 179 |
| Delaware | #56 | 26 | 1 in 156 |
| Florida | #62 | 383 | 1 in 258 |
| Nevada | #70 | 56 | 1 in 262 |
| Texas | #75 | 555 | 1 in 326 |
| Arizona | #77 | 145 | 1 in 293 |
| Connecticut | #80 | 56 | 1 in 300 |
| Maryland | #80 | 85 | 1 in 339 |
| Massachusetts | #82 | 98 | 1 in 335 |
| New York | #82 | 285 | 1 in 380 |
| Illinois | #85 | 218 | 1 in 354 |
| New Mexico | #92 | 33 | 1 in 330 |
| Rhode Island | #92 | 14 | 1 in 354 |
| New Jersey | #101 | 101 | 1 in 465 |
| California | #129 | 465 | 1 in 547 |
| District of Columbia | — | — | — |
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 Hunter
- 2 spots since 2024 (#128 → #130)
- 62 spots since 2020 (#68 → #130)
- 89 spots since 2015 (#41 → #130)
- Biggest jump: 592 spots in 1904 (#1,130 → #538)
- Biggest drop: 574 spots in 1903 (#556 → #1,130)
- Debuted 1880
- Peaked 2000 at #35 (12,538 births)
- Births halved by 2018, 18 yrs later
- Top 10: never
- Top 100: 29 yrs · run 1993–2021
- Top 1,000: 126 yrs · run 1956–2025
- Highest: 1 in 157 boys born in 2000 were named Hunter (0.64%)
- Latest: 1 in 619 boys born in 2025 (0.16%)
- 36.2% of all boys named Hunter (94,860) were born in this decade
- The majority has never changed
Show by decade
| Decade | Births | Best rank | Avg rank |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1880s | 84 | #484 (1888) | #666 |
| 1890s | 101 | #534 (1896) | #680 |
| 1900s | 125 | #538 (1904) | #728 |
| 1910s | 419 | #755 (1910) | #829 |
| 1920s | 576 | #803 (1923) | #908 |
| 1930s | 393 | #888 (1932) | #1,059 |
| 1940s | 470 | #839 (1947) | #992 |
| 1950s | 576 | #889 (1957) | #979 |
| 1960s | 764 | #765 (1968) | #861 |
| 1970s | 1,215 | #611 (1979) | #765 |
| 1980s | 5,871 | #225 (1989) | #374 |
| 1990s | 60,524 | #36 (1999) | #90 |
| 2000s | 94,860 | #35 (2000) | #47 |
| 2010s | 74,919 | #36 (2013) | #50 |
| 2020s | 21,341 | #68 (2020) | #105 |
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.
Hunter in 2005
Top girls' names in 2005
Top boys' names in 2005
More about 2005
girls
1,847,842 girls got a published name in 2005; 1 in 7,830 of them was named Hunter, which outranked 94.7% of the 19,199 girls' names that year. The ten most popular names covered 9.0% of girls (24.6% in 1880, 7.0% in 2025).
boys
1,997,305 boys got a published name in 2005; 1 in 235 of them was named Hunter, which outranked 99.6% of the 13,370 boys' names that year. The ten most popular names covered 10.7% of boys (44.2% in 1880, 8.0% in 2025).
Among names in the top 1,000 of either year.