Kaleigh
- #2,957 for girls in 2025, 56 births
- Last seen for boys in 2004 at #9,948
- Given to girls >99.9% of the time
- Peak · girls
- 2001 · 729 births
- Debut · girls
- 7 births
- In top 100 · girls
- neverof 146 years
- Total births · girls
- 16,244since 1980
Kaleigh over time
Rank among girls' names. Kaleigh 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 | #2,957 | 56 | — | |
| 2024 | #2,749 | 62 | — | |
| 2023 | #2,336 | 78 | — | |
| 2022 | #2,364 | 78 | — | |
| 2021 | #1,851 | 108 | — | |
| 2020 | #1,678 | 122 | — | |
| 2019 | #1,452 | 152 | — | |
| 2018 | #1,325 | 171 | — | |
| 2017 | #1,334 | 174 | — | |
| 2016 | #1,307 | 183 | — | |
| 2015 | #1,049 | 251 | — | |
| 2014 | #896 | 303 | — | |
| 2013 | #852 | 305 | — | |
| 2012 | #793 | 337 | — | |
| 2011 | #688 | 408 | — | |
| 2010 | #584 | 503 | — | |
| 2009 | #628 | 479 | — | |
| 2008 | #578 | 534 | — | |
| 2007 | #543 | 571 | — | |
| 2006 | #489 | 636 | — | |
| 2005 | #451 | 675 | — | |
| 2004 | #463 | 641 | #9,948 | 6 |
| 2003 | #449 | 668 | — | |
| 2002 | #433 | 670 | — | |
| 2001 | #399 | 729 | — | |
| 2000 | #415 | 683 | — | |
| 1999 | #427 | 647 | — | |
| 1998 | #423 | 625 | — | |
| 1997 | #464 | 538 | — | |
| 1996 | #481 | 499 | — | |
| 1995 | #481 | 515 | — | |
| 1994 | #481 | 520 | — | |
| 1993 | #525 | 463 | — | |
| 1992 | #435 | 577 | — | |
| 1991 | #532 | 438 | — | |
| 1990 | #529 | 448 | — | |
| 1989 | #608 | 349 | — | |
| 1988 | #613 | 326 | — | |
| 1987 | #648 | 290 | — | |
| 1986 | #641 | 288 | — | |
| 1985 | #1,483 | 83 | — | |
| 1984 | #3,423 | 24 | — | |
| 1983 | #4,686 | 15 | — | |
| 1982 | #8,224 | 7 | — | |
| 1981 | #7,409 | 8 | — | |
| 1980 | #8,178 | 7 | — | |
| 1979 | — | — | ||
| 1978 | — | — | ||
| 1977 | — | — | ||
| 1976 | — | — | ||
| 1975 | — | — | ||
| 1974 | — | — | ||
| 1973 | — | — | ||
| 1972 | — | — | ||
| 1971 | — | — | ||
| 1970 | — | — | ||
| 1969 | — | — | ||
| 1968 | — | — | ||
| 1967 | — | — | ||
| 1966 | — | — | ||
| 1965 | — | — | ||
| 1964 | — | — | ||
| 1963 | — | — | ||
| 1962 | — | — | ||
| 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 | — | — | ||
The first year at least five girls were named Kaleigh! It came in at #8,178, and was given to 7 baby girls.
Quietest stretch: 1980–1982, when fewer than 9 girls a year got the name.
Where Kaleigh 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.
- Alabama#716 · 1 in 3,053
- North Carolina#1,437 · 1 in 9,297
- Georgia#1,533 · 1 in 9,042
- Texas#2,386 · 1 in 20,068
Best ever in a state: #113 in West Virginia, 2005.
Show every state
| State | Rank | Births | Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| Alabama | #716 | 6 | 1 in 3,053 |
| North Carolina | #1,437 | 5 | 1 in 9,297 |
| Georgia | #1,533 | 5 | 1 in 9,042 |
| Texas | #2,386 | 8 | 1 in 20,068 |
| Alaska | — | — | — |
| Arizona | — | — | — |
| Arkansas | — | — | — |
| California | — | — | — |
| Colorado | — | — | — |
| Connecticut | — | — | — |
| Delaware | — | — | — |
| District of Columbia | — | — | — |
| Florida | — | — | — |
| Hawaii | — | — | — |
| Idaho | — | — | — |
| Illinois | — | — | — |
| Indiana | — | — | — |
| Iowa | — | — | — |
| Kansas | — | — | — |
| Kentucky | — | — | — |
| Louisiana | — | — | — |
| Maine | — | — | — |
| Maryland | — | — | — |
| Massachusetts | — | — | — |
| Michigan | — | — | — |
| Minnesota | — | — | — |
| Mississippi | — | — | — |
| Missouri | — | — | — |
| Montana | — | — | — |
| Nebraska | — | — | — |
| Nevada | — | — | — |
| New Hampshire | — | — | — |
| New Jersey | — | — | — |
| New Mexico | — | — | — |
| New York | — | — | — |
| North Dakota | — | — | — |
| Ohio | — | — | — |
| Oklahoma | — | — | — |
| Oregon | — | — | — |
| Pennsylvania | — | — | — |
| Rhode Island | — | — | — |
| South Carolina | — | — | — |
| South Dakota | — | — | — |
| Tennessee | — | — | — |
| Utah | — | — | — |
| Vermont | — | — | — |
| Virginia | — | — | — |
| 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 Kaleigh
- 1,279 spots since 2020 (#1,678 → #2,957)
- Biggest jump: 842 spots in 1986
- Biggest drop: 153 spots in 2015
- Debuted 1980
- Peaked 2001 at #399 (729 births)
- Births halved by 2012, 11 yrs later
- Top 10: never
- Top 100: never
- Top 1,000: 29 yrs · run 1986–2014
- Highest: 1 in 2,470 girls born in 2001 were named Kaleigh (0.04%)
- Latest: 1 in 28,701 girls born in 2025 (0.00%)
- 38.7% of all girls named Kaleigh (6,286) were born in this decade
Show by decade
| Decade | Births | Best rank | Avg rank |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1980s | 1,397 | #608 (1989) | #3,591 |
| 1990s | 5,270 | #423 (1998) | #478 |
| 2000s | 6,286 | #399 (2001) | #485 |
| 2010s | 2,787 | #584 (2010) | #1,028 |
| 2020s | 504 | #1,678 (2020) | #2,323 |
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 Kaleigh ranked and which names it was up against. Click a point on the chart, or pick a year: