Kayleigh
#799 for girls in 2025, 340 births · Last seen for boys in 2004 at #8,927
Given to girls >99.9% of the time
- Peak · girls
- 2009 · 1,450 births
- Debut · girls
- 7 births
- In top 100 · girls
- neverof 146 years
- Total births · girls
- 34,561since 1984
Kayleigh over time
Rank among girls' names. Kayleigh has never cracked the top 200 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 | #799 | 340 | — | |
| 2024 | #730 | 386 | — | |
| 2023 | #631 | 469 | — | |
| 2022 | #529 | 590 | — | |
| 2021 | #417 | 754 | — | |
| 2020 | #435 | 706 | — | |
| 2019 | #488 | 644 | — | |
| 2018 | #450 | 707 | — | |
| 2017 | #390 | 798 | — | |
| 2016 | #348 | 958 | — | |
| 2015 | #324 | 1,008 | — | |
| 2014 | #278 | 1,174 | — | |
| 2013 | #279 | 1,135 | — | |
| 2012 | #265 | 1,227 | — | |
| 2011 | #246 | 1,286 | — | |
| 2010 | #244 | 1,298 | — | |
| 2009 | #227 | 1,450 | — | |
| 2008 | #239 | 1,435 | — | |
| 2007 | #250 | 1,396 | — | |
| 2006 | #266 | 1,230 | — | |
| 2005 | #265 | 1,234 | — | |
| 2004 | #285 | 1,161 | #8,927 | 7 |
| 2003 | #290 | 1,072 | — | |
| 2002 | #324 | 945 | — | |
| 2001 | #321 | 962 | — | |
| 2000 | #349 | 885 | — | |
| 1999 | #363 | 818 | — | |
| 1998 | #364 | 793 | — | |
| 1997 | #383 | 690 | — | |
| 1996 | #411 | 633 | — | |
| 1995 | #432 | 598 | — | |
| 1994 | #436 | 576 | — | |
| 1993 | #402 | 621 | — | |
| 1992 | #407 | 627 | — | |
| 1991 | #390 | 658 | — | |
| 1990 | #414 | 620 | — | |
| 1989 | #407 | 609 | — | |
| 1988 | #412 | 565 | — | |
| 1987 | #415 | 537 | — | |
| 1986 | #321 | 748 | — | |
| 1985 | #793 | 211 | — | |
| 1984 | #8,153 | 7 | — | |
| 1983 | — | — | ||
| 1982 | — | — | ||
| 1981 | — | — | ||
| 1980 | — | — | ||
| 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 Kayleigh! It came in at #8,153, and was given to 7 baby girls.
Quietest stretch: 1984, when fewer than 8 girls a year got the name.
Where Kayleigh is popular in 1990
- Rank in state
- Top 10
- 11–50
- 51–100
- 101–500
- 501+
- Not published
Hover or tap a state for its numbers.
- New Hampshire#109 · 1 in 474
- Rhode Island#149 · 1 in 691
- Indiana#179 · 1 in 1,035
- Connecticut#213 · 1 in 1,364
- Ohio#221 · 1 in 1,447
Best ever in a state: #53 in West Virginia, 2009.
Show every state
| State | Rank | Births | Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| New Hampshire | #109 | 14 | 1 in 474 |
| Rhode Island | #149 | 8 | 1 in 691 |
| Indiana | #179 | 34 | 1 in 1,035 |
| Connecticut | #213 | 14 | 1 in 1,364 |
| Ohio | #221 | 49 | 1 in 1,447 |
| Michigan | #262 | 37 | 1 in 1,688 |
| Iowa | #288 | 9 | 1 in 1,775 |
| Pennsylvania | #288 | 36 | 1 in 2,017 |
| Massachusetts | #316 | 19 | 1 in 2,039 |
| Wisconsin | #316 | 13 | 1 in 2,256 |
| Washington | #318 | 16 | 1 in 1,932 |
| Colorado | #321 | 11 | 1 in 1,888 |
| Arizona | #323 | 16 | 1 in 1,641 |
| New York | #353 | 56 | 1 in 2,180 |
| Kansas | #366 | 6 | 1 in 2,327 |
| Oklahoma | #368 | 8 | 1 in 2,182 |
| North Carolina | #370 | 15 | 1 in 2,724 |
| Georgia | #390 | 16 | 1 in 2,667 |
| Louisiana | #395 | 11 | 1 in 2,307 |
| Virginia | #424 | 12 | 1 in 3,149 |
| Illinois | #440 | 26 | 1 in 3,020 |
| Maryland | #447 | 9 | 1 in 3,152 |
| Texas | #523 | 38 | 1 in 3,621 |
| Florida | #535 | 20 | 1 in 3,956 |
| Tennessee | #545 | 7 | 1 in 4,313 |
| South Carolina | #563 | 5 | 1 in 4,007 |
| New Jersey | #642 | 9 | 1 in 5,330 |
| California | #707 | 48 | 1 in 5,468 |
| Missouri | #707 | 5 | 1 in 6,570 |
| Alabama | — | — | — |
| Alaska | — | — | — |
| Arkansas | — | — | — |
| Delaware | — | — | — |
| District of Columbia | — | — | — |
| Hawaii | — | — | — |
| Idaho | — | — | — |
| Kentucky | — | — | — |
| Maine | — | — | — |
| Minnesota | — | — | — |
| Mississippi | — | — | — |
| Montana | — | — | — |
| Nebraska | — | — | — |
| Nevada | — | — | — |
| New Mexico | — | — | — |
| North Dakota | — | — | — |
| Oregon | — | — | — |
| South Dakota | — | — | — |
| Utah | — | — | — |
| Vermont | — | — | — |
| West Virginia | — | — | — |
| 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 Kayleigh
- 69 spots since 2024 (#730 → #799)
- 364 spots since 2020 (#435 → #799)
- 475 spots since 2015 (#324 → #799)
- Biggest jump: 7,360 spots in 1985 (#8,153 → #793)
- Biggest drop: 112 spots in 2022 (#417 → #529)
- Debuted 1984
- Peaked 2009 at #227 (1,450 births)
- Births halved by 2018, 9 yrs later
- Top 10: never
- Top 100: never
- Top 1,000: 41 yrs · run 1985–2025
- Highest: 1 in 1,267 girls born in 2009 were named Kayleigh (0.08%)
- Latest: 1 in 4,727 girls born in 2025 (0.02%)
- 34.1% of all girls named Kayleigh (11,770) were born in this decade
Show by decade
| Decade | Births | Best rank | Avg rank |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1980s | 2,677 | #321 (1986) | #1,750 |
| 1990s | 6,634 | #363 (1999) | #400 |
| 2000s | 11,770 | #227 (2009) | #282 |
| 2010s | 10,235 | #244 (2010) | #331 |
| 2020s | 3,245 | #417 (2021) | #590 |
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.
Kayleigh in 1990
Top girls' names in 1990
More about 1990
girls
1,898,547 girls got a published name in 1990; 1 in 3,062 of them was named Kayleigh, which outranked 97.3% of the 15,234 girls' names that year. The ten most popular names covered 16.0% of girls (24.6% in 1880, 7.0% in 2025).
Among names in the top 1,000 of either year.