Lacie
#2,387 for girls in 2025, 75 births · Last seen for boys in 1929 at #3,959
Given to girls 99.6% of the time
- Peak · girls
- 1984 · 375 births
- Debut · girls
- 5 births
- In top 100 · girls
- neverof 146 years
- Total births · girls
- 10,789since 1898
Lacie over time
Rank among girls' names. Lacie has never cracked the top 500 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 | #2,387 | 75 | — | |
| 2024 | #2,976 | 55 | — | |
| 2023 | #3,329 | 48 | — | |
| 2022 | #2,856 | 59 | — | |
| 2021 | #2,416 | 74 | — | |
| 2020 | #2,500 | 69 | — | |
| 2019 | #2,070 | 91 | — | |
| 2018 | #2,026 | 96 | — | |
| 2017 | #1,902 | 106 | — | |
| 2016 | #1,731 | 121 | — | |
| 2015 | #1,576 | 139 | — | |
| 2014 | #1,534 | 142 | — | |
| 2013 | #1,451 | 154 | — | |
| 2012 | #1,334 | 176 | — | |
| 2011 | #1,338 | 173 | — | |
| 2010 | #1,307 | 180 | — | |
| 2009 | #1,280 | 190 | — | |
| 2008 | #1,097 | 237 | — | |
| 2007 | #1,172 | 217 | — | |
| 2006 | #967 | 271 | — | |
| 2005 | #845 | 299 | — | |
| 2004 | #873 | 281 | — | |
| 2003 | #810 | 304 | — | |
| 2002 | #1,345 | 144 | — | |
| 2001 | #1,277 | 154 | — | |
| 2000 | #1,127 | 181 | — | |
| 1999 | #1,058 | 191 | — | |
| 1998 | #1,036 | 191 | — | |
| 1997 | #956 | 206 | — | |
| 1996 | #967 | 198 | — | |
| 1995 | #845 | 231 | — | |
| 1994 | #810 | 248 | — | |
| 1993 | #740 | 281 | — | |
| 1992 | #658 | 340 | — | |
| 1991 | #604 | 373 | — | |
| 1990 | #642 | 349 | — | |
| 1989 | #577 | 380 | — | |
| 1988 | #585 | 347 | — | |
| 1987 | #550 | 364 | — | |
| 1986 | #583 | 331 | — | |
| 1985 | #574 | 339 | — | |
| 1984 | #518 | 375 | — | |
| 1983 | #588 | 303 | — | |
| 1982 | #603 | 297 | — | |
| 1981 | #699 | 241 | — | |
| 1980 | #853 | 181 | — | |
| 1979 | #878 | 174 | — | |
| 1978 | #797 | 188 | — | |
| 1977 | #1,429 | 78 | — | |
| 1976 | #1,865 | 49 | — | |
| 1975 | #1,381 | 76 | — | |
| 1974 | #3,695 | 17 | — | |
| 1973 | #4,586 | 12 | — | |
| 1972 | #3,543 | 17 | — | |
| 1971 | #3,508 | 18 | — | |
| 1970 | #3,110 | 21 | — | |
| 1969 | #3,619 | 15 | — | |
| 1968 | #5,642 | 7 | — | |
| 1967 | — | — | ||
| 1966 | #4,493 | 9 | — | |
| 1965 | — | — | ||
| 1964 | #5,008 | 8 | — | |
| 1963 | #3,458 | 14 | — | |
| 1962 | #2,814 | 19 | — | |
| 1961 | #6,567 | 5 | — | |
| 1960 | #5,696 | 6 | — | |
| 1959 | #5,566 | 6 | — | |
| 1958 | #6,103 | 5 | — | |
| 1957 | — | — | ||
| 1956 | — | — | ||
| 1955 | — | — | ||
| 1954 | — | — | ||
| 1953 | — | — | ||
| 1952 | — | — | ||
| 1951 | — | — | ||
| 1950 | #4,738 | 6 | — | |
| 1949 | #5,244 | 5 | — | |
| 1948 | — | — | ||
| 1947 | — | — | ||
| 1946 | #4,960 | 5 | — | |
| 1945 | — | — | ||
| 1944 | #3,687 | 7 | — | |
| 1943 | — | — | ||
| 1942 | — | — | ||
| 1941 | #3,559 | 7 | — | |
| 1940 | #3,208 | 8 | — | |
| 1939 | — | — | ||
| 1938 | — | — | ||
| 1937 | — | — | ||
| 1936 | #4,181 | 5 | — | |
| 1935 | — | — | ||
| 1934 | #4,286 | 5 | — | |
| 1933 | — | — | ||
| 1932 | — | — | ||
| 1931 | — | — | ||
| 1930 | #4,047 | 6 | — | |
| 1929 | #4,053 | 6 | #3,959 | 5 |
| 1928 | #3,436 | 8 | — | |
| 1927 | #2,859 | 11 | — | |
| 1926 | #3,564 | 8 | — | |
| 1925 | #4,426 | 6 | — | |
| 1924 | #4,002 | 7 | — | |
| 1923 | #4,376 | 6 | #3,467 | 7 |
| 1922 | #4,011 | 7 | #3,872 | 6 |
| 1921 | #3,666 | 8 | #3,214 | 8 |
| 1920 | #3,097 | 10 | #4,286 | 5 |
| 1919 | #3,817 | 7 | — | |
| 1918 | — | #3,728 | 6 | |
| 1917 | #3,092 | 9 | — | |
| 1916 | #3,552 | 7 | — | |
| 1915 | #2,900 | 9 | — | |
| 1914 | #2,638 | 8 | — | |
| 1913 | — | — | ||
| 1912 | #2,144 | 8 | #2,544 | 5 |
| 1911 | #2,191 | 6 | — | |
| 1910 | #1,521 | 10 | — | |
| 1909 | #1,763 | 7 | — | |
| 1908 | #1,261 | 11 | — | |
| 1907 | — | — | ||
| 1906 | — | — | ||
| 1905 | #1,931 | 5 | — | |
| 1904 | — | — | ||
| 1903 | — | — | ||
| 1902 | #1,594 | 6 | — | |
| 1901 | — | — | ||
| 1900 | #1,723 | 6 | — | |
| 1899 | #1,181 | 8 | — | |
| 1898 | #1,700 | 5 | — | |
| 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 Lacie! It came in at #1,700, and was given to 5 baby girls.
Quietest stretch: 1901, when fewer than 5 girls a year got the name.
Where Lacie is popular in 2010
- Rank in state
- Top 10
- 11–50
- 51–100
- 101–500
- 501+
- Not published
Hover or tap a state for its numbers.
- Missouri#719 · 1 in 3,907
- Oklahoma#749 · 1 in 3,383
- Ohio#756 · 1 in 4,314
- Tennessee#773 · 1 in 4,191
- Louisiana#797 · 1 in 3,936
Best ever in a state: #129 in Utah, 1984.
Show every state
| State | Rank | Births | Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| Missouri | #719 | 7 | 1 in 3,907 |
| Oklahoma | #749 | 5 | 1 in 3,383 |
| Ohio | #756 | 12 | 1 in 4,314 |
| Tennessee | #773 | 7 | 1 in 4,191 |
| Louisiana | #797 | 5 | 1 in 3,936 |
| Michigan | #798 | 9 | 1 in 4,622 |
| Massachusetts | #831 | 5 | 1 in 5,113 |
| Maryland | #880 | 5 | 1 in 4,867 |
| Colorado | #887 | 5 | 1 in 4,571 |
| North Carolina | #971 | 8 | 1 in 5,618 |
| Virginia | #996 | 6 | 1 in 5,941 |
| Georgia | #1,307 | 6 | 1 in 7,994 |
| Florida | #1,318 | 9 | 1 in 8,843 |
| Pennsylvania | #1,367 | 5 | 1 in 10,583 |
| Texas | #1,430 | 16 | 1 in 9,977 |
| New York | #1,753 | 7 | 1 in 13,292 |
| California | #1,961 | 12 | 1 in 17,584 |
| Alabama | — | — | — |
| Alaska | — | — | — |
| Arizona | — | — | — |
| Arkansas | — | — | — |
| Connecticut | — | — | — |
| Delaware | — | — | — |
| District of Columbia | — | — | — |
| Hawaii | — | — | — |
| Idaho | — | — | — |
| Illinois | — | — | — |
| Indiana | — | — | — |
| Iowa | — | — | — |
| Kansas | — | — | — |
| Kentucky | — | — | — |
| Maine | — | — | — |
| Minnesota | — | — | — |
| Mississippi | — | — | — |
| Montana | — | — | — |
| Nebraska | — | — | — |
| Nevada | — | — | — |
| New Hampshire | — | — | — |
| New Jersey | — | — | — |
| New Mexico | — | — | — |
| North Dakota | — | — | — |
| Oregon | — | — | — |
| Rhode Island | — | — | — |
| South Carolina | — | — | — |
| South Dakota | — | — | — |
| Utah | — | — | — |
| Vermont | — | — | — |
| 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 Lacie
- 589 spots since 2024 (#2,976 → #2,387)
- 113 spots since 2020 (#2,500 → #2,387)
- 811 spots since 2015 (#1,576 → #2,387)
- Biggest jump: 632 spots in 1978 (#1,429 → #797)
- Biggest drop: 205 spots in 2007 (#967 → #1,172)
- Debuted 1898
- Peaked 1984 at #518 (375 births)
- Births halved by 2000, 16 yrs later
- Top 10: never
- Top 100: never
- Top 1,000: 24 yrs · run 1978–1997
- Highest: 1 in 4,490 girls born in 1984 were named Lacie (0.02%)
- Latest: 1 in 21,430 girls born in 2025 (0.00%)
- 29.3% of all girls named Lacie (3,158) were born in this decade
Show by decade
| Decade | Births | Best rank | Avg rank |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1890s | 13 | #1,181 (1899) | #1,441 |
| 1900s | 35 | #1,261 (1908) | #1,654 |
| 1910s | 64 | #1,521 (1910) | #2,732 |
| 1920s | 77 | #2,859 (1927) | #3,749 |
| 1930s | 16 | #4,047 (1930) | #4,171 |
| 1940s | 32 | #3,208 (1940) | #4,132 |
| 1950s | 17 | #4,738 (1950) | #5,469 |
| 1960s | 83 | #2,814 (1962) | #4,662 |
| 1970s | 650 | #797 (1978) | #2,479 |
| 1980s | 3,158 | #518 (1984) | #613 |
| 1990s | 2,608 | #604 (1991) | #832 |
| 2000s | 2,278 | #810 (2003) | #1,079 |
| 2010s | 1,378 | #1,307 (2010) | #1,627 |
| 2020s | 380 | #2,387 (2025) | #2,744 |
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.
Lacie in 2010
Top girls' names in 2010
More about 2010
girls
1,777,595 girls got a published name in 2010; 1 in 9,876 of them was named Lacie, which outranked 93.4% of the 19,841 girls' names that year. The ten most popular names covered 8.9% of girls (24.6% in 1880, 7.0% in 2025).