Lea
#848 for girls in 2025, 321 births · Last seen for boys in 1989 at #7,905
Given to girls 98.2% of the time
Showing
- Peak · girls
- 1970 · 593 births
- Debut · girls
- 7 births
- In top 100 · girls
- neverof 146 years
- Total births · girls
- 33,848since 1880
Lea over time
girls
Rank among girls' names. Lea has never cracked the top 300 here.
Hover or use arrow keys to read values by year; click or press Enter to open that year.
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 | #848 | 321 | — | |
| 2024 | #833 | 327 | — | |
| 2023 | #803 | 349 | — | |
| 2022 | #784 | 362 | — | |
| 2021 | #752 | 378 | — | |
| 2020 | #749 | 363 | — | |
| 2019 | #726 | 389 | — | |
| 2018 | #709 | 410 | — | |
| 2017 | #810 | 337 | — | |
| 2016 | #690 | 422 | — | |
| 2015 | #739 | 382 | — | |
| 2014 | #681 | 416 | — | |
| 2013 | #599 | 473 | — | |
| 2012 | #609 | 470 | — | |
| 2011 | #556 | 528 | — | |
| 2010 | #569 | 514 | — | |
| 2009 | #675 | 431 | — | |
| 2008 | #643 | 479 | — | |
| 2007 | #680 | 432 | — | |
| 2006 | #607 | 481 | — | |
| 2005 | #601 | 473 | — | |
| 2004 | #616 | 446 | — | |
| 2003 | #668 | 396 | — | |
| 2002 | #665 | 382 | — | |
| 2001 | #685 | 363 | — | |
| 2000 | #662 | 367 | — | |
| 1999 | #643 | 365 | — | |
| 1998 | #635 | 365 | — | |
| 1997 | #615 | 367 | — | |
| 1996 | #567 | 409 | — | |
| 1995 | #649 | 332 | — | |
| 1994 | #595 | 378 | — | |
| 1993 | #584 | 402 | — | |
| 1992 | #631 | 358 | — | |
| 1991 | #589 | 389 | — | |
| 1990 | #516 | 466 | — | |
| 1989 | #565 | 395 | #7,905 | 5 |
| 1988 | #543 | 402 | #5,751 | 7 |
| 1987 | #560 | 357 | — | |
| 1986 | #570 | 345 | — | |
| 1985 | #527 | 378 | #6,523 | 5 |
| 1984 | #494 | 404 | #6,315 | 5 |
| 1983 | #537 | 349 | #4,499 | 8 |
| 1982 | #519 | 384 | #5,003 | 7 |
| 1981 | #459 | 466 | #6,262 | 5 |
| 1980 | #457 | 464 | — | |
| 1979 | #436 | 472 | #5,355 | 6 |
| 1978 | #502 | 385 | #4,554 | 7 |
| 1977 | #481 | 398 | — | |
| 1976 | #510 | 349 | — | |
| 1975 | #466 | 403 | #4,309 | 7 |
| 1974 | #431 | 449 | #3,318 | 10 |
| 1973 | #443 | 424 | — | |
| 1972 | #434 | 444 | — | |
| 1971 | #400 | 536 | #4,907 | 5 |
| 1970 | #396 | 593 | #3,836 | 7 |
| 1969 | #419 | 527 | #3,935 | 6 |
| 1968 | #428 | 491 | #3,673 | 6 |
| 1967 | #402 | 519 | #3,231 | 7 |
| 1966 | #436 | 465 | — | |
| 1965 | #455 | 442 | #3,537 | 6 |
| 1964 | #482 | 403 | #2,409 | 12 |
| 1963 | #458 | 450 | #3,318 | 7 |
| 1962 | #470 | 420 | #3,640 | 6 |
| 1961 | #480 | 403 | #3,652 | 6 |
| 1960 | #503 | 373 | #4,038 | 5 |
| 1959 | #475 | 416 | — | |
| 1958 | #450 | 446 | #2,818 | 9 |
| 1957 | #515 | 342 | #3,552 | 6 |
| 1956 | #478 | 382 | #2,798 | 9 |
| 1955 | #502 | 338 | #3,886 | 5 |
| 1954 | #579 | 243 | — | |
| 1953 | #644 | 192 | #3,425 | 6 |
| 1952 | #599 | 210 | #2,680 | 9 |
| 1951 | #670 | 171 | #2,844 | 8 |
| 1950 | #703 | 149 | #2,580 | 9 |
| 1949 | #748 | 131 | #2,802 | 8 |
| 1948 | #673 | 153 | #3,668 | 5 |
| 1947 | #678 | 153 | #2,862 | 8 |
| 1946 | #732 | 122 | #2,919 | 7 |
| 1945 | #768 | 95 | #2,743 | 7 |
| 1944 | #836 | 83 | — | |
| 1943 | #801 | 92 | #1,986 | 14 |
| 1942 | #773 | 96 | #2,523 | 9 |
| 1941 | #713 | 97 | #2,333 | 10 |
| 1940 | #808 | 77 | #3,130 | 6 |
| 1939 | #868 | 65 | — | |
| 1938 | #830 | 72 | — | |
| 1937 | #775 | 78 | #3,175 | 6 |
| 1936 | #888 | 59 | #2,452 | 9 |
| 1935 | #874 | 62 | #3,252 | 6 |
| 1934 | #804 | 70 | #2,266 | 11 |
| 1933 | #826 | 65 | #1,905 | 14 |
| 1932 | #969 | 53 | #2,849 | 8 |
| 1931 | #806 | 71 | #1,843 | 16 |
| 1930 | #810 | 76 | #2,444 | 11 |
| 1929 | #922 | 60 | #2,199 | 13 |
| 1928 | #845 | 73 | #2,843 | 9 |
| 1927 | #898 | 69 | #2,408 | 12 |
| 1926 | #911 | 67 | #1,661 | 21 |
| 1925 | #970 | 59 | #1,679 | 21 |
| 1924 | #976 | 61 | #2,347 | 13 |
| 1923 | #901 | 66 | #1,874 | 18 |
| 1922 | #803 | 82 | #2,630 | 11 |
| 1921 | #928 | 64 | #2,632 | 11 |
| 1920 | #921 | 62 | #2,459 | 12 |
| 1919 | #806 | 76 | #2,063 | 15 |
| 1918 | #739 | 93 | #1,767 | 19 |
| 1917 | #849 | 65 | #2,956 | 8 |
| 1916 | #767 | 80 | #2,043 | 14 |
| 1915 | #856 | 58 | #3,825 | 5 |
| 1914 | #769 | 56 | #2,915 | 6 |
| 1913 | #803 | 43 | #1,676 | 11 |
| 1912 | #747 | 45 | #2,544 | 5 |
| 1911 | #594 | 51 | — | |
| 1910 | #896 | 23 | — | |
| 1909 | #773 | 27 | #1,440 | 5 |
| 1908 | #649 | 35 | — | |
| 1907 | #749 | 25 | — | |
| 1906 | #742 | 24 | — | |
| 1905 | #761 | 23 | — | |
| 1904 | #938 | 15 | — | |
| 1903 | #862 | 16 | — | |
| 1902 | #667 | 25 | — | |
| 1901 | #857 | 15 | — | |
| 1900 | #656 | 29 | #968 | 8 |
| 1899 | #728 | 19 | #1,051 | 5 |
| 1898 | #586 | 30 | — | |
| 1897 | #826 | 15 | — | |
| 1896 | #651 | 23 | — | |
| 1895 | #986 | 11 | #872 | 7 |
| 1894 | #557 | 27 | #1,074 | 5 |
| 1893 | #662 | 19 | — | |
| 1892 | #796 | 14 | — | |
| 1891 | #695 | 15 | — | |
| 1890 | #758 | 13 | #994 | 5 |
| 1889 | #950 | 8 | — | |
| 1888 | #612 | 17 | — | |
| 1887 | #788 | 9 | — | |
| 1886 | #897 | 7 | — | |
| 1885 | #542 | 16 | — | |
| 1884 | #541 | 15 | — | |
| 1883 | #561 | 12 | — | |
| 1882 | #813 | 6 | — | |
| 1881 | #679 | 7 | — | |
| 1880 | #679 | 7 | — | |
First appearance
1880
In the first year the SSA published name data, Lea was already there! It came in at #679, and was given to 7 baby girls.
Quietest stretch: 1880–1882, when fewer than 8 girls a year got the name.
Where Lea is popular in 2002
- Rank in state
- Top 10
- 11–50
- 51–100
- 101–500
- 501+
- Not published
Hover or tap a state for its numbers.
Top states · girls
- Kentucky#385 · 1 in 2,142
- Connecticut#387 · 1 in 2,091
- New York#394 · 1 in 2,202
- New Jersey#414 · 1 in 2,424
- Pennsylvania#438 · 1 in 2,631
Best ever in a state: #114 in Colorado, 1911.
Show every state
| State | Rank | Births | Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| Kentucky | #385 | 9 | 1 in 2,142 |
| Connecticut | #387 | 7 | 1 in 2,091 |
| New York | #394 | 44 | 1 in 2,202 |
| New Jersey | #414 | 17 | 1 in 2,424 |
| Pennsylvania | #438 | 21 | 1 in 2,631 |
| Nevada | #475 | 5 | 1 in 2,040 |
| Iowa | #480 | 5 | 1 in 2,700 |
| Michigan | #518 | 16 | 1 in 3,049 |
| Massachusetts | #522 | 9 | 1 in 3,408 |
| Florida | #558 | 23 | 1 in 3,349 |
| California | #586 | 63 | 1 in 3,535 |
| Maryland | #595 | 7 | 1 in 3,393 |
| Arizona | #631 | 10 | 1 in 3,246 |
| North Carolina | #632 | 11 | 1 in 3,949 |
| Virginia | #635 | 9 | 1 in 3,962 |
| Colorado | #647 | 7 | 1 in 3,549 |
| Indiana | #697 | 7 | 1 in 4,611 |
| Ohio | #711 | 11 | 1 in 5,291 |
| Louisiana | #724 | 5 | 1 in 4,104 |
| Illinois | #733 | 14 | 1 in 4,906 |
| Washington | #776 | 6 | 1 in 4,736 |
| Missouri | #787 | 5 | 1 in 5,583 |
| Texas | #982 | 23 | 1 in 6,780 |
| Georgia | #1,009 | 7 | 1 in 6,915 |
| Alabama | — | — | — |
| Alaska | — | — | — |
| Arkansas | — | — | — |
| Delaware | — | — | — |
| District of Columbia | — | — | — |
| Hawaii | — | — | — |
| Idaho | — | — | — |
| Kansas | — | — | — |
| Maine | — | — | — |
| Minnesota | — | — | — |
| Mississippi | — | — | — |
| Montana | — | — | — |
| Nebraska | — | — | — |
| New Hampshire | — | — | — |
| New Mexico | — | — | — |
| North Dakota | — | — | — |
| Oklahoma | — | — | — |
| Oregon | — | — | — |
| Rhode Island | — | — | — |
| South Carolina | — | — | — |
| South Dakota | — | — | — |
| Tennessee | — | — | — |
| Utah | — | — | — |
| Vermont | — | — | — |
| 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 Lea
Momentum · girls
Holding steady
- 15 spots since 2024 (#833 → #848)
- 99 spots since 2020 (#749 → #848)
- 109 spots since 2015 (#739 → #848)
- Biggest jump: 335 spots in 1896 (#986 → #651)
- Biggest drop: 429 spots in 1895 (#557 → #986)
Rise & fade · girls
90 yrs to peak
- Debuted 1880
- Peaked 1970 at #396 (593 births)
- Not yet halved from its peak
Top of the charts · girls
Top 1,000 for 146 yrs
- Top 10: never
- Top 100: never
- Top 1,000: 146 yrs · run 1880–2025
Share of babies · girls
1 in 2,948
- Highest: 1 in 2,948 girls born in 1970 were named Lea (0.03%)
- Latest: 1 in 5,007 girls born in 2025 (0.02%)
Era · girls
The 1960s
- 13.3% of all girls named Lea (4,493) were born in this decade
Show by decade
| Decade | Births | Best rank | Avg rank |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1880s | 104 | #541 (1884) | #706 |
| 1890s | 186 | #557 (1894) | #725 |
| 1900s | 234 | #649 (1908) | #765 |
| 1910s | 590 | #594 (1911) | #783 |
| 1920s | 663 | #803 (1922) | #908 |
| 1930s | 671 | #775 (1937) | #845 |
| 1940s | 1,099 | #673 (1948) | #753 |
| 1950s | 2,889 | #450 (1958) | #562 |
| 1960s | 4,493 | #402 (1967) | #453 |
| 1970s | 4,453 | #396 (1970) | #450 |
| 1980s | 3,944 | #457 (1980) | #523 |
| 1990s | 3,831 | #516 (1990) | #602 |
| 2000s | 4,250 | #601 (2005) | #650 |
| 2010s | 4,341 | #556 (2011) | #669 |
| 2020s | 2,100 | #749 (2020) | #795 |
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.
Lea in 2002
girls
#665
382 births · 1 in 4,704 girls
Top girls' names in 2002
More about 2002
girls
1,796,882 girls got a published name in 2002; 1 in 4,704 of them was named Lea, which outranked 96.3% of the 18,086 girls' names that year. The ten most popular names covered 9.6% of girls (24.6% in 1880, 7.0% in 2025).
Ranked beside Lea
Biggest movers since 2001
Risers
Among names in the top 1,000 of either year.