Leah
#58 for girls in 2025, 3,880 births · Last seen for boys in 2022 at #10,863
Given to girls 99.8% of the time
- Peak · girls
- 2010 · 6,545 births
- Debut · girls
- 54 births
- In top 100 · girls
- 42 yrsof 146 years
- Total births · girls
- 256,488since 1880
Leah over time
Rank among girls' names. 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 | #58 | 3,880 | — | |
| 2024 | #53 | 3,988 | — | |
| 2023 | #53 | 3,976 | — | |
| 2022 | #52 | 4,196 | #10,863 | 6 |
| 2021 | #46 | 4,474 | — | |
| 2020 | #45 | 4,530 | #7,502 | 10 |
| 2019 | #43 | 4,780 | #8,215 | 9 |
| 2018 | #41 | 5,038 | #8,154 | 9 |
| 2017 | #40 | 5,202 | #8,140 | 9 |
| 2016 | #37 | 5,434 | #10,744 | 6 |
| 2015 | #36 | 5,636 | — | |
| 2014 | #35 | 5,610 | #8,781 | 8 |
| 2013 | #32 | 5,618 | #12,136 | 5 |
| 2012 | #33 | 5,781 | #12,274 | 5 |
| 2011 | #29 | 6,400 | #7,502 | 10 |
| 2010 | #24 | 6,545 | #8,803 | 8 |
| 2009 | #29 | 6,790 | #8,310 | 9 |
| 2008 | #40 | 5,634 | #7,187 | 11 |
| 2007 | #67 | 4,555 | — | |
| 2006 | #68 | 4,657 | #8,732 | 8 |
| 2005 | #68 | 4,601 | #5,578 | 14 |
| 2004 | #64 | 4,744 | #5,246 | 15 |
| 2003 | #81 | 3,925 | #10,894 | 5 |
| 2002 | #87 | 3,604 | #10,667 | 5 |
| 2001 | #87 | 3,521 | #8,339 | 7 |
| 2000 | #97 | 3,399 | #9,112 | 6 |
| 1999 | #103 | 3,288 | — | |
| 1998 | #106 | 3,218 | #9,631 | 5 |
| 1997 | #104 | 3,203 | — | |
| 1996 | #98 | 3,326 | — | |
| 1995 | #103 | 3,274 | #8,868 | 5 |
| 1994 | #101 | 3,205 | — | |
| 1993 | #92 | 3,414 | #8,700 | 5 |
| 1992 | #96 | 3,431 | #6,670 | 7 |
| 1991 | #91 | 3,816 | #5,942 | 8 |
| 1990 | #82 | 3,924 | #5,382 | 9 |
| 1989 | #83 | 3,784 | #2,690 | 23 |
| 1988 | #82 | 3,558 | #3,705 | 13 |
| 1987 | #82 | 3,454 | #3,731 | 12 |
| 1986 | #78 | 3,457 | #3,268 | 14 |
| 1985 | #78 | 3,572 | #2,710 | 18 |
| 1984 | #83 | 3,535 | #4,215 | 9 |
| 1983 | #82 | 3,484 | #2,577 | 18 |
| 1982 | #79 | 3,762 | #2,426 | 20 |
| 1981 | #81 | 3,808 | #3,601 | 11 |
| 1980 | #84 | 3,642 | #2,831 | 16 |
| 1979 | #98 | 3,075 | #3,810 | 10 |
| 1978 | #108 | 2,710 | #4,157 | 8 |
| 1977 | #112 | 2,586 | #3,606 | 10 |
| 1976 | #119 | 2,270 | #4,012 | 8 |
| 1975 | #132 | 2,117 | #3,659 | 9 |
| 1974 | #149 | 1,844 | #4,634 | 6 |
| 1973 | #175 | 1,587 | — | |
| 1972 | #179 | 1,594 | #3,963 | 7 |
| 1971 | #184 | 1,690 | #3,370 | 9 |
| 1970 | #192 | 1,672 | #3,282 | 9 |
| 1969 | #210 | 1,489 | #3,935 | 6 |
| 1968 | #195 | 1,616 | #4,136 | 5 |
| 1967 | #199 | 1,598 | #2,760 | 9 |
| 1966 | #220 | 1,378 | — | |
| 1965 | #228 | 1,385 | — | |
| 1964 | #230 | 1,422 | — | |
| 1963 | #244 | 1,299 | #4,048 | 5 |
| 1962 | #295 | 977 | #3,305 | 7 |
| 1961 | #332 | 806 | — | |
| 1960 | #342 | 773 | — | |
| 1959 | #352 | 738 | — | |
| 1958 | #357 | 667 | — | |
| 1957 | #335 | 740 | — | |
| 1956 | #339 | 668 | — | |
| 1955 | #356 | 592 | — | |
| 1954 | #368 | 558 | — | |
| 1953 | #347 | 580 | — | |
| 1952 | #374 | 496 | — | |
| 1951 | #370 | 479 | — | |
| 1950 | #385 | 442 | — | |
| 1949 | #369 | 451 | — | |
| 1948 | #403 | 387 | — | |
| 1947 | #410 | 388 | — | |
| 1946 | #431 | 324 | — | |
| 1945 | #421 | 285 | — | |
| 1944 | #414 | 306 | — | |
| 1943 | #418 | 308 | — | |
| 1942 | #393 | 330 | — | |
| 1941 | #352 | 351 | — | |
| 1940 | #334 | 365 | — | |
| 1939 | #322 | 373 | — | |
| 1938 | #324 | 376 | — | |
| 1937 | #307 | 408 | — | |
| 1936 | #335 | 346 | — | |
| 1935 | #334 | 362 | — | |
| 1934 | #315 | 395 | — | |
| 1933 | #336 | 338 | — | |
| 1932 | #376 | 296 | — | |
| 1931 | #360 | 319 | — | |
| 1930 | #376 | 326 | — | |
| 1929 | #381 | 309 | — | |
| 1928 | #332 | 405 | — | |
| 1927 | #370 | 345 | — | |
| 1926 | #319 | 436 | — | |
| 1925 | #316 | 444 | — | |
| 1924 | #296 | 505 | — | |
| 1923 | #294 | 487 | — | |
| 1922 | #293 | 485 | — | |
| 1921 | #292 | 514 | — | |
| 1920 | #286 | 523 | — | |
| 1919 | #277 | 527 | — | |
| 1918 | #259 | 588 | — | |
| 1917 | #269 | 534 | — | |
| 1916 | #266 | 514 | — | |
| 1915 | #252 | 552 | — | |
| 1914 | #246 | 457 | — | |
| 1913 | #248 | 370 | — | |
| 1912 | #257 | 302 | — | |
| 1911 | #270 | 202 | — | |
| 1910 | #268 | 207 | — | |
| 1909 | #271 | 176 | — | |
| 1908 | #249 | 194 | — | |
| 1907 | #234 | 200 | — | |
| 1906 | #255 | 164 | — | |
| 1905 | #247 | 168 | — | |
| 1904 | #259 | 149 | — | |
| 1903 | #226 | 175 | — | |
| 1902 | #231 | 171 | — | |
| 1901 | #210 | 184 | — | |
| 1900 | #252 | 166 | — | |
| 1899 | #223 | 149 | — | |
| 1898 | #211 | 185 | — | |
| 1897 | #226 | 147 | — | |
| 1896 | #211 | 169 | — | |
| 1895 | #191 | 203 | — | |
| 1894 | #194 | 182 | — | |
| 1893 | #198 | 167 | — | |
| 1892 | #196 | 163 | — | |
| 1891 | #190 | 144 | — | |
| 1890 | #184 | 162 | — | |
| 1889 | #197 | 134 | — | |
| 1888 | #207 | 118 | — | |
| 1887 | #228 | 83 | — | |
| 1886 | #219 | 83 | — | |
| 1885 | #212 | 85 | — | |
| 1884 | #212 | 79 | — | |
| 1883 | #223 | 65 | — | |
| 1882 | #230 | 56 | — | |
| 1881 | #208 | 52 | — | |
| 1880 | #208 | 54 | — | |
In the first year the SSA published name data, Leah was already there! It came in at #208, and was given to 54 baby girls.
Quietest stretch: 1880–1883, when fewer than 66 girls a year got the name.
Where Leah is popular in 1980
- Rank in state
- Top 10
- 11–50
- 51–100
- 101–500
- 501+
- Not published
Hover or tap a state for its numbers.
- Alaska#38 · 1 in 158
- Minnesota#44 · 1 in 194
- North Dakota#50 · 1 in 205
- Wisconsin#51 · 1 in 256
- Washington#51 · 1 in 261
Best ever in a state: #8 in Delaware, 2010.
Show every state
| State | Rank | Births | Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| Alaska | #38 | 18 | 1 in 158 |
| Minnesota | #44 | 150 | 1 in 194 |
| North Dakota | #50 | 23 | 1 in 205 |
| Washington | #51 | 103 | 1 in 261 |
| Wisconsin | #51 | 123 | 1 in 256 |
| Oregon | #52 | 67 | 1 in 258 |
| Iowa | #58 | 75 | 1 in 268 |
| Colorado | #59 | 72 | 1 in 274 |
| Arkansas | #60 | 51 | 1 in 265 |
| South Dakota | #60 | 18 | 1 in 260 |
| West Virginia | #60 | 42 | 1 in 285 |
| Hawaii | #61 | 19 | 1 in 265 |
| Massachusetts | #61 | 109 | 1 in 287 |
| Idaho | #63 | 25 | 1 in 276 |
| Arizona | #64 | 60 | 1 in 321 |
| Rhode Island | #66 | 18 | 1 in 252 |
| Vermont | #73 | 10 | 1 in 265 |
| Alabama | #74 | 71 | 1 in 324 |
| Mississippi | #74 | 51 | 1 in 322 |
| Maine | #78 | 18 | 1 in 337 |
| Tennessee | #78 | 75 | 1 in 379 |
| Nevada | #79 | 14 | 1 in 298 |
| New Mexico | #80 | 27 | 1 in 345 |
| Indiana | #81 | 94 | 1 in 394 |
| Missouri | #81 | 85 | 1 in 393 |
| New Jersey | #81 | 100 | 1 in 372 |
| Connecticut | #84 | 42 | 1 in 355 |
| Michigan | #84 | 147 | 1 in 410 |
| Wyoming | #84 | 10 | 1 in 321 |
| Louisiana | #85 | 80 | 1 in 384 |
| Kansas | #86 | 39 | 1 in 388 |
| Ohio | #86 | 171 | 1 in 429 |
| District of Columbia | #88 | 17 | 1 in 331 |
| Nebraska | #88 | 29 | 1 in 371 |
| Kentucky | #90 | 56 | 1 in 444 |
| New York | #90 | 229 | 1 in 436 |
| Pennsylvania | #93 | 152 | 1 in 454 |
| Georgia | #97 | 78 | 1 in 452 |
| Florida | #98 | 106 | 1 in 487 |
| California | #102 | 355 | 1 in 489 |
| Montana | #102 | 11 | 1 in 426 |
| Maryland | #104 | 42 | 1 in 481 |
| Oklahoma | #109 | 39 | 1 in 495 |
| Illinois | #113 | 144 | 1 in 537 |
| New Hampshire | #115 | 9 | 1 in 588 |
| Utah | #115 | 31 | 1 in 531 |
| Texas | #116 | 202 | 1 in 593 |
| South Carolina | #126 | 34 | 1 in 526 |
| North Carolina | #130 | 52 | 1 in 640 |
| Virginia | #134 | 45 | 1 in 663 |
| Delaware | — | — | — |
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 Leah
- 5 spots since 2024 (#53 → #58)
- 13 spots since 2020 (#45 → #58)
- 22 spots since 2015 (#36 → #58)
- Biggest jump: 51 spots in 1963 (#295 → #244)
- Biggest drop: 51 spots in 1927 (#319 → #370)
- Debuted 1880
- Peaked 2010 at #24 (6,545 births)
- Not yet halved from its peak
- Top 10: never
- Top 100: 42 yrs · run 2000–2025
- Top 1,000: 146 yrs · run 1880–2025
- Highest: 1 in 271 girls born in 2009 were named Leah (0.37%)
- Latest: 1 in 414 girls born in 2025 (0.24%)
- Its best rank, #24 in 2010, was only 1 in 272 (0.37%) — a smaller share of a much bigger birth year
- 21.9% of all girls named Leah (56,044) were born in this decade
Show by decade
| Decade | Births | Best rank | Avg rank |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1880s | 809 | #197 (1889) | #214 |
| 1890s | 1,671 | #184 (1890) | #202 |
| 1900s | 1,747 | #210 (1901) | #243 |
| 1910s | 4,253 | #246 (1914) | #261 |
| 1920s | 4,453 | #286 (1920) | #318 |
| 1930s | 3,539 | #307 (1937) | #339 |
| 1940s | 3,495 | #334 (1940) | #395 |
| 1950s | 5,960 | #335 (1957) | #358 |
| 1960s | 12,743 | #195 (1968) | #250 |
| 1970s | 21,145 | #98 (1979) | #145 |
| 1980s | 36,056 | #78 (1985) | #81 |
| 1990s | 34,099 | #82 (1990) | #98 |
| 2000s | 45,430 | #29 (2009) | #69 |
| 2010s | 56,044 | #24 (2010) | #35 |
| 2020s | 25,044 | #45 (2020) | #51 |
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.
Leah in 1980
Top girls' names in 1980
Top boys' names in 1980
More about 1980
girls
1,660,307 girls got a published name in 1980; 1 in 456 of them was named Leah, which outranked 99.3% of the 12,161 girls' names that year. The ten most popular names covered 17.1% of girls (24.6% in 1880, 7.0% in 2025).
Among names in the top 1,000 of either year.
boys
1,783,951 boys got a published name in 1980; 1 in 111,497 of them was named Leah, which outranked 61.2% of the 7,293 boys' names that year. The ten most popular names covered 23.6% of boys (44.2% in 1880, 8.0% in 2025).
- #2,729Wendall17
- #2,729Zach17
- #2,729Zacharia17
- #2,831Leah16
- #2,831Adriana16
- #2,831Agapito16
- #2,831Aloysius16
- #2,965Agustine15
- #2,965Albino15
- #2,965Amaury15
Tied with 133 names at #2,831; 3 shown. Tied names share a rank, as in SSA's lists.
Among names in the top 1,000 of either year.