Linda
#902 for girls in 2025, 294 births · Last seen for boys in 1994 at #5,109
Given to girls 99.7% of the time
- Peak · girls
- 1947 · 99,692 births
- Debut · girls
- 27 births
- In top 100 · girls
- 43 yrsof 146 years
- Total births · girls
- 1,455,143since 1880
Linda 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 | #902 | 294 | — | |
| 2024 | #836 | 324 | — | |
| 2023 | #841 | 324 | — | |
| 2022 | #800 | 352 | — | |
| 2021 | #841 | 328 | — | |
| 2020 | #814 | 334 | — | |
| 2019 | #768 | 362 | — | |
| 2018 | #717 | 398 | — | |
| 2017 | #704 | 410 | — | |
| 2016 | #658 | 444 | — | |
| 2015 | #664 | 429 | — | |
| 2014 | #612 | 475 | — | |
| 2013 | #626 | 447 | — | |
| 2012 | #633 | 450 | — | |
| 2011 | #587 | 491 | — | |
| 2010 | #614 | 480 | — | |
| 2009 | #548 | 555 | — | |
| 2008 | #507 | 614 | — | |
| 2007 | #492 | 662 | — | |
| 2006 | #451 | 700 | — | |
| 2005 | #415 | 754 | — | |
| 2004 | #417 | 731 | — | |
| 2003 | #409 | 741 | — | |
| 2002 | #382 | 773 | — | |
| 2001 | #354 | 839 | — | |
| 2000 | #357 | 851 | — | |
| 1999 | #336 | 900 | — | |
| 1998 | #312 | 972 | — | |
| 1997 | #263 | 1,099 | — | |
| 1996 | #293 | 987 | — | |
| 1995 | #230 | 1,234 | — | |
| 1994 | #221 | 1,284 | #5,109 | 11 |
| 1993 | #198 | 1,488 | #6,816 | 7 |
| 1992 | #191 | 1,582 | #4,564 | 12 |
| 1991 | #187 | 1,608 | #5,096 | 10 |
| 1990 | #175 | 1,661 | #4,673 | 11 |
| 1989 | #157 | 1,844 | #3,325 | 17 |
| 1988 | #155 | 1,845 | #4,786 | 9 |
| 1987 | #142 | 1,931 | #3,201 | 15 |
| 1986 | #148 | 1,950 | #2,510 | 21 |
| 1985 | #137 | 2,114 | #3,599 | 12 |
| 1984 | #119 | 2,336 | #3,459 | 12 |
| 1983 | #119 | 2,474 | #2,140 | 24 |
| 1982 | #107 | 2,791 | #2,518 | 19 |
| 1981 | #111 | 2,728 | #2,898 | 15 |
| 1980 | #110 | 2,806 | #2,617 | 18 |
| 1979 | #114 | 2,739 | #2,777 | 16 |
| 1978 | #100 | 2,932 | #2,799 | 15 |
| 1977 | #99 | 2,912 | #2,131 | 22 |
| 1976 | #90 | 3,138 | #3,095 | 12 |
| 1975 | #81 | 3,522 | #2,205 | 20 |
| 1974 | #75 | 4,077 | #2,050 | 21 |
| 1973 | #61 | 4,731 | #2,036 | 20 |
| 1972 | #51 | 5,742 | #1,473 | 33 |
| 1971 | #42 | 7,376 | #1,705 | 27 |
| 1970 | #38 | 8,731 | #1,351 | 38 |
| 1969 | #33 | 10,246 | #1,110 | 49 |
| 1968 | #28 | 11,371 | #1,183 | 41 |
| 1967 | #26 | 13,196 | #1,312 | 33 |
| 1966 | #18 | 15,566 | #998 | 53 |
| 1965 | #8 | 19,345 | #929 | 63 |
| 1964 | #8 | 23,629 | #782 | 93 |
| 1963 | #5 | 27,727 | #821 | 85 |
| 1962 | #5 | 31,461 | #822 | 85 |
| 1961 | #4 | 35,597 | #825 | 86 |
| 1960 | #3 | 37,316 | #775 | 96 |
| 1959 | #3 | 40,410 | #700 | 121 |
| 1958 | #3 | 41,904 | #761 | 95 |
| 1957 | #3 | 44,517 | #694 | 120 |
| 1956 | #3 | 48,084 | #710 | 107 |
| 1955 | #3 | 51,300 | #715 | 104 |
| 1954 | #2 | 55,371 | #669 | 116 |
| 1953 | #2 | 61,281 | #665 | 114 |
| 1952 | #1 | 67,082 | #603 | 137 |
| 1951 | #1 | 73,982 | #628 | 125 |
| 1950 | #1 | 80,433 | #599 | 130 |
| 1949 | #1 | 91,015 | #512 | 169 |
| 1948 | #1 | 96,220 | #463 | 207 |
| 1947 | #1 | 99,692 | #457 | 216 |
| 1946 | #2 | 52,710 | #601 | 115 |
| 1945 | #2 | 41,465 | #577 | 111 |
| 1944 | #3 | 38,415 | #575 | 114 |
| 1943 | #4 | 38,439 | #536 | 137 |
| 1942 | #4 | 31,613 | #558 | 121 |
| 1941 | #5 | 23,721 | #683 | 80 |
| 1940 | #8 | 18,370 | #810 | 59 |
| 1939 | #15 | 10,713 | #942 | 44 |
| 1938 | #31 | 7,047 | #1,247 | 28 |
| 1937 | #49 | 4,378 | #1,576 | 19 |
| 1936 | #97 | 2,440 | #2,452 | 9 |
| 1935 | #165 | 1,197 | #2,396 | 10 |
| 1934 | #182 | 1,000 | — | |
| 1933 | #216 | 782 | #2,542 | 9 |
| 1932 | #219 | 774 | #3,776 | 5 |
| 1931 | #269 | 535 | — | |
| 1930 | #299 | 492 | — | |
| 1929 | #289 | 509 | #3,247 | 7 |
| 1928 | #277 | 555 | — | |
| 1927 | #295 | 516 | — | |
| 1926 | #305 | 480 | — | |
| 1925 | #320 | 438 | #3,741 | 6 |
| 1924 | #314 | 454 | — | |
| 1923 | #312 | 423 | — | |
| 1922 | #339 | 365 | — | |
| 1921 | #341 | 367 | — | |
| 1920 | #352 | 348 | — | |
| 1919 | #385 | 282 | — | |
| 1918 | #359 | 322 | — | |
| 1917 | #370 | 291 | — | |
| 1916 | #356 | 297 | — | |
| 1915 | #349 | 290 | — | |
| 1914 | #358 | 219 | — | |
| 1913 | #306 | 238 | — | |
| 1912 | #329 | 189 | — | |
| 1911 | #350 | 130 | — | |
| 1910 | #335 | 137 | — | |
| 1909 | #352 | 105 | — | |
| 1908 | #372 | 93 | — | |
| 1907 | #350 | 102 | — | |
| 1906 | #337 | 98 | — | |
| 1905 | #329 | 105 | — | |
| 1904 | #323 | 101 | — | |
| 1903 | #326 | 90 | — | |
| 1902 | #324 | 91 | — | |
| 1901 | #326 | 86 | — | |
| 1900 | #293 | 125 | — | |
| 1899 | #298 | 98 | — | |
| 1898 | #311 | 102 | — | |
| 1897 | #326 | 81 | — | |
| 1896 | #287 | 104 | — | |
| 1895 | #288 | 96 | — | |
| 1894 | #285 | 94 | — | |
| 1893 | #300 | 82 | — | |
| 1892 | #296 | 83 | — | |
| 1891 | #282 | 78 | — | |
| 1890 | #348 | 54 | — | |
| 1889 | #277 | 74 | — | |
| 1888 | #262 | 77 | — | |
| 1887 | #302 | 50 | — | |
| 1886 | #294 | 49 | — | |
| 1885 | #255 | 60 | — | |
| 1884 | #341 | 33 | — | |
| 1883 | #257 | 49 | — | |
| 1882 | #294 | 36 | — | |
| 1881 | #262 | 38 | — | |
| 1880 | #305 | 27 | — | |
In the first year the SSA published name data, Linda was already there! It came in at #305, and was given to 27 baby girls.
Quietest stretch: 1880–1882, when fewer than 39 girls a year got the name.
Where Linda is popular in 1960
- Rank in state
- Top 10
- 11–50
- 51–100
- 101–500
- 501+
- Not published
Hover or tap a state for its numbers.
- Mississippi#2 · 1 in 33
- Arkansas#2 · 1 in 43
- Maine#2 · 1 in 44
- Nevada#2 · 1 in 44
- Alaska#2 · 1 in 47
Best ever in a state: #1 in Utah, 1940.
Show every state
| State | Rank | Births | Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| Alaska | #2 | 56 | 1 in 47 |
| Arkansas | #2 | 413 | 1 in 43 |
| Idaho | #2 | 134 | 1 in 48 |
| Maine | #2 | 227 | 1 in 44 |
| Mississippi | #2 | 775 | 1 in 33 |
| Nevada | #2 | 53 | 1 in 44 |
| New Mexico | #2 | 216 | 1 in 57 |
| Alabama | #3 | 726 | 1 in 48 |
| Florida | #3 | 1,054 | 1 in 48 |
| Missouri | #3 | 919 | 1 in 49 |
| New Hampshire | #3 | 154 | 1 in 36 |
| Oregon | #3 | 318 | 1 in 51 |
| Arizona | #4 | 242 | 1 in 63 |
| Colorado | #4 | 351 | 1 in 56 |
| Georgia | #4 | 850 | 1 in 52 |
| Illinois | #4 | 2,174 | 1 in 50 |
| Louisiana | #4 | 719 | 1 in 54 |
| Maryland | #4 | 651 | 1 in 46 |
| Michigan | #4 | 1,820 | 1 in 49 |
| Nebraska | #4 | 297 | 1 in 49 |
| Oklahoma | #4 | 413 | 1 in 51 |
| Rhode Island | #4 | 230 | 1 in 36 |
| South Carolina | #4 | 516 | 1 in 51 |
| Texas | #4 | 1,936 | 1 in 59 |
| Washington | #4 | 514 | 1 in 55 |
| Wisconsin | #4 | 962 | 1 in 47 |
| Wyoming | #4 | 57 | 1 in 51 |
| California | #5 | 2,883 | 1 in 60 |
| Indiana | #5 | 888 | 1 in 57 |
| Kansas | #5 | 382 | 1 in 55 |
| Massachusetts | #5 | 1,306 | 1 in 40 |
| Montana | #5 | 112 | 1 in 60 |
| New York | #5 | 3,201 | 1 in 52 |
| North Carolina | #5 | 948 | 1 in 51 |
| Ohio | #5 | 1,993 | 1 in 53 |
| Pennsylvania | #5 | 2,387 | 1 in 47 |
| South Dakota | #5 | 141 | 1 in 50 |
| Vermont | #5 | 87 | 1 in 41 |
| Connecticut | #6 | 552 | 1 in 45 |
| Delaware | #6 | 108 | 1 in 42 |
| Iowa | #6 | 566 | 1 in 50 |
| Kentucky | #6 | 616 | 1 in 52 |
| Minnesota | #6 | 700 | 1 in 55 |
| New Jersey | #6 | 1,328 | 1 in 44 |
| Tennessee | #6 | 669 | 1 in 54 |
| Utah | #6 | 183 | 1 in 58 |
| Virginia | #6 | 751 | 1 in 53 |
| Hawaii | #7 | 92 | 1 in 65 |
| North Dakota | #7 | 121 | 1 in 55 |
| District of Columbia | #8 | 229 | 1 in 58 |
| West Virginia | #13 | 296 | 1 in 59 |
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 Linda
- 66 spots since 2024 (#836 → #902)
- 88 spots since 2020 (#814 → #902)
- 238 spots since 2015 (#664 → #902)
- Biggest jump: 86 spots in 1885 (#341 → #255)
- Biggest drop: 84 spots in 1884 (#257 → #341)
- Debuted 1880
- Peaked 1947 at #1 (99,692 births)
- Births halved by 1956, 9 yrs later
- Top 10: 26 yrs · run 1940–1965
- Top 100: 43 yrs · run 1936–1978
- Top 1,000: 146 yrs · run 1880–2025
- Highest: 1 in 18 girls born in 1948 were named Linda (5.7%)
- Latest: 1 in 5,467 girls born in 2025 (0.02%)
- Its best rank, #1 in 1947, was only 1 in 18 (5.6%) — a smaller share of a much bigger birth year
- 38.8% of all girls named Linda (564,364) were born in this decade
Show by decade
| Decade | Births | Best rank | Avg rank |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1880s | 493 | #255 (1885) | #285 |
| 1890s | 872 | #282 (1891) | #302 |
| 1900s | 996 | #293 (1900) | #333 |
| 1910s | 2,395 | #306 (1913) | #350 |
| 1920s | 4,455 | #277 (1928) | #314 |
| 1930s | 29,358 | #15 (1939) | #154 |
| 1940s | 531,660 | #1 (1947) | #3 |
| 1950s | 564,364 | #1 (1950) | #2 |
| 1960s | 225,454 | #3 (1960) | #14 |
| 1970s | 45,900 | #38 (1970) | #75 |
| 1980s | 22,819 | #107 (1982) | #131 |
| 1990s | 12,815 | #175 (1990) | #241 |
| 2000s | 7,220 | #354 (2001) | #433 |
| 2010s | 4,386 | #587 (2011) | #658 |
| 2020s | 1,956 | #800 (2022) | #839 |
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.
Linda in 1960
Top girls' names in 1960
Top boys' names in 1960
More about 1960
girls
2,021,941 girls got a published name in 1960; 1 in 54 of them was named Linda, which outranked 100.0% of the 7,332 girls' names that year. The ten most popular names covered 17.0% of girls (24.6% in 1880, 7.0% in 2025).
Among names in the top 1,000 of either year.
boys
2,132,320 boys got a published name in 1960; 1 in 22,212 of them was named Linda, which outranked 83.1% of the 4,598 boys' names that year. The ten most popular names covered 29.1% of boys (44.2% in 1880, 8.0% in 2025).