Mabel
- #201 for girls in 2025, 1,522 births
- Last seen for boys in 1940 at #3,459
- Given to girls 99.7% of the time
Showing
- Peak · girls
- 1891 · 2,029 births
- Debut · girls
- 808 births
- In top 100 · girls
- 43 yrsof 146 years
- Total births · girls
- 142,284since 1880
Mabel over time
girls
Rank among girls' names. Click any year to open it.
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 | #201 | 1,522 | — | |
| 2024 | #222 | 1,385 | — | |
| 2023 | #278 | 1,131 | — | |
| 2022 | #310 | 1,027 | — | |
| 2021 | #375 | 831 | — | |
| 2020 | #428 | 718 | — | |
| 2019 | #440 | 712 | — | |
| 2018 | #439 | 727 | — | |
| 2017 | #451 | 703 | — | |
| 2016 | #515 | 605 | — | |
| 2015 | #578 | 529 | — | |
| 2014 | #668 | 427 | — | |
| 2013 | #711 | 393 | — | |
| 2012 | #1,044 | 241 | — | |
| 2011 | #1,224 | 196 | — | |
| 2010 | #1,328 | 177 | — | |
| 2009 | #1,538 | 147 | — | |
| 2008 | #1,631 | 139 | — | |
| 2007 | #1,713 | 127 | — | |
| 2006 | #1,788 | 116 | — | |
| 2005 | #1,838 | 106 | — | |
| 2004 | #2,030 | 90 | — | |
| 2003 | #1,885 | 97 | — | |
| 2002 | #1,897 | 93 | — | |
| 2001 | #2,035 | 83 | — | |
| 2000 | #2,141 | 75 | — | |
| 1999 | #1,770 | 90 | — | |
| 1998 | #1,958 | 77 | — | |
| 1997 | #2,874 | 42 | — | |
| 1996 | #2,282 | 58 | — | |
| 1995 | #2,421 | 53 | — | |
| 1994 | #1,862 | 76 | — | |
| 1993 | #2,090 | 65 | — | |
| 1992 | #1,798 | 80 | — | |
| 1991 | #1,877 | 75 | — | |
| 1990 | #1,828 | 78 | — | |
| 1989 | #1,981 | 64 | — | |
| 1988 | #1,354 | 105 | — | |
| 1987 | #1,498 | 86 | — | |
| 1986 | #1,638 | 72 | — | |
| 1985 | #1,710 | 67 | — | |
| 1984 | #1,511 | 75 | — | |
| 1983 | #1,531 | 73 | — | |
| 1982 | #1,566 | 75 | — | |
| 1981 | #1,423 | 86 | — | |
| 1980 | #1,542 | 76 | — | |
| 1979 | #1,605 | 70 | — | |
| 1978 | #1,690 | 62 | — | |
| 1977 | #1,637 | 64 | — | |
| 1976 | #1,397 | 76 | — | |
| 1975 | #1,498 | 68 | — | |
| 1974 | #1,300 | 82 | — | |
| 1973 | #1,458 | 65 | — | |
| 1972 | #1,432 | 68 | — | |
| 1971 | #1,405 | 75 | — | |
| 1970 | #1,584 | 60 | — | |
| 1969 | #1,201 | 86 | — | |
| 1968 | #1,311 | 71 | — | |
| 1967 | #1,269 | 72 | — | |
| 1966 | #1,161 | 84 | — | |
| 1965 | #1,079 | 94 | — | |
| 1964 | #945 | 124 | — | |
| 1963 | #959 | 122 | — | |
| 1962 | #945 | 126 | — | |
| 1961 | #914 | 140 | — | |
| 1960 | #915 | 134 | — | |
| 1959 | #871 | 140 | — | |
| 1958 | #888 | 132 | — | |
| 1957 | #754 | 175 | — | |
| 1956 | #715 | 181 | — | |
| 1955 | #672 | 194 | — | |
| 1954 | #706 | 173 | — | |
| 1953 | #636 | 197 | — | |
| 1952 | #592 | 216 | — | |
| 1951 | #608 | 200 | — | |
| 1950 | #547 | 228 | — | |
| 1949 | #514 | 253 | — | |
| 1948 | #453 | 311 | — | |
| 1947 | #443 | 345 | — | |
| 1946 | #421 | 334 | — | |
| 1945 | #379 | 344 | — | |
| 1944 | #351 | 387 | — | |
| 1943 | #319 | 478 | — | |
| 1942 | #304 | 513 | — | |
| 1941 | #285 | 507 | — | |
| 1940 | #265 | 548 | #3,459 | 5 |
| 1939 | #256 | 593 | — | |
| 1938 | #245 | 674 | — | |
| 1937 | #233 | 697 | #3,518 | 5 |
| 1936 | #221 | 743 | — | |
| 1935 | #208 | 826 | — | |
| 1934 | #209 | 850 | #3,277 | 6 |
| 1933 | #196 | 875 | #3,004 | 7 |
| 1932 | #171 | 1,111 | #3,361 | 6 |
| 1931 | #174 | 1,060 | #3,390 | 6 |
| 1930 | #150 | 1,369 | #2,781 | 9 |
| 1929 | #147 | 1,516 | #2,766 | 9 |
| 1928 | #135 | 1,742 | #3,357 | 7 |
| 1927 | #133 | 1,954 | #4,210 | 5 |
| 1926 | #127 | 2,076 | #3,139 | 8 |
| 1925 | #118 | 2,292 | #3,155 | 8 |
| 1924 | #108 | 2,652 | #4,347 | 5 |
| 1923 | #102 | 2,696 | #3,467 | 7 |
| 1922 | #99 | 2,894 | #3,872 | 6 |
| 1921 | #85 | 3,336 | #4,322 | 5 |
| 1920 | #83 | 3,364 | #2,967 | 9 |
| 1919 | #78 | 3,405 | #3,391 | 7 |
| 1918 | #74 | 3,636 | #2,882 | 9 |
| 1917 | #68 | 3,499 | #1,815 | 17 |
| 1916 | #65 | 3,680 | #3,516 | 6 |
| 1915 | #62 | 3,683 | #2,070 | 13 |
| 1914 | #58 | 3,131 | #1,868 | 12 |
| 1913 | #56 | 2,741 | #2,092 | 8 |
| 1912 | #46 | 2,714 | #1,223 | 15 |
| 1911 | #43 | 2,171 | #1,117 | 10 |
| 1910 | #45 | 2,123 | #1,045 | 10 |
| 1909 | #41 | 2,007 | #893 | 11 |
| 1908 | #37 | 2,096 | #779 | 12 |
| 1907 | #36 | 2,069 | #815 | 11 |
| 1906 | #34 | 2,054 | #798 | 10 |
| 1905 | #29 | 2,178 | #1,002 | 7 |
| 1904 | #27 | 2,172 | #686 | 12 |
| 1903 | #25 | 2,163 | #846 | 8 |
| 1902 | #24 | 2,280 | #651 | 12 |
| 1901 | #23 | 2,097 | #596 | 12 |
| 1900 | #25 | 2,509 | #968 | 8 |
| 1899 | #22 | 2,127 | #928 | 6 |
| 1898 | #23 | 2,331 | #885 | 7 |
| 1897 | #22 | 2,222 | #681 | 10 |
| 1896 | #21 | 2,283 | — | |
| 1895 | #20 | 2,359 | — | |
| 1894 | #20 | 2,221 | #954 | 6 |
| 1893 | #21 | 2,191 | #650 | 10 |
| 1892 | #19 | 2,170 | — | |
| 1891 | #15 | 2,029 | #700 | 8 |
| 1890 | #17 | 2,058 | #739 | 8 |
| 1889 | #16 | 1,947 | #789 | 7 |
| 1888 | #17 | 1,830 | — | |
| 1887 | #18 | 1,494 | #921 | 5 |
| 1886 | #20 | 1,422 | #845 | 6 |
| 1885 | #20 | 1,349 | #765 | 7 |
| 1884 | #20 | 1,270 | — | |
| 1883 | #23 | 1,086 | #799 | 6 |
| 1882 | #23 | 997 | — | |
| 1881 | #23 | 893 | — | |
| 1880 | #22 | 808 | — | |
First appearance
1880
In the first year the SSA published name data, Mabel was already there! It came in at #22, and was given to 808 baby girls.
Quietest stretch: 1995–1997, when fewer than 59 girls a year got the name.
Where Mabel is popular in 2025
- Rank in state
- Top 10
- 11–50
- 51–100
- 101–500
- 501+
- Not published
Hover or tap a state for its numbers.
Show every state
| State | Rank | Births | Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| Maine | #50 | 16 | 1 in 195 |
| Utah | #64 | 57 | 1 in 300 |
| Minnesota | #66 | 68 | 1 in 316 |
| Oregon | #67 | 42 | 1 in 311 |
| Alaska | #70 | 8 | 1 in 207 |
| Vermont | #75 | 5 | 1 in 195 |
| Montana | #79 | 11 | 1 in 257 |
| New Hampshire | #82 | 14 | 1 in 271 |
| Michigan | #93 | 80 | 1 in 447 |
| Idaho | #94 | 21 | 1 in 341 |
| Nebraska | #95 | 21 | 1 in 338 |
| Iowa | #96 | 31 | 1 in 380 |
| Indiana | #99 | 64 | 1 in 436 |
| Wisconsin | #100 | 48 | 1 in 422 |
| Colorado | #131 | 41 | 1 in 569 |
| Missouri | #139 | 43 | 1 in 565 |
| Massachusetts | #142 | 39 | 1 in 616 |
| South Carolina | #144 | 31 | 1 in 590 |
| West Virginia | #154 | 10 | 1 in 507 |
| Washington | #164 | 44 | 1 in 656 |
| Hawaii | #168 | 5 | 1 in 429 |
| Ohio | #175 | 64 | 1 in 739 |
| Oklahoma | #175 | 22 | 1 in 672 |
| Illinois | #179 | 55 | 1 in 806 |
| Kansas | #184 | 18 | 1 in 656 |
| Virginia | #192 | 43 | 1 in 785 |
| Tennessee | #194 | 39 | 1 in 822 |
| North Dakota | #195 | 5 | 1 in 540 |
| Nevada | #196 | 13 | 1 in 708 |
| Connecticut | #206 | 16 | 1 in 719 |
| Arkansas | #208 | 14 | 1 in 757 |
| Kentucky | #208 | 22 | 1 in 784 |
| Pennsylvania | #228 | 49 | 1 in 953 |
| Maryland | #242 | 21 | 1 in 952 |
| Arizona | #251 | 28 | 1 in 1,008 |
| California | #267 | 123 | 1 in 1,315 |
| Louisiana | #322 | 14 | 1 in 1,169 |
| North Carolina | #381 | 28 | 1 in 1,660 |
| Florida | #383 | 48 | 1 in 1,808 |
| Texas | #386 | 87 | 1 in 1,845 |
| New York | #403 | 43 | 1 in 1,822 |
| Alabama | #481 | 10 | 1 in 1,832 |
| Georgia | #487 | 23 | 1 in 1,966 |
| New Jersey | #499 | 15 | 1 in 2,367 |
| Mississippi | #514 | 5 | 1 in 1,780 |
| Delaware | — | — | — |
| District of Columbia | — | — | — |
| New Mexico | — | — | — |
| Rhode Island | — | — | — |
| South Dakota | — | — | — |
| 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 Mabel
Momentum · girls
Rising
- 227 spots since 2020 (#428 → #201)
- Biggest jump: 333 spots in 2013
- Biggest drop: 134 spots in 1958
Rise & fade · girls
11 yrs to peak
- Debuted 1880
- Peaked 1891 at #15 (2,029 births)
- Births halved by 1933, 42 yrs later
Top of the charts · girls
Top 100 for 43 yrs
- Top 10: never
- Top 100: 43 yrs · run 1880–1922
- Top 1,000: 98 yrs · run 1880–1964
Share of babies · girls
1 in 91
- Highest: 1 in 91 girls born in 1891 were named Mabel (1.1%)
- Latest: 1 in 1,056 girls born in 2025 (0.09%)
Era · girls
The 1910s
- 21.6% of all girls named Mabel (30,783) were born in this decade
- Comeback: #15 (1891) → #2,874 (1997) → #201 (2025)
Show by decade
| Decade | Births | Best rank | Avg rank |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1880s | 13,096 | #16 (1889) | #20 |
| 1890s | 21,991 | #15 (1891) | #20 |
| 1900s | 21,625 | #23 (1901) | #30 |
| 1910s | 30,783 | #43 (1911) | #60 |
| 1920s | 24,522 | #83 (1920) | #114 |
| 1930s | 8,798 | #150 (1930) | #206 |
| 1940s | 4,020 | #265 (1940) | #373 |
| 1950s | 1,836 | #547 (1950) | #699 |
| 1960s | 1,053 | #914 (1961) | #1,070 |
| 1970s | 690 | #1,300 (1974) | #1,501 |
| 1980s | 779 | #1,354 (1988) | #1,575 |
| 1990s | 694 | #1,770 (1999) | #2,076 |
| 2000s | 1,073 | #1,538 (2009) | #1,850 |
| 2010s | 4,710 | #439 (2018) | #740 |
| 2020s | 6,614 | #201 (2025) | #302 |
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.
Want to check a specific year?
See where Mabel ranked and which names it was up against. Click a point on the chart, or pick a year: