Micaiah
- #4,172 for girls in 2025, 34 births
- #1,382 for boys in 2025, 133 births
- Given to boys 66.5% of the time
Showing
- Peak · boys
- 2001 · 105 births
- Debut · boys
- 5 births
- In top 100 · boys
- neverof 146 years
- Total births · boys
- 3,085since 1973
Micaiah over time
girlsboys
Rank within each sex, plotted together. 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 | #4,172 | 34 | #1,382 | 133 |
| 2024 | #5,300 | 24 | #1,556 | 112 |
| 2023 | #4,454 | 31 | #1,408 | 130 |
| 2022 | #5,465 | 23 | #1,665 | 103 |
| 2021 | #3,553 | 43 | #1,688 | 97 |
| 2020 | #3,179 | 49 | #1,398 | 124 |
| 2019 | #3,085 | 52 | #1,698 | 93 |
| 2018 | #3,346 | 47 | #1,707 | 92 |
| 2017 | #3,848 | 39 | #1,612 | 99 |
| 2016 | #2,667 | 65 | #1,386 | 127 |
| 2015 | #3,299 | 49 | #1,625 | 98 |
| 2014 | #3,652 | 42 | #1,276 | 139 |
| 2013 | #3,778 | 40 | #1,361 | 124 |
| 2012 | #3,364 | 48 | #1,562 | 101 |
| 2011 | #3,132 | 53 | #1,516 | 105 |
| 2010 | #3,360 | 48 | #1,687 | 91 |
| 2009 | #3,737 | 42 | #1,594 | 100 |
| 2008 | #2,855 | 62 | #1,916 | 75 |
| 2007 | #3,096 | 56 | #1,539 | 102 |
| 2006 | #2,778 | 63 | #1,738 | 80 |
| 2005 | #2,756 | 60 | #1,943 | 65 |
| 2004 | #2,556 | 65 | #1,687 | 76 |
| 2003 | #2,393 | 69 | #1,451 | 90 |
| 2002 | #2,673 | 57 | #1,543 | 80 |
| 2001 | #2,211 | 73 | #1,265 | 105 |
| 2000 | #2,213 | 71 | #1,993 | 51 |
| 1999 | #2,854 | 47 | #1,720 | 60 |
| 1998 | #3,301 | 37 | #1,987 | 48 |
| 1997 | #3,448 | 33 | #2,024 | 44 |
| 1996 | #3,723 | 29 | #2,380 | 33 |
| 1995 | #5,958 | 15 | #2,253 | 35 |
| 1994 | #5,713 | 16 | #3,469 | 19 |
| 1993 | #7,038 | 12 | #2,943 | 23 |
| 1992 | #7,067 | 12 | #3,220 | 20 |
| 1991 | #10,271 | 7 | #2,544 | 27 |
| 1990 | #10,193 | 7 | #2,695 | 24 |
| 1989 | #12,362 | 5 | #3,809 | 14 |
| 1988 | #11,798 | 5 | #3,350 | 15 |
| 1987 | #9,825 | 6 | #3,201 | 15 |
| 1986 | — | #6,721 | 5 | |
| 1985 | #9,307 | 6 | #6,523 | 5 |
| 1984 | — | #5,561 | 6 | |
| 1983 | #10,275 | 5 | #4,907 | 7 |
| 1982 | — | #3,282 | 13 | |
| 1981 | — | #4,961 | 7 | |
| 1980 | — | #4,134 | 9 | |
| 1979 | — | #2,777 | 16 | |
| 1978 | — | #2,568 | 17 | |
| 1977 | — | #2,791 | 15 | |
| 1976 | #9,284 | 5 | #5,587 | 5 |
| 1975 | — | #4,797 | 6 | |
| 1974 | — | — | ||
| 1973 | — | #5,101 | 5 | |
| 1972 | — | — | ||
| 1971 | — | — | ||
| 1970 | — | — | ||
| 1969 | — | — | ||
| 1968 | — | — | ||
| 1967 | — | — | ||
| 1966 | — | — | ||
| 1965 | — | — | ||
| 1964 | — | — | ||
| 1963 | — | — | ||
| 1962 | — | — | ||
| 1961 | — | — | ||
| 1960 | — | — | ||
| 1959 | — | — | ||
| 1958 | — | — | ||
| 1957 | — | — | ||
| 1956 | — | — | ||
| 1955 | — | — | ||
| 1954 | — | — | ||
| 1953 | — | — | ||
| 1952 | — | — | ||
| 1951 | — | — | ||
| 1950 | — | — | ||
| 1949 | — | — | ||
| 1948 | — | — | ||
| 1947 | — | — | ||
| 1946 | — | — | ||
| 1945 | — | — | ||
| 1944 | — | — | ||
| 1943 | — | — | ||
| 1942 | — | — | ||
| 1941 | — | — | ||
| 1940 | — | — | ||
| 1939 | — | — | ||
| 1938 | — | — | ||
| 1937 | — | — | ||
| 1936 | — | — | ||
| 1935 | — | — | ||
| 1934 | — | — | ||
| 1933 | — | — | ||
| 1932 | — | — | ||
| 1931 | — | — | ||
| 1930 | — | — | ||
| 1929 | — | — | ||
| 1928 | — | — | ||
| 1927 | — | — | ||
| 1926 | — | — | ||
| 1925 | — | — | ||
| 1924 | — | — | ||
| 1923 | — | — | ||
| 1922 | — | — | ||
| 1921 | — | — | ||
| 1920 | — | — | ||
| 1919 | — | — | ||
| 1918 | — | — | ||
| 1917 | — | — | ||
| 1916 | — | — | ||
| 1915 | — | — | ||
| 1914 | — | — | ||
| 1913 | — | — | ||
| 1912 | — | — | ||
| 1911 | — | — | ||
| 1910 | — | — | ||
| 1909 | — | — | ||
| 1908 | — | — | ||
| 1907 | — | — | ||
| 1906 | — | — | ||
| 1905 | — | — | ||
| 1904 | — | — | ||
| 1903 | — | — | ||
| 1902 | — | — | ||
| 1901 | — | — | ||
| 1900 | — | — | ||
| 1899 | — | — | ||
| 1898 | — | — | ||
| 1897 | — | — | ||
| 1896 | — | — | ||
| 1895 | — | — | ||
| 1894 | — | — | ||
| 1893 | — | — | ||
| 1892 | — | — | ||
| 1891 | — | — | ||
| 1890 | — | — | ||
| 1889 | — | — | ||
| 1888 | — | — | ||
| 1887 | — | — | ||
| 1886 | — | — | ||
| 1885 | — | — | ||
| 1884 | — | — | ||
| 1883 | — | — | ||
| 1882 | — | — | ||
| 1881 | — | — | ||
| 1880 | — | — | ||
First appearance
1973
The first year at least five boys were named Micaiah! It came in at #5,101, and was given to 5 baby boys.
Quietest stretch: 1973–1974, when fewer than 6 boys a year got the name.
Where Micaiah 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.
Top states · boys
- Virginia#727 · 1 in 4,139
- Colorado#756 · 1 in 4,475
- Michigan#829 · 1 in 5,024
- Pennsylvania#913 · 1 in 6,532
- Tennessee#927 · 1 in 6,128
Best ever in a state: #524 in South Carolina, 2004.
Show every state
| State | Rank | Births | Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| Virginia | #727 | 9 | 1 in 4,139 |
| Colorado | #756 | 6 | 1 in 4,475 |
| Michigan | #829 | 8 | 1 in 5,024 |
| Pennsylvania | #913 | 8 | 1 in 6,532 |
| Tennessee | #927 | 6 | 1 in 6,128 |
| Florida | #1,009 | 13 | 1 in 7,349 |
| Ohio | #1,015 | 7 | 1 in 7,505 |
| North Carolina | #1,144 | 6 | 1 in 8,578 |
| Texas | #1,415 | 13 | 1 in 13,465 |
| California | #1,687 | 9 | 1 in 19,497 |
| Alabama | — | — | — |
| Alaska | — | — | — |
| Arizona | — | — | — |
| Arkansas | — | — | — |
| Connecticut | — | — | — |
| Delaware | — | — | — |
| District of Columbia | — | — | — |
| Georgia | — | — | — |
| Hawaii | — | — | — |
| Idaho | — | — | — |
| Illinois | — | — | — |
| Indiana | — | — | — |
| Iowa | — | — | — |
| Kansas | — | — | — |
| Kentucky | — | — | — |
| Louisiana | — | — | — |
| Maine | — | — | — |
| Maryland | — | — | — |
| Massachusetts | — | — | — |
| Minnesota | — | — | — |
| Mississippi | — | — | — |
| Missouri | — | — | — |
| Montana | — | — | — |
| Nebraska | — | — | — |
| Nevada | — | — | — |
| New Hampshire | — | — | — |
| New Jersey | — | — | — |
| New Mexico | — | — | — |
| New York | — | — | — |
| North Dakota | — | — | — |
| Oklahoma | — | — | — |
| 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 boys 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 Micaiah
Momentum · boys
Holding steady
- 16 spots since 2020 (#1,398 → #1,382)
Rise & fade · boys
28 yrs to peak
- Debuted 1973
- Peaked 2001 at #1,265 (105 births)
- Not yet halved from its peak
Top of the charts · boys
Never in the top 1,000
- Top 10: never
- Top 100: never
- Top 1,000: never
Share of babies · boys
1 in 12,843
- Highest: 1 in 12,843 boys born in 2025 were named Micaiah (0.01%)
- Its best rank, #1,265 in 2001, was only 1 in 18,504 (0.01%) — a smaller share of a much bigger birth year
Era · boys
The 2010s
- 34.7% of all boys named Micaiah (1,069) were born in this decade
Girls or boys?
Flipped in 2001
- Mostly girls until 2000, mostly boys since
Show by decade
| Decade | Births | Best rank | Avg rank |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1970s | 64 | #2,568 (1978) | #3,937 |
| 1980s | 96 | #3,201 (1987) | #4,645 |
| 1990s | 333 | #1,720 (1999) | #2,524 |
| 2000s | 824 | #1,265 (2001) | #1,667 |
| 2010s | 1,069 | #1,276 (2014) | #1,543 |
| 2020s | 699 | #1,382 (2025) | #1,516 |
All figures count published births only (names given to at least 5 boys in a year). Registrations before 1937 are incomplete, so early shares and totals run low.
Want to check a specific year?
See where Micaiah ranked and which names it was up against. Click a point on the chart, or pick a year: