Oakleigh
- #666 for girls in 2025, 423 births
- Last seen for boys in 2022 at #10,863
- Given to girls 99.6% of the time
- Peak · girls
- 2023 · 598 births
- Debut · girls
- 8 births
- In top 100 · girls
- neverof 146 years
- Total births · girls
- 4,121since 2005
Oakleigh over time
Rank among girls' names. Oakleigh has never cracked the top 500 here.
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 | #666 | 423 | — | |
| 2024 | #629 | 471 | — | |
| 2023 | #507 | 598 | — | |
| 2022 | #522 | 597 | #10,863 | 6 |
| 2021 | #605 | 495 | #10,799 | 6 |
| 2020 | #858 | 315 | — | |
| 2019 | #854 | 313 | — | |
| 2018 | #1,162 | 207 | #12,156 | 5 |
| 2017 | #1,291 | 182 | — | |
| 2016 | #1,550 | 144 | — | |
| 2015 | #1,793 | 116 | — | |
| 2014 | #2,351 | 78 | — | |
| 2013 | #3,218 | 50 | — | |
| 2012 | #3,169 | 52 | — | |
| 2011 | #5,063 | 27 | — | |
| 2010 | #8,701 | 13 | — | |
| 2009 | #9,379 | 12 | — | |
| 2008 | #10,807 | 10 | — | |
| 2007 | #17,636 | 5 | — | |
| 2006 | #17,168 | 5 | — | |
| 2005 | #11,834 | 8 | — | |
| 2004 | — | — | ||
| 2003 | — | — | ||
| 2002 | — | — | ||
| 2001 | — | — | ||
| 2000 | — | — | ||
| 1999 | — | — | ||
| 1998 | — | — | ||
| 1997 | — | — | ||
| 1996 | — | — | ||
| 1995 | — | — | ||
| 1994 | — | — | ||
| 1993 | — | — | ||
| 1992 | — | — | ||
| 1991 | — | — | ||
| 1990 | — | — | ||
| 1989 | — | — | ||
| 1988 | — | — | ||
| 1987 | — | — | ||
| 1986 | — | — | ||
| 1985 | — | — | ||
| 1984 | — | — | ||
| 1983 | — | — | ||
| 1982 | — | — | ||
| 1981 | — | — | ||
| 1980 | — | — | ||
| 1979 | — | — | ||
| 1978 | — | — | ||
| 1977 | — | — | ||
| 1976 | — | — | ||
| 1975 | — | — | ||
| 1974 | — | — | ||
| 1973 | — | — | ||
| 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 | — | — | ||
The first year at least five girls were named Oakleigh! It came in at #11,834, and was given to 8 baby girls.
Quietest stretch: 2006–2007, when fewer than 6 girls a year got the name.
Where Oakleigh 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.
- Mississippi#151 · 1 in 556
- West Virginia#154 · 1 in 507
- Alabama#177 · 1 in 733
- Arkansas#231 · 1 in 815
- Kentucky#286 · 1 in 1,150
Best ever in a state: #122 in Mississippi, 2023.
Show every state
| State | Rank | Births | Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mississippi | #151 | 16 | 1 in 556 |
| West Virginia | #154 | 10 | 1 in 507 |
| Alabama | #177 | 25 | 1 in 733 |
| Arkansas | #231 | 13 | 1 in 815 |
| Kentucky | #286 | 15 | 1 in 1,150 |
| Georgia | #305 | 34 | 1 in 1,330 |
| South Carolina | #347 | 14 | 1 in 1,306 |
| Ohio | #371 | 30 | 1 in 1,576 |
| Missouri | #386 | 15 | 1 in 1,620 |
| Tennessee | #389 | 20 | 1 in 1,604 |
| Iowa | #390 | 8 | 1 in 1,472 |
| Indiana | #418 | 16 | 1 in 1,744 |
| Michigan | #424 | 20 | 1 in 1,787 |
| Kansas | #497 | 6 | 1 in 1,968 |
| North Carolina | #534 | 20 | 1 in 2,324 |
| Pennsylvania | #576 | 18 | 1 in 2,594 |
| Louisiana | #597 | 7 | 1 in 2,339 |
| Oklahoma | #619 | 6 | 1 in 2,463 |
| Virginia | #704 | 10 | 1 in 3,374 |
| Florida | #735 | 22 | 1 in 3,944 |
| Arizona | #909 | 6 | 1 in 4,703 |
| Texas | #917 | 31 | 1 in 5,179 |
| Illinois | #927 | 9 | 1 in 4,925 |
| New York | #2,075 | 5 | 1 in 15,666 |
| Alaska | — | — | — |
| California | — | — | — |
| Colorado | — | — | — |
| Connecticut | — | — | — |
| Delaware | — | — | — |
| District of Columbia | — | — | — |
| Hawaii | — | — | — |
| Idaho | — | — | — |
| Maine | — | — | — |
| Maryland | — | — | — |
| Massachusetts | — | — | — |
| Minnesota | — | — | — |
| Montana | — | — | — |
| Nebraska | — | — | — |
| Nevada | — | — | — |
| New Hampshire | — | — | — |
| New Jersey | — | — | — |
| New Mexico | — | — | — |
| North Dakota | — | — | — |
| Oregon | — | — | — |
| Rhode Island | — | — | — |
| South Dakota | — | — | — |
| Utah | — | — | — |
| Vermont | — | — | — |
| Washington | — | — | — |
| 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 Oakleigh
- 37 spots since 2024 (#629 → #666)
- 192 spots since 2020 (#858 → #666)
- Biggest jump: 308 spots in 2019
- Biggest drop: 122 spots in 2024
- Debuted 2005
- Peaked 2023 at #507 (598 births)
- Not yet halved from its peak
- Top 10: never
- Top 100: never
- Top 1,000: 7 yrs · run 2019–2025
- Highest: 1 in 2,683 girls born in 2023 were named Oakleigh (0.04%)
- Latest: 1 in 3,800 girls born in 2025 (0.03%)
- 70.3% of all girls named Oakleigh (2,899) were born in this decade
Show by decade
| Decade | Births | Best rank | Avg rank |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 40 | #9,379 (2009) | #13,365 |
| 2010s | 1,182 | #854 (2019) | #2,915 |
| 2020s | 2,899 | #507 (2023) | #631 |
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 Oakleigh ranked and which names it was up against. Click a point on the chart, or pick a year: