Retha
Last seen for girls in 2014 at #16,513
- Peak · girls
- 1901 · 48 births
- Debut · girls
- 6 births
- In top 100 · girls
- neverof 146 years
- Total births · girls
- 10,597since 1884
Retha over time
Rank among girls' names. Retha has never cracked the top 400 here.
Gaps mean fewer than 5 babies received the name that year, so the SSA doesn't publish it.
Show data table
| Year | girls | |
|---|---|---|
| rank | births | |
| 2025 | — | |
| 2024 | — | |
| 2023 | — | |
| 2022 | — | |
| 2021 | — | |
| 2020 | — | |
| 2019 | — | |
| 2018 | — | |
| 2017 | — | |
| 2016 | — | |
| 2015 | — | |
| 2014 | #16,513 | 5 |
| 2013 | — | |
| 2012 | — | |
| 2011 | — | |
| 2010 | — | |
| 2009 | — | |
| 2008 | — | |
| 2007 | — | |
| 2006 | — | |
| 2005 | — | |
| 2004 | — | |
| 2003 | — | |
| 2002 | — | |
| 2001 | #15,352 | 5 |
| 2000 | — | |
| 1999 | — | |
| 1998 | #14,122 | 5 |
| 1997 | — | |
| 1996 | — | |
| 1995 | #13,386 | 5 |
| 1994 | #13,430 | 5 |
| 1993 | #13,442 | 5 |
| 1992 | #11,738 | 6 |
| 1991 | #8,588 | 9 |
| 1990 | #7,303 | 11 |
| 1989 | #6,160 | 13 |
| 1988 | #7,111 | 10 |
| 1987 | #5,923 | 12 |
| 1986 | #4,539 | 17 |
| 1985 | #4,455 | 17 |
| 1984 | #5,899 | 11 |
| 1983 | #4,686 | 15 |
| 1982 | #6,371 | 10 |
| 1981 | #4,746 | 15 |
| 1980 | #3,506 | 23 |
| 1979 | #4,842 | 14 |
| 1978 | #4,459 | 15 |
| 1977 | #5,213 | 12 |
| 1976 | #3,678 | 18 |
| 1975 | #2,881 | 25 |
| 1974 | #2,616 | 28 |
| 1973 | #2,506 | 29 |
| 1972 | #2,057 | 38 |
| 1971 | #2,477 | 30 |
| 1970 | #1,828 | 48 |
| 1969 | #1,728 | 49 |
| 1968 | #1,387 | 65 |
| 1967 | #1,372 | 64 |
| 1966 | #1,335 | 66 |
| 1965 | #1,208 | 79 |
| 1964 | #1,293 | 74 |
| 1963 | #1,104 | 97 |
| 1962 | #949 | 125 |
| 1961 | #983 | 121 |
| 1960 | #926 | 132 |
| 1959 | #936 | 125 |
| 1958 | #837 | 148 |
| 1957 | #821 | 152 |
| 1956 | #830 | 142 |
| 1955 | #735 | 167 |
| 1954 | #728 | 161 |
| 1953 | #719 | 159 |
| 1952 | #669 | 175 |
| 1951 | #651 | 177 |
| 1950 | #608 | 189 |
| 1949 | #611 | 183 |
| 1948 | #629 | 172 |
| 1947 | #667 | 159 |
| 1946 | #625 | 161 |
| 1945 | #570 | 167 |
| 1944 | #592 | 154 |
| 1943 | #576 | 173 |
| 1942 | #583 | 161 |
| 1941 | #525 | 176 |
| 1940 | #490 | 196 |
| 1939 | #508 | 175 |
| 1938 | #507 | 173 |
| 1937 | #470 | 194 |
| 1936 | #500 | 167 |
| 1935 | #456 | 195 |
| 1934 | #455 | 206 |
| 1933 | #440 | 213 |
| 1932 | #492 | 181 |
| 1931 | #469 | 191 |
| 1930 | #510 | 173 |
| 1929 | #493 | 186 |
| 1928 | #486 | 199 |
| 1927 | #481 | 210 |
| 1926 | #492 | 201 |
| 1925 | #482 | 209 |
| 1924 | #438 | 252 |
| 1923 | #481 | 205 |
| 1922 | #467 | 215 |
| 1921 | #472 | 214 |
| 1920 | #510 | 187 |
| 1919 | #454 | 213 |
| 1918 | #452 | 218 |
| 1917 | #473 | 190 |
| 1916 | #517 | 160 |
| 1915 | #494 | 155 |
| 1914 | #590 | 93 |
| 1913 | #503 | 102 |
| 1912 | #497 | 92 |
| 1911 | #467 | 77 |
| 1910 | #472 | 72 |
| 1909 | #442 | 70 |
| 1908 | #493 | 54 |
| 1907 | #486 | 54 |
| 1906 | #472 | 52 |
| 1905 | #632 | 31 |
| 1904 | #484 | 46 |
| 1903 | #640 | 27 |
| 1902 | #490 | 41 |
| 1901 | #431 | 48 |
| 1900 | #760 | 23 |
| 1899 | #514 | 33 |
| 1898 | #527 | 35 |
| 1897 | #644 | 23 |
| 1896 | #707 | 20 |
| 1895 | #770 | 17 |
| 1894 | #850 | 13 |
| 1893 | #826 | 13 |
| 1892 | #1,017 | 9 |
| 1891 | #1,332 | 5 |
| 1890 | #872 | 10 |
| 1889 | #839 | 10 |
| 1888 | — | |
| 1887 | #788 | 9 |
| 1886 | — | |
| 1885 | #1,047 | 5 |
| 1884 | #930 | 6 |
| 1883 | — | |
| 1882 | — | |
| 1881 | — | |
| 1880 | — | |
The first year at least five girls were named Retha! It came in at #930, and was given to 6 baby girls.
Quietest stretch: 1885–1886, when fewer than 6 girls a year got the name.
Where Retha is popular in 1952
- Rank in state
- Top 10
- 11–50
- 51–100
- 101–500
- 501+
- Not published
Hover or tap a state for its numbers.
- West Virginia#236 · 1 in 1,708
- Arkansas#283 · 1 in 1,992
- Oklahoma#300 · 1 in 2,387
- Kentucky#321 · 1 in 3,062
- Georgia#341 · 1 in 2,936
Best ever in a state: #167 in Oklahoma, 1941.
Show every state
| State | Rank | Births | Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| West Virginia | #236 | 13 | 1 in 1,708 |
| Arkansas | #283 | 10 | 1 in 1,992 |
| Oklahoma | #300 | 9 | 1 in 2,387 |
| Kentucky | #321 | 11 | 1 in 3,062 |
| Georgia | #341 | 15 | 1 in 2,936 |
| Alabama | #347 | 13 | 1 in 2,833 |
| North Carolina | #351 | 16 | 1 in 3,192 |
| Tennessee | #354 | 10 | 1 in 3,704 |
| South Carolina | #415 | 7 | 1 in 4,182 |
| Missouri | #487 | 6 | 1 in 6,889 |
| Florida | #536 | 5 | 1 in 6,542 |
| Ohio | #577 | 9 | 1 in 10,555 |
| Texas | #671 | 13 | 1 in 8,195 |
| Michigan | #727 | 5 | 1 in 16,161 |
| California | #997 | 7 | 1 in 18,764 |
| Alaska | — | — | — |
| Arizona | — | — | — |
| Colorado | — | — | — |
| Connecticut | — | — | — |
| Delaware | — | — | — |
| District of Columbia | — | — | — |
| Hawaii | — | — | — |
| Idaho | — | — | — |
| Illinois | — | — | — |
| Indiana | — | — | — |
| Iowa | — | — | — |
| Kansas | — | — | — |
| Louisiana | — | — | — |
| Maine | — | — | — |
| Maryland | — | — | — |
| Massachusetts | — | — | — |
| Minnesota | — | — | — |
| Mississippi | — | — | — |
| Montana | — | — | — |
| Nebraska | — | — | — |
| Nevada | — | — | — |
| New Hampshire | — | — | — |
| New Jersey | — | — | — |
| New Mexico | — | — | — |
| New York | — | — | — |
| North Dakota | — | — | — |
| Oregon | — | — | — |
| Pennsylvania | — | — | — |
| Rhode Island | — | — | — |
| South Dakota | — | — | — |
| Utah | — | — | — |
| Vermont | — | — | — |
| Virginia | — | — | — |
| 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 Retha
- Not published in 2025; last seen 2014
- Biggest jump: 329 spots in 1901 (#760 → #431)
- Biggest drop: 460 spots in 1891 (#872 → #1,332)
- Debuted 1884
- Peaked 1901 at #431 (48 births)
- Births halved by 1976, 75 yrs later
- Top 10: never
- Top 100: never
- Top 1,000: 74 yrs · run 1893–1962
- Highest: 1 in 4,732 girls born in 1933 were named Retha (0.02%)
- Latest: 1 in 357,271 girls born in 2014 (0.00%)
- Its best rank, #431 in 1901, was only 1 in 4,986 (0.02%) — a smaller share of a much bigger birth year
- 19.6% of all girls named Retha (2,078) were born in this decade
Show by decade
| Decade | Births | Best rank | Avg rank |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1880s | 30 | #788 (1887) | #901 |
| 1890s | 178 | #514 (1899) | #806 |
| 1900s | 446 | #431 (1901) | #533 |
| 1910s | 1,372 | #452 (1918) | #492 |
| 1920s | 2,078 | #438 (1924) | #480 |
| 1930s | 1,868 | #440 (1933) | #481 |
| 1940s | 1,702 | #490 (1940) | #587 |
| 1950s | 1,595 | #608 (1950) | #753 |
| 1960s | 872 | #926 (1960) | #1,229 |
| 1970s | 257 | #1,828 (1970) | #3,256 |
| 1980s | 143 | #3,506 (1980) | #5,340 |
| 1990s | 46 | #7,303 (1990) | #11,716 |
| 2000s | 5 | #15,352 (2001) | #15,352 |
| 2010s | 5 | #16,513 (2014) | #16,513 |
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.
Retha in 1952
Top girls' names in 1952
More about 1952
girls
1,854,335 girls got a published name in 1952; 1 in 10,596 of them was named Retha, which outranked 89.5% of the 6,389 girls' names that year. The ten most popular names covered 23.2% of girls (24.6% in 1880, 7.0% in 2025).
Among names in the top 1,000 of either year.