Ricardo
Last seen for girls in 2005 at #14,502 · #380 for boys in 2025, 833 births
Given to boys 99.5% of the time
- Peak · boys
- 1992 · 3,024 births
- Debut · boys
- 6 births
- In top 100 · boys
- neverof 146 years
- Total births · boys
- 146,456since 1888
Ricardo over time
Rank among boys' names. Ricardo has never cracked the top 100 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 | — | #380 | 833 | |
| 2024 | — | #373 | 871 | |
| 2023 | — | #371 | 876 | |
| 2022 | — | #357 | 920 | |
| 2021 | — | #345 | 946 | |
| 2020 | — | #339 | 963 | |
| 2019 | — | #329 | 1,018 | |
| 2018 | — | #305 | 1,125 | |
| 2017 | — | #302 | 1,168 | |
| 2016 | — | #281 | 1,297 | |
| 2015 | — | #277 | 1,340 | |
| 2014 | — | #256 | 1,462 | |
| 2013 | — | #253 | 1,430 | |
| 2012 | — | #226 | 1,567 | |
| 2011 | — | #215 | 1,635 | |
| 2010 | — | #195 | 1,886 | |
| 2009 | — | #170 | 2,303 | |
| 2008 | — | #149 | 2,757 | |
| 2007 | — | #146 | 2,779 | |
| 2006 | — | #152 | 2,702 | |
| 2005 | #14,502 | 6 | #157 | 2,626 |
| 2004 | #11,624 | 8 | #144 | 2,781 |
| 2003 | #11,325 | 8 | #148 | 2,762 |
| 2002 | #10,246 | 9 | #143 | 2,709 |
| 2001 | #13,521 | 6 | #138 | 2,853 |
| 2000 | #15,031 | 5 | #134 | 2,918 |
| 1999 | #7,239 | 13 | #126 | 2,987 |
| 1998 | #8,016 | 11 | #125 | 3,044 |
| 1997 | #12,070 | 6 | #130 | 2,926 |
| 1996 | #6,392 | 14 | #128 | 2,883 |
| 1995 | #8,766 | 9 | #126 | 2,871 |
| 1994 | #5,016 | 19 | #119 | 2,974 |
| 1993 | #4,998 | 19 | #120 | 2,947 |
| 1992 | #5,267 | 18 | #115 | 3,024 |
| 1991 | #6,976 | 12 | #117 | 2,853 |
| 1990 | #6,131 | 14 | #120 | 2,802 |
| 1989 | #5,049 | 17 | #119 | 2,735 |
| 1988 | #4,015 | 22 | #121 | 2,502 |
| 1987 | #4,474 | 18 | #131 | 2,124 |
| 1986 | #3,277 | 27 | #124 | 2,222 |
| 1985 | #4,282 | 18 | #131 | 2,139 |
| 1984 | #4,737 | 15 | #122 | 2,209 |
| 1983 | #4,109 | 18 | #121 | 2,179 |
| 1982 | #3,898 | 20 | #121 | 2,291 |
| 1981 | #4,344 | 17 | #117 | 2,364 |
| 1980 | #4,517 | 16 | #117 | 2,324 |
| 1979 | #3,541 | 22 | #130 | 2,076 |
| 1978 | #3,388 | 22 | #140 | 1,880 |
| 1977 | #3,366 | 22 | #147 | 1,724 |
| 1976 | #5,215 | 11 | #141 | 1,784 |
| 1975 | #3,950 | 16 | #143 | 1,726 |
| 1974 | #3,558 | 18 | #140 | 1,812 |
| 1973 | #3,635 | 17 | #151 | 1,631 |
| 1972 | #5,480 | 9 | #153 | 1,701 |
| 1971 | #3,652 | 17 | #165 | 1,670 |
| 1970 | #3,872 | 15 | #172 | 1,653 |
| 1969 | #3,619 | 15 | #177 | 1,573 |
| 1968 | #4,779 | 9 | #187 | 1,350 |
| 1967 | #4,053 | 11 | #188 | 1,290 |
| 1966 | #4,198 | 10 | #199 | 1,201 |
| 1965 | #3,733 | 12 | #198 | 1,279 |
| 1964 | #4,355 | 10 | #210 | 1,317 |
| 1963 | #5,891 | 6 | #211 | 1,327 |
| 1962 | #4,011 | 11 | #219 | 1,256 |
| 1961 | #4,009 | 11 | #222 | 1,245 |
| 1960 | #4,437 | 9 | #215 | 1,311 |
| 1959 | #4,625 | 8 | #210 | 1,346 |
| 1958 | #6,103 | 5 | #208 | 1,295 |
| 1957 | #4,536 | 8 | #219 | 1,182 |
| 1956 | #4,837 | 7 | #221 | 1,101 |
| 1955 | #3,778 | 10 | #216 | 1,104 |
| 1954 | #3,718 | 10 | #211 | 1,092 |
| 1953 | #5,673 | 5 | #209 | 1,051 |
| 1952 | — | #227 | 863 | |
| 1951 | #4,833 | 6 | #257 | 670 |
| 1950 | — | #264 | 614 | |
| 1949 | — | #307 | 492 | |
| 1948 | #5,243 | 5 | #317 | 448 |
| 1947 | — | #349 | 379 | |
| 1946 | — | #348 | 349 | |
| 1945 | #4,556 | 5 | #354 | 282 |
| 1944 | — | #376 | 253 | |
| 1943 | — | #429 | 211 | |
| 1942 | #4,124 | 6 | #427 | 205 |
| 1941 | — | #390 | 218 | |
| 1940 | — | #399 | 207 | |
| 1939 | — | #424 | 179 | |
| 1938 | — | #418 | 186 | |
| 1937 | — | #398 | 196 | |
| 1936 | — | #447 | 158 | |
| 1935 | — | #448 | 162 | |
| 1934 | — | #400 | 189 | |
| 1933 | — | #422 | 168 | |
| 1932 | — | #446 | 159 | |
| 1931 | — | #428 | 176 | |
| 1930 | — | #389 | 216 | |
| 1929 | — | #411 | 204 | |
| 1928 | — | #473 | 167 | |
| 1927 | — | #493 | 152 | |
| 1926 | — | #631 | 99 | |
| 1925 | — | #523 | 138 | |
| 1924 | — | #594 | 114 | |
| 1923 | — | #725 | 81 | |
| 1922 | — | #709 | 85 | |
| 1921 | — | #953 | 54 | |
| 1920 | — | #766 | 74 | |
| 1919 | — | #839 | 61 | |
| 1918 | — | #918 | 52 | |
| 1917 | — | #946 | 46 | |
| 1916 | — | #1,013 | 40 | |
| 1915 | — | #1,054 | 37 | |
| 1914 | — | #1,127 | 26 | |
| 1913 | — | #1,256 | 17 | |
| 1912 | — | #892 | 25 | |
| 1911 | — | #793 | 17 | |
| 1910 | — | #1,118 | 9 | |
| 1909 | — | #756 | 14 | |
| 1908 | — | #946 | 9 | |
| 1907 | — | #866 | 10 | |
| 1906 | — | — | ||
| 1905 | — | — | ||
| 1904 | — | #874 | 8 | |
| 1903 | — | #846 | 8 | |
| 1902 | — | #933 | 7 | |
| 1901 | — | #1,058 | 5 | |
| 1900 | — | — | ||
| 1899 | — | — | ||
| 1898 | — | — | ||
| 1897 | — | — | ||
| 1896 | — | — | ||
| 1895 | — | — | ||
| 1894 | — | — | ||
| 1893 | — | — | ||
| 1892 | — | — | ||
| 1891 | — | #766 | 7 | |
| 1890 | — | — | ||
| 1889 | — | — | ||
| 1888 | — | #917 | 6 | |
| 1887 | — | — | ||
| 1886 | — | — | ||
| 1885 | — | — | ||
| 1884 | — | — | ||
| 1883 | — | — | ||
| 1882 | — | — | ||
| 1881 | — | — | ||
| 1880 | — | — | ||
The first year at least five boys were named Ricardo! It came in at #917, and was given to 6 baby boys.
Quietest stretch: 1889–1890, when fewer than 5 boys a year got the name.
Where Ricardo is popular in 1955
- Rank in state
- Top 10
- 11–50
- 51–100
- 101–500
- 501+
- Not published
Hover or tap a state for its numbers.
- Texas#67 · 1 in 330
- District of Columbia#101 · 1 in 516
- New Mexico#143 · 1 in 691
- California#148 · 1 in 932
- Arizona#153 · 1 in 749
Best ever in a state: #44 in Texas, 1972.
Show every state
| State | Rank | Births | Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| Texas | #67 | 366 | 1 in 330 |
| District of Columbia | #101 | 29 | 1 in 516 |
| New Mexico | #143 | 17 | 1 in 691 |
| California | #148 | 170 | 1 in 932 |
| Arizona | #153 | 18 | 1 in 749 |
| New York | #187 | 95 | 1 in 1,834 |
| Pennsylvania | #207 | 43 | 1 in 2,802 |
| Michigan | #209 | 43 | 1 in 2,230 |
| Illinois | #215 | 49 | 1 in 2,202 |
| Ohio | #217 | 42 | 1 in 2,626 |
| Maryland | #229 | 12 | 1 in 2,542 |
| Florida | #230 | 23 | 1 in 1,871 |
| Nebraska | #234 | 6 | 1 in 2,665 |
| Missouri | #238 | 19 | 1 in 2,476 |
| New Jersey | #252 | 14 | 1 in 4,112 |
| Connecticut | #260 | 5 | 1 in 4,838 |
| Virginia | #277 | 15 | 1 in 2,893 |
| Colorado | #287 | 6 | 1 in 3,261 |
| Kansas | #287 | 7 | 1 in 3,451 |
| Louisiana | #290 | 17 | 1 in 2,394 |
| Wisconsin | #291 | 7 | 1 in 6,398 |
| Indiana | #298 | 12 | 1 in 4,417 |
| Massachusetts | #302 | 5 | 1 in 10,907 |
| Minnesota | #307 | 6 | 1 in 6,519 |
| North Carolina | #332 | 13 | 1 in 4,218 |
| Kentucky | #346 | 7 | 1 in 5,220 |
| Washington | #364 | 5 | 1 in 6,220 |
| Georgia | #409 | 8 | 1 in 6,129 |
| Tennessee | #436 | 5 | 1 in 8,223 |
| Alabama | #474 | 5 | 1 in 7,777 |
| Alaska | — | — | — |
| Arkansas | — | — | — |
| Delaware | — | — | — |
| Hawaii | — | — | — |
| Idaho | — | — | — |
| Iowa | — | — | — |
| Maine | — | — | — |
| Mississippi | — | — | — |
| Montana | — | — | — |
| Nevada | — | — | — |
| New Hampshire | — | — | — |
| North Dakota | — | — | — |
| Oklahoma | — | — | — |
| Oregon | — | — | — |
| Rhode Island | — | — | — |
| South Carolina | — | — | — |
| South Dakota | — | — | — |
| Utah | — | — | — |
| Vermont | — | — | — |
| West Virginia | — | — | — |
| 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 Ricardo
- 7 spots since 2024 (#373 → #380)
- 41 spots since 2020 (#339 → #380)
- 103 spots since 2015 (#277 → #380)
- Biggest jump: 325 spots in 1911 (#1,118 → #793)
- Biggest drop: 364 spots in 1913 (#892 → #1,256)
- Debuted 1888
- Peaked 1992 at #115 (3,024 births)
- Births halved by 2013, 21 yrs later
- Top 10: never
- Top 100: never
- Top 1,000: 119 yrs · run 1917–2025
- Highest: 1 in 628 boys born in 1998 were named Ricardo (0.16%)
- Latest: 1 in 2,051 boys born in 2025 (0.05%)
- Its best rank, #115 in 1992, was only 1 in 661 (0.15%) — a smaller share of a much bigger birth year
- 20.0% of all boys named Ricardo (29,311) were born in this decade
Show by decade
| Decade | Births | Best rank | Avg rank |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1880s | 6 | #917 (1888) | #917 |
| 1890s | 7 | #766 (1891) | #766 |
| 1900s | 61 | #756 (1909) | #897 |
| 1910s | 330 | #793 (1911) | #996 |
| 1920s | 1,168 | #411 (1929) | #628 |
| 1930s | 1,789 | #389 (1930) | #422 |
| 1940s | 3,044 | #307 (1949) | #370 |
| 1950s | 10,318 | #208 (1958) | #224 |
| 1960s | 13,149 | #177 (1969) | #203 |
| 1970s | 17,657 | #130 (1979) | #148 |
| 1980s | 23,089 | #117 (1981) | #122 |
| 1990s | 29,311 | #115 (1992) | #123 |
| 2000s | 27,190 | #134 (2000) | #148 |
| 2010s | 13,928 | #195 (2010) | #264 |
| 2020s | 5,409 | #339 (2020) | #361 |
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.
Ricardo in 1955
Top girls' names in 1955
Top boys' names in 1955
More about 1955
girls
1,955,277 girls got a published name in 1955; 1 in 195,528 of them was named Ricardo, which outranked 43.9% of the 6,732 girls' names that year. The ten most popular names covered 22.3% of girls (24.6% in 1880, 7.0% in 2025).
- #3,571Wava11
- #3,571Wilhelmenia11
- #3,571Zan11
- #3,778Ricardo10
- #3,778Aldora10
- #3,778Alisia10
- #3,778Alona10
- #4,069Adaline9
- #4,069Adline9
- #4,069Adonna9
Tied with 290 names at #3,778; 3 shown. Tied names share a rank, as in SSA's lists.
Among names in the top 1,000 of either year.
boys
2,059,889 boys got a published name in 1955; 1 in 1,866 of them was named Ricardo, which outranked 95.1% of the 4,400 boys' names that year. The ten most popular names covered 32.1% of boys (44.2% in 1880, 8.0% in 2025).
Among names in the top 1,000 of either year.