Samantha
#151 for girls in 2025, 1,973 births · Last seen for boys in 2017 at #12,246
Given to girls 99.8% of the time
- Peak · girls
- 1998 · 20,195 births
- Debut · girls
- 21 births
- In top 100 · girls
- 45 yrsof 146 years
- Total births · girls
- 592,847since 1880
Samantha over time
Rank among girls' names. Click any year to open it.
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 | #151 | 1,973 | — | |
| 2024 | #126 | 2,232 | — | |
| 2023 | #114 | 2,372 | — | |
| 2022 | #106 | 2,605 | — | |
| 2021 | #106 | 2,599 | — | |
| 2020 | #90 | 2,956 | — | |
| 2019 | #80 | 3,369 | — | |
| 2018 | #61 | 3,924 | — | |
| 2017 | #54 | 4,333 | #12,246 | 5 |
| 2016 | #44 | 4,956 | #12,185 | 5 |
| 2015 | #40 | 5,347 | #9,568 | 7 |
| 2014 | #33 | 5,735 | #6,632 | 12 |
| 2013 | #29 | 6,516 | #9,655 | 7 |
| 2012 | #26 | 6,938 | #8,864 | 8 |
| 2011 | #17 | 7,400 | — | |
| 2010 | #15 | 8,411 | #5,251 | 17 |
| 2009 | #14 | 9,669 | #5,334 | 17 |
| 2008 | #11 | 11,190 | #6,070 | 14 |
| 2007 | #12 | 11,883 | #9,788 | 7 |
| 2006 | #10 | 12,470 | #4,865 | 18 |
| 2005 | #8 | 13,642 | #4,824 | 17 |
| 2004 | #9 | 13,786 | #2,697 | 39 |
| 2003 | #10 | 13,870 | #5,877 | 12 |
| 2002 | #9 | 14,671 | #3,670 | 23 |
| 2001 | #7 | 15,867 | #4,676 | 16 |
| 2000 | #7 | 17,265 | #3,764 | 21 |
| 1999 | #5 | 19,044 | #2,510 | 35 |
| 1998 | #3 | 20,195 | #2,851 | 28 |
| 1997 | #6 | 20,170 | #3,601 | 19 |
| 1996 | #5 | 20,552 | #2,299 | 35 |
| 1995 | #4 | 21,644 | #2,299 | 34 |
| 1994 | #4 | 22,824 | #2,444 | 31 |
| 1993 | #4 | 23,668 | #2,257 | 34 |
| 1992 | #6 | 24,407 | #2,046 | 38 |
| 1991 | #5 | 25,651 | #1,677 | 49 |
| 1990 | #5 | 25,868 | #1,486 | 58 |
| 1989 | #6 | 24,792 | #926 | 120 |
| 1988 | #8 | 20,700 | #1,204 | 71 |
| 1987 | #11 | 17,944 | #1,136 | 71 |
| 1986 | #21 | 14,092 | #1,334 | 54 |
| 1985 | #29 | 10,658 | #1,794 | 33 |
| 1984 | #39 | 8,038 | #2,232 | 23 |
| 1983 | #40 | 7,703 | #1,748 | 32 |
| 1982 | #44 | 6,768 | #2,269 | 22 |
| 1981 | #51 | 5,516 | #2,779 | 16 |
| 1980 | #58 | 4,913 | #3,430 | 12 |
| 1979 | #66 | 4,461 | #2,777 | 16 |
| 1978 | #74 | 3,886 | #2,473 | 18 |
| 1977 | #85 | 3,284 | #4,582 | 7 |
| 1976 | #85 | 3,347 | #2,709 | 15 |
| 1975 | #101 | 2,834 | #3,078 | 12 |
| 1974 | #128 | 2,251 | #2,946 | 12 |
| 1973 | #135 | 2,119 | #3,223 | 10 |
| 1972 | #137 | 2,220 | #3,963 | 7 |
| 1971 | #144 | 2,209 | #2,464 | 15 |
| 1970 | #149 | 2,295 | #3,282 | 9 |
| 1969 | #140 | 2,422 | #2,861 | 10 |
| 1968 | #136 | 2,335 | #3,673 | 6 |
| 1967 | #176 | 1,804 | — | |
| 1966 | #182 | 1,793 | — | |
| 1965 | #179 | 1,961 | #2,982 | 8 |
| 1964 | #474 | 415 | — | |
| 1963 | #1,305 | 71 | — | |
| 1962 | #1,292 | 73 | — | |
| 1961 | #1,305 | 72 | — | |
| 1960 | #1,212 | 81 | — | |
| 1959 | #1,001 | 111 | — | |
| 1958 | #994 | 109 | — | |
| 1957 | #1,754 | 38 | — | |
| 1956 | #2,005 | 29 | — | |
| 1955 | #2,063 | 27 | — | |
| 1954 | #1,909 | 30 | — | |
| 1953 | #1,783 | 31 | — | |
| 1952 | #1,560 | 38 | — | |
| 1951 | #1,528 | 38 | — | |
| 1950 | #1,576 | 35 | — | |
| 1949 | #1,393 | 44 | — | |
| 1948 | #1,461 | 40 | — | |
| 1947 | #1,752 | 30 | — | |
| 1946 | #1,532 | 33 | — | |
| 1945 | #1,450 | 31 | — | |
| 1944 | #1,698 | 24 | — | |
| 1943 | #1,625 | 27 | — | |
| 1942 | #1,706 | 24 | — | |
| 1941 | #1,810 | 20 | — | |
| 1940 | #1,845 | 19 | — | |
| 1939 | #1,585 | 23 | — | |
| 1938 | #1,945 | 17 | — | |
| 1937 | #1,580 | 23 | — | |
| 1936 | #1,691 | 20 | — | |
| 1935 | #1,606 | 22 | — | |
| 1934 | #2,087 | 15 | — | |
| 1933 | #2,052 | 15 | — | |
| 1932 | #2,037 | 16 | — | |
| 1931 | #2,750 | 10 | — | |
| 1930 | #2,306 | 14 | — | |
| 1929 | #2,301 | 14 | — | |
| 1928 | #2,381 | 14 | — | |
| 1927 | #2,859 | 11 | — | |
| 1926 | #3,269 | 9 | — | |
| 1925 | #2,018 | 19 | — | |
| 1924 | #2,409 | 15 | — | |
| 1923 | #1,840 | 22 | — | |
| 1922 | #1,575 | 28 | — | |
| 1921 | #1,577 | 28 | — | |
| 1920 | #1,626 | 26 | — | |
| 1919 | #1,698 | 23 | — | |
| 1918 | #2,102 | 17 | — | |
| 1917 | #1,605 | 23 | — | |
| 1916 | #1,739 | 20 | — | |
| 1915 | #1,672 | 20 | — | |
| 1914 | #1,444 | 20 | — | |
| 1913 | #1,670 | 13 | — | |
| 1912 | #1,178 | 20 | — | |
| 1911 | #1,171 | 15 | — | |
| 1910 | #1,521 | 10 | — | |
| 1909 | #1,369 | 10 | — | |
| 1908 | #1,135 | 13 | — | |
| 1907 | #945 | 16 | — | |
| 1906 | #1,043 | 13 | — | |
| 1905 | #1,093 | 12 | — | |
| 1904 | #1,364 | 8 | — | |
| 1903 | #1,792 | 5 | — | |
| 1902 | #903 | 15 | — | |
| 1901 | #829 | 16 | — | |
| 1900 | #688 | 27 | — | |
| 1899 | #835 | 15 | — | |
| 1898 | #719 | 21 | — | |
| 1897 | #895 | 13 | — | |
| 1896 | #754 | 18 | — | |
| 1895 | #788 | 16 | — | |
| 1894 | #744 | 16 | — | |
| 1893 | #644 | 20 | — | |
| 1892 | #638 | 20 | — | |
| 1891 | #589 | 20 | — | |
| 1890 | #693 | 15 | — | |
| 1889 | #687 | 14 | — | |
| 1888 | #593 | 18 | — | |
| 1887 | #560 | 16 | — | |
| 1886 | #633 | 13 | — | |
| 1885 | #520 | 17 | — | |
| 1884 | #520 | 16 | — | |
| 1883 | #465 | 17 | — | |
| 1882 | #475 | 15 | — | |
| 1881 | #491 | 12 | — | |
| 1880 | #352 | 21 | — | |
In the first year the SSA published name data, Samantha was already there! It came in at #352, and was given to 21 baby girls.
Quietest stretch: 1903, when fewer than 6 girls a year got the name.
Where Samantha is popular in 2000
- Rank in state
- Top 10
- 11–50
- 51–100
- 101–500
- 501+
- Not published
Hover or tap a state for its numbers.
- New Jersey#2 · 1 in 60
- New York#2 · 1 in 71
- Connecticut#3 · 1 in 60
- Wisconsin#3 · 1 in 68
- Arizona#3 · 1 in 80
Best ever in a state: #1 in North Dakota, 1993.
Show every state
| State | Rank | Births | Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| New Jersey | #2 | 693 | 1 in 60 |
| New York | #2 | 1,422 | 1 in 71 |
| Arizona | #3 | 397 | 1 in 80 |
| California | #3 | 2,578 | 1 in 87 |
| Connecticut | #3 | 254 | 1 in 60 |
| Wisconsin | #3 | 373 | 1 in 68 |
| Florida | #4 | 954 | 1 in 81 |
| Maine | #4 | 91 | 1 in 49 |
| Illinois | #5 | 800 | 1 in 89 |
| Nevada | #5 | 135 | 1 in 70 |
| Utah | #5 | 225 | 1 in 76 |
| Minnesota | #6 | 356 | 1 in 72 |
| Nebraska | #6 | 117 | 1 in 71 |
| New Mexico | #6 | 104 | 1 in 78 |
| Pennsylvania | #6 | 702 | 1 in 83 |
| Texas | #6 | 1,469 | 1 in 104 |
| Washington | #6 | 322 | 1 in 91 |
| Massachusetts | #7 | 475 | 1 in 66 |
| Michigan | #7 | 593 | 1 in 88 |
| Montana | #7 | 43 | 1 in 68 |
| Oregon | #7 | 193 | 1 in 85 |
| Vermont | #7 | 35 | 1 in 50 |
| Idaho | #8 | 77 | 1 in 79 |
| Maryland | #9 | 265 | 1 in 93 |
| New Hampshire | #9 | 72 | 1 in 64 |
| Ohio | #9 | 694 | 1 in 89 |
| Rhode Island | #9 | 60 | 1 in 63 |
| Colorado | #10 | 239 | 1 in 101 |
| Delaware | #10 | 44 | 1 in 69 |
| Missouri | #11 | 335 | 1 in 88 |
| West Virginia | #11 | 97 | 1 in 75 |
| Indiana | #12 | 345 | 1 in 97 |
| Iowa | #12 | 177 | 1 in 80 |
| Oklahoma | #12 | 152 | 1 in 110 |
| Kansas | #13 | 134 | 1 in 100 |
| Wyoming | #13 | 18 | 1 in 70 |
| North Dakota | #14 | 34 | 1 in 71 |
| North Carolina | #15 | 423 | 1 in 107 |
| Alaska | #16 | 25 | 1 in 91 |
| Virginia | #17 | 303 | 1 in 117 |
| Arkansas | #18 | 109 | 1 in 112 |
| South Dakota | #18 | 33 | 1 in 87 |
| Tennessee | #21 | 263 | 1 in 118 |
| Hawaii | #23 | 26 | 1 in 138 |
| Kentucky | #23 | 178 | 1 in 115 |
| Georgia | #24 | 335 | 1 in 143 |
| South Carolina | #24 | 137 | 1 in 123 |
| Mississippi | #28 | 77 | 1 in 156 |
| Alabama | #29 | 141 | 1 in 150 |
| Louisiana | #33 | 124 | 1 in 177 |
| District of Columbia | #55 | 17 | 1 in 209 |
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 Samantha
- 25 spots since 2024 (#126 → #151)
- 61 spots since 2020 (#90 → #151)
- 111 spots since 2015 (#40 → #151)
- Biggest jump: 831 spots in 1964 (#1,305 → #474)
- Biggest drop: 889 spots in 1903 (#903 → #1,792)
- Debuted 1880
- Peaked 1998 at #3 (20,195 births)
- Births halved by 2009, 11 yrs later
- Top 10: 19 yrs · run 1988–2006
- Top 100: 45 yrs · run 1976–2020
- Top 1,000: 87 yrs · run 1964–2025
- Highest: 1 in 73 girls born in 1991 were named Samantha (1.4%)
- Latest: 1 in 815 girls born in 2025 (0.12%)
- Its best rank, #3 in 1998, was only 1 in 87 (1.1%) — a smaller share of a much bigger birth year
- 37.8% of all girls named Samantha (224,023) were born in this decade
Show by decade
| Decade | Births | Best rank | Avg rank |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1880s | 159 | #352 (1880) | #530 |
| 1890s | 174 | #589 (1891) | #730 |
| 1900s | 135 | #688 (1900) | #1,116 |
| 1910s | 181 | #1,171 (1911) | #1,580 |
| 1920s | 186 | #1,575 (1922) | #2,186 |
| 1930s | 175 | #1,580 (1937) | #1,964 |
| 1940s | 292 | #1,393 (1949) | #1,627 |
| 1950s | 486 | #994 (1958) | #1,617 |
| 1960s | 11,027 | #136 (1968) | #640 |
| 1970s | 28,906 | #66 (1979) | #110 |
| 1980s | 121,124 | #6 (1989) | #31 |
| 1990s | 224,023 | #3 (1998) | #5 |
| 2000s | 134,313 | #7 (2000) | #10 |
| 2010s | 56,929 | #15 (2010) | #40 |
| 2020s | 14,737 | #90 (2020) | #116 |
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.
Samantha in 2000
Top girls' names in 2000
Top boys' names in 2000
More about 2000
girls
1,816,036 girls got a published name in 2000; 1 in 105 of them was named Samantha, which outranked 100.0% of the 17,660 girls' names that year. The ten most popular names covered 10.2% of girls (24.6% in 1880, 7.0% in 2025).
Among names in the top 1,000 of either year.
boys
1,964,001 boys got a published name in 2000; 1 in 93,524 of them was named Samantha, which outranked 68.9% of the 12,119 boys' names that year. The ten most popular names covered 13.4% of boys (44.2% in 1880, 8.0% in 2025).
- #3,640Zebulun22
- #3,640Zenon22
- #3,640Ziad22
- #3,764Samantha21
- #3,764Aayush21
- #3,764Abdel21
- #3,764Adiel21
- #3,922Aeron20
- #3,922Ahmet20
- #3,922Akim20
Tied with 157 names at #3,764; 3 shown. Tied names share a rank, as in SSA's lists.
Among names in the top 1,000 of either year.