Tom
Last seen for girls in 1976 at #7,296 · #2,183 for boys in 2025, 65 births
Given to boys 99.6% of the time
- Peak · boys
- 1880 · 399 births
- Debut · boys
- 399 births
- In top 100 · boys
- 46 yrsof 146 years
- Total births · boys
- 139,756since 1880
Tom over time
Rank among boys' 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 | — | #2,183 | 65 | |
| 2024 | — | #2,715 | 48 | |
| 2023 | — | #2,614 | 50 | |
| 2022 | — | #2,355 | 60 | |
| 2021 | — | #2,193 | 64 | |
| 2020 | — | #2,323 | 58 | |
| 2019 | — | #1,777 | 87 | |
| 2018 | — | #2,122 | 66 | |
| 2017 | — | #1,746 | 88 | |
| 2016 | — | #2,028 | 70 | |
| 2015 | — | #2,036 | 70 | |
| 2014 | — | #1,884 | 77 | |
| 2013 | — | #1,763 | 82 | |
| 2012 | — | #1,787 | 83 | |
| 2011 | — | #1,755 | 83 | |
| 2010 | — | #1,816 | 80 | |
| 2009 | — | #1,604 | 99 | |
| 2008 | — | #1,620 | 96 | |
| 2007 | — | #1,638 | 94 | |
| 2006 | — | #1,427 | 109 | |
| 2005 | — | #1,257 | 125 | |
| 2004 | — | #1,359 | 107 | |
| 2003 | — | #1,141 | 132 | |
| 2002 | — | #1,076 | 140 | |
| 2001 | — | #1,345 | 96 | |
| 2000 | — | #1,300 | 99 | |
| 1999 | — | #1,130 | 116 | |
| 1998 | — | #1,023 | 132 | |
| 1997 | — | #1,016 | 125 | |
| 1996 | — | #990 | 126 | |
| 1995 | — | #959 | 134 | |
| 1994 | — | #1,030 | 116 | |
| 1993 | — | #882 | 146 | |
| 1992 | — | #861 | 151 | |
| 1991 | — | #728 | 194 | |
| 1990 | — | #693 | 214 | |
| 1989 | — | #719 | 189 | |
| 1988 | — | #684 | 189 | |
| 1987 | — | #682 | 177 | |
| 1986 | — | #652 | 188 | |
| 1985 | — | #653 | 180 | |
| 1984 | — | #624 | 186 | |
| 1983 | — | #604 | 200 | |
| 1982 | — | #616 | 197 | |
| 1981 | — | #538 | 243 | |
| 1980 | — | #562 | 235 | |
| 1979 | — | #523 | 261 | |
| 1978 | — | #527 | 244 | |
| 1977 | — | #480 | 285 | |
| 1976 | #7,296 | 7 | #438 | 317 |
| 1975 | — | #463 | 303 | |
| 1974 | — | #372 | 424 | |
| 1973 | #7,435 | 6 | #363 | 452 |
| 1972 | — | #316 | 581 | |
| 1971 | #8,324 | 5 | #256 | 867 |
| 1970 | — | #219 | 1,130 | |
| 1969 | — | #206 | 1,214 | |
| 1968 | — | #185 | 1,363 | |
| 1967 | #4,982 | 8 | #175 | 1,491 |
| 1966 | #5,273 | 7 | #153 | 1,850 |
| 1965 | #5,817 | 6 | #127 | 2,497 |
| 1964 | #5,008 | 8 | #107 | 3,292 |
| 1963 | #5,891 | 6 | #103 | 3,698 |
| 1962 | #5,293 | 7 | #98 | 4,171 |
| 1961 | #4,239 | 10 | #88 | 4,731 |
| 1960 | #3,920 | 11 | #86 | 4,894 |
| 1959 | #3,619 | 12 | #82 | 5,068 |
| 1958 | #5,408 | 6 | #96 | 4,356 |
| 1957 | — | #116 | 3,354 | |
| 1956 | #3,910 | 10 | #161 | 1,914 |
| 1955 | #5,208 | 6 | #180 | 1,513 |
| 1954 | #5,148 | 6 | #188 | 1,388 |
| 1953 | #5,673 | 5 | #184 | 1,377 |
| 1952 | — | #181 | 1,439 | |
| 1951 | — | #168 | 1,522 | |
| 1950 | #3,662 | 9 | #145 | 1,823 |
| 1949 | #3,612 | 9 | #114 | 2,543 |
| 1948 | #2,828 | 13 | #94 | 3,429 |
| 1947 | #3,240 | 11 | #87 | 3,922 |
| 1946 | #3,217 | 10 | #87 | 3,624 |
| 1945 | #2,916 | 10 | #89 | 2,893 |
| 1944 | #3,139 | 9 | #87 | 2,902 |
| 1943 | #3,801 | 7 | #87 | 2,909 |
| 1942 | #2,537 | 13 | #89 | 2,875 |
| 1941 | #3,030 | 9 | #88 | 2,500 |
| 1940 | #3,208 | 8 | #92 | 2,287 |
| 1939 | #3,145 | 8 | #97 | 2,028 |
| 1938 | #2,225 | 14 | #106 | 1,931 |
| 1937 | #2,448 | 12 | #108 | 1,807 |
| 1936 | #3,103 | 8 | #112 | 1,695 |
| 1935 | #2,305 | 13 | #110 | 1,725 |
| 1934 | — | #112 | 1,579 | |
| 1933 | #2,688 | 10 | #117 | 1,425 |
| 1932 | #2,365 | 13 | #116 | 1,538 |
| 1931 | #3,226 | 8 | #125 | 1,363 |
| 1930 | #2,425 | 13 | #132 | 1,336 |
| 1929 | #2,098 | 16 | #134 | 1,270 |
| 1928 | #2,094 | 17 | #135 | 1,305 |
| 1927 | #2,552 | 13 | #138 | 1,269 |
| 1926 | #3,046 | 10 | #138 | 1,252 |
| 1925 | #1,946 | 20 | #138 | 1,216 |
| 1924 | #2,514 | 14 | #149 | 1,097 |
| 1923 | #2,587 | 13 | #144 | 1,131 |
| 1922 | #2,612 | 13 | #145 | 1,084 |
| 1921 | #2,941 | 11 | #144 | 1,092 |
| 1920 | #2,357 | 15 | #131 | 1,207 |
| 1919 | #2,384 | 14 | #140 | 1,059 |
| 1918 | #2,209 | 16 | #139 | 1,104 |
| 1917 | #2,693 | 11 | #138 | 981 |
| 1916 | #2,133 | 15 | #139 | 971 |
| 1915 | #2,143 | 14 | #142 | 869 |
| 1914 | #2,009 | 12 | #137 | 735 |
| 1913 | #3,187 | 5 | #135 | 573 |
| 1912 | #1,844 | 10 | #124 | 538 |
| 1911 | #2,463 | 5 | #105 | 365 |
| 1910 | — | #82 | 428 | |
| 1909 | — | #88 | 340 | |
| 1908 | — | #80 | 340 | |
| 1907 | #1,639 | 7 | #83 | 313 |
| 1906 | #1,727 | 6 | #80 | 298 |
| 1905 | — | #77 | 317 | |
| 1904 | — | #74 | 318 | |
| 1903 | — | #73 | 295 | |
| 1902 | #1,594 | 6 | #75 | 312 |
| 1901 | — | #67 | 291 | |
| 1900 | — | #52 | 469 | |
| 1899 | — | #66 | 288 | |
| 1898 | — | #64 | 337 | |
| 1897 | — | #63 | 298 | |
| 1896 | — | #62 | 339 | |
| 1895 | #1,426 | 6 | #62 | 335 |
| 1894 | — | #60 | 343 | |
| 1893 | — | #60 | 349 | |
| 1892 | — | #58 | 381 | |
| 1891 | — | #60 | 318 | |
| 1890 | — | #57 | 347 | |
| 1889 | — | #50 | 379 | |
| 1888 | — | #49 | 416 | |
| 1887 | — | #52 | 329 | |
| 1886 | #993 | 6 | #50 | 383 |
| 1885 | — | #48 | 361 | |
| 1884 | — | #47 | 394 | |
| 1883 | #817 | 6 | #44 | 386 |
| 1882 | — | #46 | 390 | |
| 1881 | — | #43 | 349 | |
| 1880 | — | #40 | 399 | |
In the first year the SSA published name data, Tom was already there! It came in at #40, and was given to 399 baby boys.
Quietest stretch: 2020–2025, when fewer than 66 boys a year got the name.
Where Tom is popular in 1951
- Rank in state
- Top 10
- 11–50
- 51–100
- 101–500
- 501+
- Not published
Hover or tap a state for its numbers.
- Nevada#51 · 1 in 224
- Montana#63 · 1 in 362
- Oregon#87 · 1 in 521
- Wisconsin#90 · 1 in 630
- Wyoming#100 · 1 in 478
Best ever in a state: #14 in New Mexico, 1911.
Show every state
| State | Rank | Births | Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nevada | #51 | 7 | 1 in 224 |
| Montana | #63 | 19 | 1 in 362 |
| Oregon | #87 | 33 | 1 in 521 |
| Wisconsin | #90 | 67 | 1 in 630 |
| Wyoming | #100 | 7 | 1 in 478 |
| Nebraska | #101 | 26 | 1 in 593 |
| Oklahoma | #103 | 46 | 1 in 524 |
| Ohio | #104 | 137 | 1 in 713 |
| Michigan | #107 | 106 | 1 in 795 |
| Illinois | #113 | 122 | 1 in 798 |
| Arizona | #114 | 20 | 1 in 529 |
| Iowa | #114 | 41 | 1 in 770 |
| Washington | #116 | 40 | 1 in 701 |
| California | #119 | 170 | 1 in 762 |
| Colorado | #121 | 25 | 1 in 683 |
| Minnesota | #122 | 39 | 1 in 969 |
| Indiana | #123 | 60 | 1 in 810 |
| Kansas | #128 | 32 | 1 in 669 |
| New Mexico | #129 | 17 | 1 in 604 |
| Utah | #137 | 14 | 1 in 762 |
| Missouri | #139 | 46 | 1 in 962 |
| Mississippi | #150 | 32 | 1 in 913 |
| South Dakota | #151 | 8 | 1 in 1,017 |
| North Dakota | #152 | 7 | 1 in 1,086 |
| Idaho | #160 | 8 | 1 in 874 |
| West Virginia | #174 | 17 | 1 in 1,432 |
| Arkansas | #180 | 17 | 1 in 1,295 |
| Kentucky | #208 | 22 | 1 in 1,670 |
| Texas | #213 | 83 | 1 in 1,316 |
| Georgia | #216 | 26 | 1 in 1,727 |
| Pennsylvania | #216 | 35 | 1 in 3,288 |
| Tennessee | #221 | 19 | 1 in 2,096 |
| Alabama | #228 | 20 | 1 in 1,934 |
| District of Columbia | #230 | 6 | 1 in 2,311 |
| Massachusetts | #238 | 8 | 1 in 6,190 |
| New York | #245 | 44 | 1 in 3,596 |
| Florida | #246 | 16 | 1 in 2,073 |
| New Jersey | #252 | 10 | 1 in 4,952 |
| Louisiana | #276 | 17 | 1 in 2,189 |
| North Carolina | #283 | 19 | 1 in 2,783 |
| Virginia | #294 | 12 | 1 in 3,273 |
| South Carolina | #335 | 7 | 1 in 4,191 |
| Alaska | — | — | — |
| Connecticut | — | — | — |
| Delaware | — | — | — |
| Hawaii | — | — | — |
| Maine | — | — | — |
| Maryland | — | — | — |
| New Hampshire | — | — | — |
| Rhode Island | — | — | — |
| Vermont | — | — | — |
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 Tom
- 532 spots since 2024 (#2,715 → #2,183)
- 140 spots since 2020 (#2,323 → #2,183)
- 147 spots since 2015 (#2,036 → #2,183)
- Biggest jump: 71 spots in 1995 (#1,030 → #959)
- Biggest drop: 148 spots in 1994 (#882 → #1,030)
- Debuted 1880
- Peaked 1880 at #40 (399 births)
- Births halved by 1982, 102 yrs later
- Top 10: never
- Top 100: 46 yrs · run 1880–1910
- Top 1,000: 116 yrs · run 1880–1993
- Highest: 1 in 271 boys born in 1883 were named Tom (0.37%)
- Latest: 1 in 26,278 boys born in 2025 (0.00%)
- Its best rank, #40 in 1880, was only 1 in 277 (0.36%) — a smaller share of a much bigger birth year
- 21.4% of all boys named Tom (29,884) were born in this decade
Show by decade
| Decade | Births | Best rank | Avg rank |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1880s | 3,786 | #40 (1880) | #47 |
| 1890s | 3,335 | #57 (1890) | #61 |
| 1900s | 3,293 | #52 (1900) | #75 |
| 1910s | 7,623 | #82 (1910) | #128 |
| 1920s | 11,923 | #131 (1920) | #140 |
| 1930s | 16,427 | #97 (1939) | #114 |
| 1940s | 29,884 | #87 (1947) | #91 |
| 1950s | 23,754 | #82 (1959) | #150 |
| 1960s | 29,201 | #86 (1960) | #133 |
| 1970s | 4,864 | #219 (1970) | #396 |
| 1980s | 1,984 | #538 (1981) | #633 |
| 1990s | 1,454 | #693 (1990) | #931 |
| 2000s | 1,097 | #1,076 (2002) | #1,377 |
| 2010s | 786 | #1,746 (2017) | #1,871 |
| 2020s | 345 | #2,183 (2025) | #2,397 |
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.
Tom in 1951
Top boys' names in 1951
More about 1951
boys
1,882,837 boys got a published name in 1951; 1 in 1,237 of them was named Tom, which outranked 96.0% of the 4,253 boys' names that year. The ten most popular names covered 33.8% of boys (44.2% in 1880, 8.0% in 2025).
Among names in the top 1,000 of either year.