Tucker
#8,860 for girls in 2025, 11 births · #181 for boys in 2025, 2,008 births
Given to boys 99.3% of the time
- Peak · boys
- 2016 · 2,311 births
- Debut · boys
- 5 births
- In top 100 · boys
- neverof 146 years
- Total births · boys
- 55,150since 1884
Tucker over time
Rank among boys' names. Tucker 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 | #8,860 | 11 | #181 | 2,008 |
| 2024 | #8,946 | 11 | #200 | 1,785 |
| 2023 | #8,486 | 12 | #205 | 1,810 |
| 2022 | #8,542 | 12 | #197 | 1,934 |
| 2021 | #9,562 | 10 | #180 | 2,138 |
| 2020 | #6,629 | 17 | #191 | 2,013 |
| 2019 | #9,112 | 11 | #195 | 2,018 |
| 2018 | #8,146 | 13 | #183 | 2,171 |
| 2017 | #6,531 | 18 | #179 | 2,223 |
| 2016 | #7,602 | 15 | #173 | 2,311 |
| 2015 | #8,008 | 14 | #186 | 2,235 |
| 2014 | #6,987 | 17 | #176 | 2,422 |
| 2013 | #7,372 | 16 | #179 | 2,241 |
| 2012 | #9,711 | 11 | #185 | 2,044 |
| 2011 | #9,723 | 11 | #196 | 1,840 |
| 2010 | #9,231 | 12 | #204 | 1,754 |
| 2009 | #15,242 | 6 | #226 | 1,612 |
| 2008 | #9,476 | 12 | #238 | 1,544 |
| 2007 | #9,007 | 13 | #246 | 1,464 |
| 2006 | #11,417 | 9 | #262 | 1,312 |
| 2005 | #9,452 | 11 | #273 | 1,224 |
| 2004 | #9,264 | 11 | #287 | 1,107 |
| 2003 | #12,408 | 7 | #295 | 1,040 |
| 2002 | #7,816 | 13 | #296 | 999 |
| 2001 | #8,758 | 11 | #287 | 1,041 |
| 2000 | #7,158 | 14 | #288 | 1,047 |
| 1999 | #9,479 | 9 | #296 | 971 |
| 1998 | #5,363 | 19 | #306 | 920 |
| 1997 | #9,802 | 8 | #302 | 902 |
| 1996 | #6,064 | 15 | #326 | 803 |
| 1995 | — | #348 | 709 | |
| 1994 | #7,097 | 12 | #352 | 694 |
| 1993 | #8,719 | 9 | #382 | 601 |
| 1992 | — | #442 | 498 | |
| 1991 | — | #445 | 488 | |
| 1990 | #10,193 | 7 | #475 | 434 |
| 1989 | — | #497 | 371 | |
| 1988 | — | #626 | 228 | |
| 1987 | — | #772 | 142 | |
| 1986 | #8,523 | 7 | #860 | 111 |
| 1985 | — | #748 | 141 | |
| 1984 | — | #713 | 149 | |
| 1983 | — | #786 | 123 | |
| 1982 | — | #907 | 97 | |
| 1981 | — | #964 | 87 | |
| 1980 | — | #878 | 103 | |
| 1979 | — | #976 | 82 | |
| 1978 | — | #967 | 80 | |
| 1977 | — | #1,047 | 68 | |
| 1976 | — | #1,042 | 64 | |
| 1975 | — | #1,065 | 61 | |
| 1974 | — | #1,351 | 40 | |
| 1973 | — | #1,612 | 29 | |
| 1972 | — | #1,327 | 40 | |
| 1971 | — | #1,400 | 37 | |
| 1970 | — | #1,743 | 25 | |
| 1969 | — | #1,680 | 24 | |
| 1968 | — | #1,731 | 21 | |
| 1967 | — | #1,388 | 30 | |
| 1966 | — | #1,540 | 25 | |
| 1965 | — | #1,513 | 26 | |
| 1964 | — | #2,854 | 9 | |
| 1963 | — | #2,115 | 15 | |
| 1962 | — | #1,896 | 18 | |
| 1961 | — | #2,070 | 16 | |
| 1960 | — | #2,210 | 14 | |
| 1959 | — | #3,037 | 8 | |
| 1958 | — | #1,644 | 23 | |
| 1957 | — | #2,019 | 16 | |
| 1956 | — | #2,091 | 15 | |
| 1955 | — | #1,682 | 21 | |
| 1954 | — | #2,592 | 10 | |
| 1953 | — | #2,709 | 9 | |
| 1952 | — | #2,251 | 12 | |
| 1951 | — | #1,904 | 16 | |
| 1950 | — | #2,111 | 13 | |
| 1949 | — | #1,872 | 16 | |
| 1948 | — | #2,326 | 11 | |
| 1947 | — | #1,850 | 17 | |
| 1946 | — | #1,440 | 24 | |
| 1945 | — | #2,743 | 7 | |
| 1944 | — | #1,890 | 14 | |
| 1943 | — | #2,732 | 8 | |
| 1942 | — | #1,946 | 14 | |
| 1941 | — | #2,491 | 9 | |
| 1940 | — | #2,478 | 9 | |
| 1939 | — | #3,113 | 6 | |
| 1938 | — | #2,868 | 7 | |
| 1937 | — | #2,332 | 10 | |
| 1936 | — | #2,629 | 8 | |
| 1935 | — | #1,757 | 16 | |
| 1934 | — | #2,121 | 12 | |
| 1933 | — | #2,738 | 8 | |
| 1932 | — | #2,849 | 8 | |
| 1931 | — | #2,471 | 10 | |
| 1930 | — | #3,289 | 7 | |
| 1929 | — | #3,559 | 6 | |
| 1928 | — | #3,357 | 7 | |
| 1927 | — | #2,912 | 9 | |
| 1926 | — | #2,904 | 9 | |
| 1925 | — | #2,588 | 11 | |
| 1924 | — | #2,347 | 13 | |
| 1923 | — | #4,239 | 5 | |
| 1922 | — | #4,307 | 5 | |
| 1921 | — | — | ||
| 1920 | — | #3,489 | 7 | |
| 1919 | — | #4,168 | 5 | |
| 1918 | — | #3,096 | 8 | |
| 1917 | — | #2,732 | 9 | |
| 1916 | — | #2,389 | 11 | |
| 1915 | — | #2,621 | 9 | |
| 1914 | — | #2,101 | 10 | |
| 1913 | — | #2,821 | 5 | |
| 1912 | — | #1,885 | 8 | |
| 1911 | — | — | ||
| 1910 | — | — | ||
| 1909 | — | #1,277 | 6 | |
| 1908 | — | — | ||
| 1907 | — | — | ||
| 1906 | — | — | ||
| 1905 | — | — | ||
| 1904 | — | — | ||
| 1903 | — | — | ||
| 1902 | — | — | ||
| 1901 | — | — | ||
| 1900 | — | — | ||
| 1899 | — | — | ||
| 1898 | — | — | ||
| 1897 | — | — | ||
| 1896 | — | — | ||
| 1895 | — | — | ||
| 1894 | — | #1,074 | 5 | |
| 1893 | — | — | ||
| 1892 | — | — | ||
| 1891 | — | — | ||
| 1890 | — | — | ||
| 1889 | — | — | ||
| 1888 | — | — | ||
| 1887 | — | — | ||
| 1886 | — | — | ||
| 1885 | — | — | ||
| 1884 | — | #971 | 5 | |
| 1883 | — | — | ||
| 1882 | — | — | ||
| 1881 | — | — | ||
| 1880 | — | — | ||
The first year at least five boys were named Tucker! It came in at #971, and was given to 5 baby boys.
Quietest stretch: 1884–1908, when fewer than 6 boys a year got the name.
Where Tucker is popular in 2016
- Rank in state
- Top 10
- 11–50
- 51–100
- 101–500
- 501+
- Not published
Hover or tap a state for its numbers.
- Montana#55 · 1 in 197
- North Dakota#58 · 1 in 206
- Wyoming#70 · 1 in 193
- Vermont#71 · 1 in 184
- Idaho#75 · 1 in 298
Best ever in a state: #24 in Montana, 2011.
Show every state
| State | Rank | Births | Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| Montana | #55 | 20 | 1 in 197 |
| North Dakota | #58 | 20 | 1 in 206 |
| Wyoming | #70 | 9 | 1 in 193 |
| Vermont | #71 | 9 | 1 in 184 |
| Idaho | #75 | 27 | 1 in 298 |
| Arkansas | #77 | 49 | 1 in 293 |
| West Virginia | #79 | 30 | 1 in 261 |
| Maine | #86 | 17 | 1 in 267 |
| South Dakota | #86 | 15 | 1 in 273 |
| Iowa | #87 | 48 | 1 in 317 |
| Kansas | #91 | 49 | 1 in 320 |
| Missouri | #91 | 89 | 1 in 355 |
| Kentucky | #92 | 64 | 1 in 341 |
| Alabama | #93 | 58 | 1 in 398 |
| Tennessee | #97 | 87 | 1 in 416 |
| Oklahoma | #103 | 49 | 1 in 414 |
| Louisiana | #106 | 59 | 1 in 416 |
| Utah | #112 | 51 | 1 in 411 |
| North Carolina | #114 | 117 | 1 in 444 |
| Mississippi | #115 | 31 | 1 in 433 |
| Wisconsin | #123 | 61 | 1 in 441 |
| New Hampshire | #125 | 11 | 1 in 421 |
| Nebraska | #126 | 24 | 1 in 415 |
| South Carolina | #126 | 44 | 1 in 482 |
| Oregon | #128 | 38 | 1 in 484 |
| Virginia | #135 | 75 | 1 in 555 |
| Georgia | #137 | 92 | 1 in 584 |
| Ohio | #141 | 103 | 1 in 576 |
| Minnesota | #142 | 52 | 1 in 538 |
| Michigan | #153 | 74 | 1 in 645 |
| Indiana | #155 | 60 | 1 in 593 |
| Washington | #155 | 59 | 1 in 628 |
| Pennsylvania | #183 | 73 | 1 in 811 |
| Colorado | #187 | 39 | 1 in 707 |
| Maryland | #202 | 32 | 1 in 861 |
| Rhode Island | #204 | 5 | 1 in 782 |
| Connecticut | #216 | 14 | 1 in 1,007 |
| Alaska | #217 | 5 | 1 in 657 |
| Massachusetts | #222 | 27 | 1 in 1,090 |
| Illinois | #226 | 64 | 1 in 1,003 |
| Florida | #244 | 83 | 1 in 1,180 |
| Texas | #247 | 168 | 1 in 1,102 |
| Arizona | #259 | 33 | 1 in 1,092 |
| Nevada | #297 | 11 | 1 in 1,223 |
| New York | #344 | 53 | 1 in 1,887 |
| New Mexico | #375 | 5 | 1 in 1,676 |
| California | #416 | 89 | 1 in 2,513 |
| New Jersey | #576 | 11 | 1 in 3,775 |
| Delaware | — | — | — |
| District of Columbia | — | — | — |
| Hawaii | — | — | — |
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 Tucker
- 19 spots since 2024 (#200 → #181)
- 10 spots since 2020 (#191 → #181)
- 5 spots since 2015 (#186 → #181)
- Biggest jump: 146 spots in 1988 (#772 → #626)
- Biggest drop: 112 spots in 1986 (#748 → #860)
- Debuted 1884
- Peaked 2016 at #173 (2,311 births)
- Not yet halved from its peak
- Top 10: never
- Top 100: never
- Top 1,000: 49 yrs · run 1978–2025
- Highest: 1 in 793 boys born in 2014 were named Tucker (0.13%)
- Latest: 1 in 851 boys born in 2025 (0.12%)
- Its best rank, #173 in 2016, was only 1 in 821 (0.12%) — a smaller share of a much bigger birth year
- 38.5% of all boys named Tucker (21,259) were born in this decade
Show by decade
| Decade | Births | Best rank | Avg rank |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1880s | 5 | #971 (1884) | #971 |
| 1890s | 5 | #1,074 (1894) | #1,074 |
| 1900s | 6 | #1,277 (1909) | #1,277 |
| 1910s | 65 | #1,885 (1912) | #2,727 |
| 1920s | 72 | #2,347 (1924) | #3,300 |
| 1930s | 92 | #1,757 (1935) | #2,617 |
| 1940s | 129 | #1,440 (1946) | #2,177 |
| 1950s | 143 | #1,644 (1958) | #2,204 |
| 1960s | 198 | #1,388 (1967) | #1,900 |
| 1970s | 526 | #967 (1978) | #1,253 |
| 1980s | 1,552 | #497 (1989) | #775 |
| 1990s | 7,020 | #296 (1999) | #367 |
| 2000s | 12,390 | #226 (2009) | #270 |
| 2010s | 21,259 | #173 (2016) | #186 |
| 2020s | 11,688 | #180 (2021) | #192 |
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.
Tucker in 2016
Top girls' names in 2016
Top boys' names in 2016
More about 2016
girls
1,772,022 girls got a published name in 2016; 1 in 118,135 of them was named Tucker, which outranked 59.7% of the 18,885 girls' names that year. The ten most popular names covered 8.3% of girls (24.6% in 1880, 7.0% in 2025).
- #7,230Ziyonna16
- #7,230Zuly16
- #7,230Zuzu16
- #7,602Tucker15
- #7,602Aalyah15
- #7,602Aamilah15
- #7,602Abeeha15
- #7,988Aadhira14
- #7,988Aanaya14
- #7,988Abia14
Tied with 385 names at #7,602; 3 shown. Tied names share a rank, as in SSA's lists.
Among names in the top 1,000 of either year.
boys
1,897,738 boys got a published name in 2016; 1 in 821 of them was named Tucker, which outranked 98.8% of the 14,207 boys' names that year. The ten most popular names covered 8.2% of boys (44.2% in 1880, 8.0% in 2025).
Among names in the top 1,000 of either year.