Meaning not yet researched.
Bailey: US girls given the name each year, 1880 to 2025, from Social Security card applications. 1,446 in 2025. Its best rank was #60 in 1998.
US births per year · SSA card applications
Peaked at #60 in 1998; #209 in 2025. About 91% of babies named Bailey in 2025 were girls.
Baby name · US data 1880–2025
#209 for US girls in 2025. Its best year was 1998, at #60.
Hover, tap or use the arrow keys for any year. Years with fewer than five babies of a sex are not published by SSA and show as zero.
Bailey: US girls and boys given the name each year from 1880 to 2025. 1,446 girls in 2025. Peak: #60 in 1998 · most girls in one year: 5,198 (1998).
In 2025, 1,446 US girls were named Bailey, making it the 209th most common girls’ name of the year, down 27 places from #182 in 2024. That is 206 fewer than the 1,652 girls named Bailey in 2024. Its best rank for girls was #60, reached in 1998. That year also had the most girls given the name: 5,198. For comparison, it was #107 in 2015 and unranked in 1950.
In 2025, 138 US boys were named Bailey, making it the 1,358th most common boys’ name of the year, down 87 places from #1,271 in 2024. That is 17 fewer than the 155 boys named Bailey in 2024. Its best rank for boys was #151, reached in 1997. That year also had the most boys given the name: 2,296. For comparison, it was #1,494 in 2015 and #1,221 in 1950.
Social Security card records list Bailey in every one of the 146 years from 1880 to 2025; in 1880 there were 12 babies with the name. In all, 132,544 US babies have been given the name, 84% of them girls and 16% boys. Its busiest decade was the 2000s, with 43,773 babies named Bailey.
Over the 10 years from 2016 to 2025, 19,020 US girls were named Bailey; the busiest of those years was 2016, with 2,712. In 2025 that was about 1 in 1,112 of the girls in SSA’s list for the year.
Among the states, Bailey ranked highest in Vermont in 2025, at #58 for girls there. It was in the top 100 in 1 state (counting DC). Related spellings in the SSA files include Bayley (2,656 babies since 1880), Baylee (22,403 babies since 1880), Bailee (16,483 babies since 1880) and Baily (1,824 babies since 1880). Rarer spellings such as Baylei, Baylea and Baley are summarised on this page.
Meaning not yet researched.
We publish a meaning only with a cited source and a confidence label, and never generate one. Meanings are being researched for the most common names first.
Wikidata records this spelling as a given name in English. That is where the name is used, not necessarily where it comes from.
Rare spellings summarised here: Baylei (475), Baylea (462), Baley (436), Baili (333), Bailei (286), Bailea (227), Bailley (71), Bayly (63), Baelee (58), Balee (24), Baeley (23), Bailly (20), and more.
Numbers are all-time US births. Links come from Wikidata’s “said to be the same as” (P460, CC0) and our spelling rule: at most two letters different, with the same sound pattern.
No nicknames listed for Bailey in the open dataset we use.
Source: carltonnorthern/nicknames (Apache-2.0).
US girls. Rank within each state. SSA leaves out states where fewer than five girls got the name, so 6 are not listed.
| State | Births 2025 | Rank 2025 | Rank 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Vermont | 7 | #58 | — |
| South Carolina | 40 | #105 | #105 |
| New Hampshire | 10 | #123 | #104 |
| Virginia | 57 | #131 | #108 |
| Alaska | 5 | #143 | #69 |
| Maryland | 33 | #147 | #102 |
| Georgia | 65 | #149 | #52 |
| Alabama | 28 | #154 | #62 |
| Massachusetts | 36 | #155 | #186 |
| Kentucky | 29 | #156 | #79 |
| West Virginia | 10 | #157 | #75 |
| Missouri | 38 | #160 | #83 |
| Arkansas | 18 | #166 | #86 |
| Ohio | 65 | #170 | #93 |
| Hawaii | 5 | #173 | #29 |
| Illinois | 57 | #174 | #142 |
| Arizona | 37 | #176 | #129 |
| Maine | 6 | #178 | #45 |
| Idaho | 12 | #179 | #59 |
| Colorado | 32 | #185 | #87 |
| Mississippi | 14 | #185 | #50 |
| New Mexico | 8 | #186 | #81 |
| Louisiana | 23 | #187 | #32 |
| Pennsylvania | 60 | #189 | #100 |
| South Dakota | 6 | #193 | #132 |
| Tennessee | 39 | #196 | #70 |
| Michigan | 44 | #206 | #96 |
| Connecticut | 16 | #208 | #186 |
| North Carolina | 52 | #210 | #73 |
| Wisconsin | 26 | #214 | #80 |
| Utah | 21 | #225 | #114 |
| Oklahoma | 17 | #225 | #92 |
| Indiana | 28 | #254 | #107 |
| Florida | 74 | #258 | #169 |
| Iowa | 13 | #259 | #71 |
| Oregon | 14 | #261 | #172 |
| Nebraska | 8 | #269 | #123 |
| Texas | 128 | #270 | #117 |
| New York | 60 | #279 | #211 |
| Washington | 25 | #291 | #125 |
| Kansas | 11 | #292 | #157 |
| Minnesota | 18 | #309 | #123 |
| California | 105 | #309 | #150 |
| New Jersey | 25 | #325 | #313 |
| Nevada | 7 | #382 | #179 |
Births and national rank for each year SSA lists the name, newest first.
| Year | Girls | Girls rank | Boys | Boys rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | 1,446 | #209 | 138 | #1,358 |
| 2024 | 1,652 | #182 | 155 | #1,271 |
| 2023 | 1,683 | #172 | 151 | #1,274 |
| 2022 | 1,649 | #182 | 119 | #1,517 |
| 2021 | 1,775 | #162 | 119 | #1,497 |
| 2020 | 1,670 | #172 | 93 | #1,688 |
| 2019 | 1,819 | #157 | 120 | #1,451 |
| 2018 | 2,181 | #133 | 128 | #1,377 |
| 2017 | 2,433 | #125 | 144 | #1,265 |
| 2016 | 2,712 | #116 | 110 | #1,523 |
| 2015 | 2,853 | #107 | 111 | #1,494 |
| 2014 | 2,951 | #104 | 135 | #1,308 |
| 2013 | 3,019 | #105 | 124 | #1,361 |
| 2012 | 3,418 | #81 | 121 | #1,384 |
| 2011 | 3,318 | #88 | 168 | #1,101 |
| 2010 | 3,598 | #78 | 196 | #997 |
| 2009 | 3,643 | #85 | 219 | #938 |
| 2008 | 3,907 | #82 | 277 | #792 |
| 2007 | 3,934 | #84 | 355 | #673 |
| 2006 | 2,980 | #112 | 366 | #637 |
| 2005 | 2,991 | #108 | 477 | #515 |
| 2004 | 3,309 | #100 | 599 | #433 |
| 2003 | 3,467 | #98 | 759 | #357 |
| 2002 | 3,662 | #84 | 851 | #325 |
| 2001 | 4,339 | #69 | 1,234 | #266 |
| 2000 | 4,649 | #68 | 1,755 | #202 |
| 1999 | 4,809 | #65 | 2,208 | #167 |
| 1998 | 5,198 | #60 | 2,239 | #154 |
| 1997 | 5,024 | #65 | 2,296 | #151 |
| 1996 | 4,192 | #85 | 1,550 | #200 |
| 1995 | 3,488 | #96 | 1,010 | #277 |
| 1994 | 2,351 | #137 | 188 | #768 |
| 1993 | 2,134 | #146 | 129 | #947 |
| 1992 | 1,730 | #177 | 119 | #989 |
| 1991 | 1,435 | #208 | 100 | #1,088 |
| 1990 | 1,260 | #227 | 87 | #1,166 |
| 1989 | 1,051 | #257 | 88 | #1,132 |
| 1988 | 942 | #269 | 77 | #1,145 |
| 1987 | 611 | #383 | 65 | #1,195 |
| 1986 | 500 | #430 | 41 | #1,592 |
| 1985 | 309 | #612 | 39 | #1,620 |
| 1984 | 267 | #652 | 40 | #1,533 |
| 1983 | 152 | #959 | 30 | #1,824 |
| 1982 | 110 | #1,213 | 41 | #1,517 |
| 1981 | 84 | #1,447 | 26 | #2,043 |
| 1980 | 56 | #1,907 | 30 | #1,855 |
| 1979 | 17 | #4,244 | 19 | #2,473 |
| 1978 | 6 | #8,646 | 16 | #2,677 |
| 1977 | — | — | 18 | #2,467 |
| 1976 | — | — | 15 | #2,717 |
| 1975 | 5 | #9,196 | 13 | #2,920 |
| 1974 | — | — | 16 | #2,470 |
| 1973 | — | — | 18 | #2,226 |
| 1972 | — | — | 15 | #2,434 |
| 1971 | — | — | 19 | #2,134 |
| 1970 | — | — | 20 | #1,994 |
| 1969 | — | — | 26 | #1,608 |
| 1968 | — | — | 13 | #2,324 |
| 1967 | — | — | 26 | #1,507 |
| 1966 | — | — | 22 | #1,652 |
| 1965 | — | — | 15 | #2,096 |
| 1964 | — | — | 23 | #1,657 |
| 1963 | — | — | 22 | #1,698 |
| 1962 | — | — | 21 | #1,764 |
| 1961 | — | — | 14 | #2,245 |
| 1960 | — | — | 15 | #2,129 |
| 1959 | — | — | 28 | #1,503 |
| 1958 | — | — | 21 | #1,729 |
| 1957 | — | — | 31 | #1,411 |
| 1956 | 5 | #6,013 | 27 | #1,512 |
| 1955 | — | — | 28 | #1,461 |
| 1954 | — | — | 29 | #1,411 |
| 1953 | — | — | 25 | #1,512 |
| 1952 | — | — | 34 | #1,271 |
| 1951 | — | — | 29 | #1,376 |
| 1950 | — | — | 35 | #1,221 |
| 1949 | — | — | 30 | #1,324 |
| 1948 | — | — | 27 | #1,403 |
| 1947 | — | — | 28 | #1,395 |
| 1946 | — | — | 31 | #1,262 |
| 1945 | — | — | 31 | #1,184 |
| 1944 | — | — | 32 | #1,174 |
| 1943 | — | — | 27 | #1,346 |
| 1942 | — | — | 31 | #1,247 |
| 1941 | — | — | 33 | #1,153 |
| 1940 | — | — | 31 | #1,210 |
| 1939 | — | — | 38 | #1,033 |
| 1938 | — | — | 34 | #1,111 |
| 1937 | — | — | 41 | #987 |
| 1936 | — | — | 34 | #1,120 |
| 1935 | — | — | 37 | #1,060 |
| 1934 | — | — | 30 | #1,215 |
| 1933 | — | — | 35 | #1,103 |
| 1932 | — | — | 41 | #1,037 |
| 1931 | — | — | 35 | #1,148 |
| 1930 | — | — | 42 | #1,071 |
| 1929 | — | — | 35 | #1,177 |
| 1928 | — | — | 45 | #1,032 |
| 1927 | — | — | 36 | #1,204 |
| 1926 | — | — | 32 | #1,280 |
| 1925 | 6 | #4,486 | 30 | #1,334 |
| 1924 | — | — | 44 | #1,071 |
| 1923 | — | — | 33 | #1,256 |
| 1922 | — | — | 39 | #1,142 |
| 1921 | — | — | 48 | #1,014 |
| 1920 | — | — | 48 | #989 |
| 1919 | — | — | 36 | #1,164 |
| 1918 | — | — | 37 | #1,127 |
| 1917 | — | — | 33 | #1,177 |
| 1916 | 6 | #3,963 | 50 | #888 |
| 1915 | — | — | 34 | #1,102 |
| 1914 | — | — | 34 | #951 |
| 1913 | — | — | 24 | #1,025 |
| 1912 | — | — | 26 | #879 |
| 1911 | — | — | 11 | #1,044 |
| 1910 | — | — | 10 | #1,046 |
| 1909 | — | — | 9 | #1,029 |
| 1908 | — | — | 7 | #1,125 |
| 1907 | — | — | 14 | #702 |
| 1906 | — | — | 15 | #616 |
| 1905 | — | — | 10 | #793 |
| 1904 | — | — | 10 | #764 |
| 1903 | — | — | 5 | #1,143 |
| 1902 | — | — | 10 | #749 |
| 1901 | — | — | 12 | #601 |
| 1900 | — | — | 19 | #557 |
| 1899 | — | — | 11 | #620 |
| 1898 | — | — | 14 | #576 |
| 1897 | — | — | 13 | #585 |
| 1896 | — | — | 8 | #829 |
| 1895 | — | — | 10 | #690 |
| 1894 | — | — | 11 | #633 |
| 1893 | — | — | 16 | #461 |
| 1892 | — | — | 10 | #691 |
| 1891 | — | — | 10 | #605 |
| 1890 | — | — | 13 | #536 |
| 1889 | — | — | 10 | #632 |
| 1888 | — | — | 6 | #924 |
| 1887 | — | — | 6 | #828 |
| 1886 | — | — | 7 | #768 |
| 1885 | — | — | 7 | #767 |
| 1884 | — | — | 6 | #860 |
| 1883 | — | — | 8 | #684 |
| 1882 | — | — | 8 | #705 |
| 1881 | — | — | 8 | #656 |
| 1880 | — | — | 12 | #532 |
About the data: counts are Social Security card applications for US births, for names given to at least five babies of a sex in a year (SSA, names.zip, public domain). Ranks follow SSA’s own order: most births first, ties alphabetical. Files retrieved 2026-10-05 (checksum on our sources page).