Angelica
#707 for girls in 2025, 398 births · Last seen for boys in 2007 at #12,367
Given to girls 99.7% of the time
- Peak · girls
- 1996 · 3,404 births
- Debut · girls
- 5 births
- In top 100 · girls
- 3 yrsof 146 years
- Total births · girls
- 93,217since 1892
Angelica 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 | #707 | 398 | — | |
| 2024 | #619 | 481 | — | |
| 2023 | #634 | 463 | — | |
| 2022 | #658 | 450 | — | |
| 2021 | #599 | 497 | — | |
| 2020 | #572 | 511 | — | |
| 2019 | #591 | 514 | — | |
| 2018 | #545 | 567 | — | |
| 2017 | #538 | 576 | — | |
| 2016 | #500 | 624 | — | |
| 2015 | #423 | 756 | — | |
| 2014 | #434 | 737 | — | |
| 2013 | #412 | 734 | — | |
| 2012 | #373 | 837 | — | |
| 2011 | #369 | 867 | — | |
| 2010 | #346 | 932 | — | |
| 2009 | #292 | 1,128 | — | |
| 2008 | #258 | 1,337 | — | |
| 2007 | #232 | 1,516 | #12,367 | 5 |
| 2006 | #206 | 1,669 | — | |
| 2005 | #192 | 1,788 | #10,151 | 6 |
| 2004 | #176 | 1,941 | — | |
| 2003 | #152 | 2,213 | — | |
| 2002 | #146 | 2,273 | #10,667 | 5 |
| 2001 | #136 | 2,435 | — | |
| 2000 | #138 | 2,395 | #10,349 | 5 |
| 1999 | #116 | 2,821 | #7,874 | 7 |
| 1998 | #109 | 3,183 | — | |
| 1997 | #101 | 3,381 | #8,110 | 6 |
| 1996 | #97 | 3,404 | #6,496 | 8 |
| 1995 | #101 | 3,357 | #4,052 | 15 |
| 1994 | #108 | 3,078 | #5,868 | 9 |
| 1993 | #98 | 3,242 | #5,002 | 11 |
| 1992 | #100 | 3,324 | #6,128 | 8 |
| 1991 | #117 | 2,823 | #4,476 | 12 |
| 1990 | #119 | 2,717 | #3,058 | 20 |
| 1989 | #107 | 2,876 | #2,469 | 26 |
| 1988 | #109 | 2,612 | #2,860 | 19 |
| 1987 | #106 | 2,601 | #2,725 | 19 |
| 1986 | #130 | 2,146 | #2,510 | 21 |
| 1985 | #176 | 1,542 | #3,216 | 14 |
| 1984 | #194 | 1,380 | #3,701 | 11 |
| 1983 | #186 | 1,464 | #3,230 | 13 |
| 1982 | #183 | 1,498 | #2,831 | 16 |
| 1981 | #183 | 1,502 | #4,153 | 9 |
| 1980 | #184 | 1,455 | #3,838 | 10 |
| 1979 | #204 | 1,305 | — | |
| 1978 | #219 | 1,146 | #4,554 | 7 |
| 1977 | #220 | 1,133 | #4,164 | 8 |
| 1976 | #200 | 1,211 | — | |
| 1975 | #201 | 1,210 | #3,941 | 8 |
| 1974 | #240 | 1,062 | #2,946 | 12 |
| 1973 | #302 | 771 | #5,101 | 5 |
| 1972 | #339 | 666 | — | |
| 1971 | #370 | 640 | — | |
| 1970 | #400 | 591 | #4,230 | 6 |
| 1969 | #486 | 398 | — | |
| 1968 | #541 | 315 | — | |
| 1967 | #532 | 313 | — | |
| 1966 | #602 | 247 | — | |
| 1965 | #619 | 247 | — | |
| 1964 | #658 | 240 | — | |
| 1963 | #753 | 187 | — | |
| 1962 | #867 | 148 | — | |
| 1961 | #879 | 147 | — | |
| 1960 | #946 | 127 | — | |
| 1959 | #944 | 123 | — | |
| 1958 | #1,089 | 93 | — | |
| 1957 | #1,100 | 90 | — | |
| 1956 | #1,100 | 88 | — | |
| 1955 | #1,026 | 96 | — | |
| 1954 | #1,053 | 87 | — | |
| 1953 | #1,103 | 77 | — | |
| 1952 | #1,236 | 59 | — | |
| 1951 | #1,339 | 48 | — | |
| 1950 | #1,123 | 67 | — | |
| 1949 | #1,409 | 43 | — | |
| 1948 | #1,358 | 46 | — | |
| 1947 | #1,270 | 51 | — | |
| 1946 | #1,318 | 43 | — | |
| 1945 | #1,418 | 32 | — | |
| 1944 | #1,364 | 35 | — | |
| 1943 | #1,395 | 35 | — | |
| 1942 | #1,413 | 33 | — | |
| 1941 | #1,418 | 30 | — | |
| 1940 | #1,170 | 39 | — | |
| 1939 | #1,378 | 29 | — | |
| 1938 | #1,140 | 40 | — | |
| 1937 | #1,355 | 29 | — | |
| 1936 | #1,135 | 39 | — | |
| 1935 | #1,307 | 31 | — | |
| 1934 | #1,440 | 26 | — | |
| 1933 | #1,400 | 27 | — | |
| 1932 | #1,346 | 30 | — | |
| 1931 | #1,199 | 36 | — | |
| 1930 | #1,161 | 41 | — | |
| 1929 | #1,419 | 29 | — | |
| 1928 | #1,469 | 29 | — | |
| 1927 | #1,486 | 30 | — | |
| 1926 | #1,541 | 28 | — | |
| 1925 | #1,504 | 30 | — | |
| 1924 | #1,031 | 56 | — | |
| 1923 | #1,490 | 30 | — | |
| 1922 | #1,575 | 28 | — | |
| 1921 | #1,867 | 22 | — | |
| 1920 | #1,708 | 24 | — | |
| 1919 | #2,264 | 15 | — | |
| 1918 | #1,690 | 23 | — | |
| 1917 | #1,923 | 18 | — | |
| 1916 | #1,485 | 25 | — | |
| 1915 | #1,571 | 22 | — | |
| 1914 | #1,480 | 19 | — | |
| 1913 | #1,601 | 14 | — | |
| 1912 | #1,080 | 23 | — | |
| 1911 | #1,656 | 9 | — | |
| 1910 | #1,421 | 11 | — | |
| 1909 | #1,957 | 6 | — | |
| 1908 | #2,101 | 5 | — | |
| 1907 | #1,821 | 6 | — | |
| 1906 | #1,727 | 6 | — | |
| 1905 | — | — | ||
| 1904 | — | — | ||
| 1903 | — | — | ||
| 1902 | — | — | ||
| 1901 | — | — | ||
| 1900 | — | — | ||
| 1899 | — | — | ||
| 1898 | — | — | ||
| 1897 | #1,263 | 7 | — | |
| 1896 | #1,583 | 5 | — | |
| 1895 | — | — | ||
| 1894 | — | — | ||
| 1893 | — | — | ||
| 1892 | #1,450 | 5 | — | |
| 1891 | — | — | ||
| 1890 | — | — | ||
| 1889 | — | — | ||
| 1888 | — | — | ||
| 1887 | — | — | ||
| 1886 | — | — | ||
| 1885 | — | — | ||
| 1884 | — | — | ||
| 1883 | — | — | ||
| 1882 | — | — | ||
| 1881 | — | — | ||
| 1880 | — | — | ||
The first year at least five girls were named Angelica! It came in at #1,450, and was given to 5 baby girls.
Quietest stretch: 1892–1896, when fewer than 6 girls a year got the name.
Where Angelica is popular in 1982
- Rank in state
- Top 10
- 11–50
- 51–100
- 101–500
- 501+
- Not published
Hover or tap a state for its numbers.
- Arizona#58 · 1 in 284
- New Mexico#62 · 1 in 294
- California#69 · 1 in 363
- Texas#74 · 1 in 414
- Nevada#110 · 1 in 477
Best ever in a state: #15 in New Mexico, 1998.
Show every state
| State | Rank | Births | Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| Arizona | #58 | 71 | 1 in 284 |
| New Mexico | #62 | 33 | 1 in 294 |
| California | #69 | 512 | 1 in 363 |
| Texas | #74 | 314 | 1 in 414 |
| Nevada | #110 | 10 | 1 in 477 |
| Colorado | #154 | 29 | 1 in 760 |
| Illinois | #158 | 86 | 1 in 865 |
| New Jersey | #189 | 36 | 1 in 1,063 |
| Florida | #190 | 53 | 1 in 1,070 |
| Connecticut | #208 | 13 | 1 in 1,212 |
| New York | #211 | 82 | 1 in 1,253 |
| Nebraska | #214 | 9 | 1 in 1,195 |
| Washington | #220 | 23 | 1 in 1,196 |
| Kansas | #230 | 11 | 1 in 1,411 |
| North Carolina | #320 | 16 | 1 in 2,137 |
| Wisconsin | #341 | 11 | 1 in 2,856 |
| Massachusetts | #367 | 11 | 1 in 2,961 |
| Iowa | #369 | 6 | 1 in 3,136 |
| Oregon | #369 | 7 | 1 in 2,334 |
| Indiana | #376 | 12 | 1 in 2,932 |
| Missouri | #376 | 11 | 1 in 2,926 |
| Michigan | #382 | 19 | 1 in 3,032 |
| Utah | #397 | 6 | 1 in 2,733 |
| Tennessee | #400 | 9 | 1 in 3,118 |
| Ohio | #410 | 21 | 1 in 3,403 |
| Alabama | #446 | 7 | 1 in 3,124 |
| Virginia | #459 | 8 | 1 in 3,850 |
| South Carolina | #504 | 5 | 1 in 3,578 |
| Pennsylvania | #506 | 15 | 1 in 4,660 |
| Oklahoma | #513 | 6 | 1 in 3,762 |
| Georgia | #516 | 9 | 1 in 3,875 |
| Louisiana | #548 | 8 | 1 in 3,960 |
| Alaska | — | — | — |
| Arkansas | — | — | — |
| Delaware | — | — | — |
| District of Columbia | — | — | — |
| Hawaii | — | — | — |
| Idaho | — | — | — |
| Kentucky | — | — | — |
| Maine | — | — | — |
| Maryland | — | — | — |
| Minnesota | — | — | — |
| Mississippi | — | — | — |
| Montana | — | — | — |
| New Hampshire | — | — | — |
| North Dakota | — | — | — |
| Rhode Island | — | — | — |
| South Dakota | — | — | — |
| Vermont | — | — | — |
| West Virginia | — | — | — |
| Wyoming | — | — | — |
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 Angelica
- 88 spots since 2024 (#619 → #707)
- 135 spots since 2020 (#572 → #707)
- 284 spots since 2015 (#423 → #707)
- Biggest jump: 145 spots in 1959 (#1,089 → #944)
- Biggest drop: 88 spots in 2025 (#619 → #707)
- Debuted 1892
- Peaked 1996 at #97 (3,404 births)
- Births halved by 2006, 10 yrs later
- Top 10: never
- Top 100: 3 yrs · run 1992–1993
- Top 1,000: 67 yrs · run 1959–2025
- Highest: 1 in 515 girls born in 1997 were named Angelica (0.19%)
- Latest: 1 in 4,038 girls born in 2025 (0.02%)
- Its best rank, #97 in 1996, was only 1 in 515 (0.19%) — a smaller share of a much bigger birth year
- 33.6% of all girls named Angelica (31,330) were born in this decade
Show by decade
| Decade | Births | Best rank | Avg rank |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1890s | 17 | #1,263 (1897) | #1,432 |
| 1900s | 23 | #1,727 (1906) | #1,902 |
| 1910s | 179 | #1,080 (1912) | #1,617 |
| 1920s | 306 | #1,031 (1924) | #1,509 |
| 1930s | 328 | #1,135 (1936) | #1,286 |
| 1940s | 387 | #1,170 (1940) | #1,353 |
| 1950s | 828 | #944 (1959) | #1,111 |
| 1960s | 2,369 | #486 (1969) | #688 |
| 1970s | 9,735 | #200 (1976) | #270 |
| 1980s | 19,076 | #106 (1987) | #156 |
| 1990s | 31,330 | #97 (1996) | #107 |
| 2000s | 18,695 | #136 (2001) | #193 |
| 2010s | 7,144 | #346 (2010) | #453 |
| 2020s | 2,800 | #572 (2020) | #632 |
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.
Angelica in 1982
Top girls' names in 1982
Top boys' names in 1982
More about 1982
girls
1,693,325 girls got a published name in 1982; 1 in 1,130 of them was named Angelica, which outranked 98.5% of the 12,332 girls' names that year. The ten most popular names covered 17.3% of girls (24.6% in 1880, 7.0% in 2025).
Among names in the top 1,000 of either year.
boys
1,814,447 boys got a published name in 1982; 1 in 113,403 of them was named Angelica, which outranked 61.6% of the 7,367 boys' names that year. The ten most popular names covered 23.9% of boys (44.2% in 1880, 8.0% in 2025).
- #2,709Watson17
- #2,709Willian17
- #2,709Yousef17
- #2,831Angelica16
- #2,831Addam16
- #2,831Alonza16
- #2,831Amish16
- #2,972Abrahan15
- #2,972Alaric15
- #2,972Alejandra15
Tied with 140 names at #2,831; 3 shown. Tied names share a rank, as in SSA's lists.
Among names in the top 1,000 of either year.