Elmer
Last seen for girls in 1980 at #10,392 · #1,222 for boys in 2025, 165 births
Given to boys 98.7% of the time
- Peak · boys
- 1893 · 574 births
- Debut · boys
- 373 births
- In top 100 · boys
- 53 yrsof 146 years
- Total births · boys
- 129,591since 1880
Elmer 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 | — | #1,222 | 165 | |
| 2024 | — | #1,155 | 181 | |
| 2023 | — | #1,346 | 140 | |
| 2022 | — | #1,191 | 168 | |
| 2021 | — | #1,207 | 160 | |
| 2020 | — | #1,308 | 138 | |
| 2019 | — | #1,118 | 175 | |
| 2018 | — | #1,261 | 145 | |
| 2017 | — | #1,213 | 151 | |
| 2016 | — | #1,141 | 169 | |
| 2015 | — | #1,205 | 153 | |
| 2014 | — | #1,130 | 169 | |
| 2013 | — | #1,144 | 158 | |
| 2012 | — | #1,237 | 143 | |
| 2011 | — | #1,046 | 181 | |
| 2010 | — | #1,005 | 195 | |
| 2009 | — | #909 | 227 | |
| 2008 | — | #1,041 | 182 | |
| 2007 | — | #857 | 244 | |
| 2006 | — | #889 | 221 | |
| 2005 | — | #826 | 227 | |
| 2004 | — | #832 | 214 | |
| 2003 | — | #649 | 307 | |
| 2002 | — | #760 | 227 | |
| 2001 | — | #734 | 237 | |
| 2000 | — | #850 | 188 | |
| 1999 | — | #850 | 178 | |
| 1998 | — | #749 | 215 | |
| 1997 | — | #711 | 222 | |
| 1996 | — | #704 | 225 | |
| 1995 | — | #738 | 212 | |
| 1994 | — | #772 | 186 | |
| 1993 | — | #725 | 205 | |
| 1992 | — | #675 | 236 | |
| 1991 | — | #699 | 210 | |
| 1990 | — | #691 | 215 | |
| 1989 | — | #767 | 167 | |
| 1988 | — | #727 | 168 | |
| 1987 | — | #724 | 160 | |
| 1986 | — | #744 | 149 | |
| 1985 | — | #752 | 140 | |
| 1984 | — | #677 | 163 | |
| 1983 | — | #698 | 150 | |
| 1982 | — | #708 | 151 | |
| 1981 | — | #689 | 157 | |
| 1980 | #10,392 | 5 | #681 | 162 |
| 1979 | — | #618 | 191 | |
| 1978 | — | #651 | 166 | |
| 1977 | — | #639 | 176 | |
| 1976 | — | #598 | 184 | |
| 1975 | #9,067 | 5 | #590 | 187 |
| 1974 | — | #537 | 222 | |
| 1973 | — | #539 | 209 | |
| 1972 | — | #502 | 245 | |
| 1971 | — | #486 | 271 | |
| 1970 | — | #476 | 286 | |
| 1969 | — | #450 | 300 | |
| 1968 | — | #435 | 307 | |
| 1967 | #6,042 | 6 | #434 | 306 |
| 1966 | #6,564 | 5 | #426 | 319 |
| 1965 | — | #405 | 376 | |
| 1964 | #6,009 | 6 | #407 | 389 |
| 1963 | #6,592 | 5 | #398 | 409 |
| 1962 | #6,578 | 5 | #385 | 434 |
| 1961 | — | #363 | 478 | |
| 1960 | #4,437 | 9 | #342 | 515 |
| 1959 | #4,300 | 9 | #337 | 529 |
| 1958 | #3,925 | 10 | #329 | 549 |
| 1957 | #4,536 | 8 | #289 | 660 |
| 1956 | #5,325 | 6 | #286 | 656 |
| 1955 | #4,740 | 7 | #261 | 714 |
| 1954 | #4,655 | 7 | #271 | 673 |
| 1953 | #3,955 | 9 | #265 | 688 |
| 1952 | #3,201 | 12 | #245 | 761 |
| 1951 | #2,937 | 13 | #226 | 842 |
| 1950 | #3,052 | 12 | #226 | 809 |
| 1949 | #2,212 | 20 | #215 | 866 |
| 1948 | #2,491 | 16 | #203 | 971 |
| 1947 | #2,898 | 13 | #201 | 997 |
| 1946 | #3,034 | 11 | #178 | 1,046 |
| 1945 | #2,237 | 15 | #169 | 969 |
| 1944 | #2,027 | 18 | #164 | 1,069 |
| 1943 | #2,352 | 15 | #154 | 1,311 |
| 1942 | #2,046 | 18 | #158 | 1,228 |
| 1941 | #2,096 | 16 | #147 | 1,202 |
| 1940 | #2,297 | 13 | #144 | 1,220 |
| 1939 | #1,514 | 25 | #132 | 1,327 |
| 1938 | #1,650 | 22 | #130 | 1,332 |
| 1937 | #1,493 | 25 | #120 | 1,413 |
| 1936 | #1,186 | 36 | #121 | 1,412 |
| 1935 | #1,381 | 28 | #115 | 1,592 |
| 1934 | #1,190 | 36 | #108 | 1,709 |
| 1933 | #1,330 | 29 | #101 | 1,787 |
| 1932 | #1,213 | 35 | #94 | 2,058 |
| 1931 | #1,199 | 36 | #82 | 2,265 |
| 1930 | #1,128 | 43 | #80 | 2,476 |
| 1929 | #1,015 | 51 | #70 | 2,697 |
| 1928 | #896 | 67 | #63 | 2,977 |
| 1927 | #1,042 | 54 | #61 | 3,205 |
| 1926 | #963 | 60 | #61 | 3,233 |
| 1925 | #1,064 | 51 | #61 | 3,356 |
| 1924 | #1,123 | 48 | #57 | 3,731 |
| 1923 | #1,158 | 44 | #57 | 3,630 |
| 1922 | #1,059 | 51 | #54 | 3,738 |
| 1921 | #1,003 | 56 | #48 | 4,146 |
| 1920 | #1,074 | 48 | #45 | 4,206 |
| 1919 | #984 | 53 | #44 | 3,982 |
| 1918 | #1,126 | 43 | #44 | 4,373 |
| 1917 | #1,013 | 48 | #45 | 3,812 |
| 1916 | #1,059 | 43 | #45 | 3,936 |
| 1915 | #1,000 | 44 | #45 | 3,802 |
| 1914 | #1,119 | 29 | #46 | 2,878 |
| 1913 | #961 | 31 | #45 | 2,323 |
| 1912 | #978 | 27 | #47 | 1,840 |
| 1911 | #932 | 22 | #48 | 894 |
| 1910 | #1,069 | 17 | #48 | 760 |
| 1909 | #761 | 28 | #45 | 687 |
| 1908 | #829 | 22 | #42 | 689 |
| 1907 | #1,384 | 9 | #44 | 616 |
| 1906 | #1,229 | 10 | #42 | 598 |
| 1905 | #797 | 21 | #41 | 602 |
| 1904 | #1,092 | 11 | #39 | 620 |
| 1903 | #1,027 | 12 | #40 | 556 |
| 1902 | #1,320 | 8 | #40 | 574 |
| 1901 | #1,136 | 9 | #38 | 520 |
| 1900 | #885 | 18 | #38 | 699 |
| 1899 | #1,394 | 6 | #37 | 514 |
| 1898 | #963 | 13 | #40 | 583 |
| 1897 | #1,167 | 8 | #34 | 587 |
| 1896 | #1,047 | 10 | #36 | 576 |
| 1895 | #1,592 | 5 | #34 | 610 |
| 1894 | #905 | 12 | #37 | 575 |
| 1893 | #865 | 12 | #32 | 574 |
| 1892 | #908 | 11 | #36 | 592 |
| 1891 | #1,006 | 8 | #36 | 508 |
| 1890 | #940 | 9 | #38 | 528 |
| 1889 | #1,147 | 6 | #34 | 557 |
| 1888 | — | #39 | 527 | |
| 1887 | — | #36 | 467 | |
| 1886 | — | #35 | 485 | |
| 1885 | #745 | 9 | #40 | 443 |
| 1884 | — | #35 | 523 | |
| 1883 | — | #40 | 423 | |
| 1882 | — | #38 | 441 | |
| 1881 | — | #38 | 388 | |
| 1880 | — | #41 | 373 | |
In the first year the SSA published name data, Elmer was already there! It came in at #41, and was given to 373 baby boys.
Quietest stretch: 2010–2025, when fewer than 200 boys a year got the name.
See more about Elmer
- 67 spots since 2024 (#1,155 → #1,222)
- 86 spots since 2020 (#1,308 → #1,222)
- 17 spots since 2015 (#1,205 → #1,222)
- Biggest jump: 132 spots in 2009 (#1,041 → #909)
- Biggest drop: 184 spots in 2008 (#857 → #1,041)
- Debuted 1880
- Peaked 1893 at #32 (574 births)
- Births halved by 1970, 77 yrs later
- Top 10: never
- Top 100: 53 yrs · run 1880–1932
- Top 1,000: 129 yrs · run 1880–2007
- Highest: 1 in 192 boys born in 1897 were named Elmer (0.52%)
- Latest: 1 in 10,352 boys born in 2025 (0.01%)
- Its best rank, #32 in 1893, was only 1 in 196 (0.51%) — a smaller share of a much bigger birth year
- 26.9% of all boys named Elmer (34,919) were born in this decade
Show by decade
| Decade | Births | Best rank | Avg rank |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1880s | 4,627 | #34 (1889) | #38 |
| 1890s | 5,647 | #32 (1893) | #36 |
| 1900s | 6,161 | #38 (1900) | #41 |
| 1910s | 28,600 | #44 (1918) | #46 |
| 1920s | 34,919 | #45 (1920) | #58 |
| 1930s | 17,371 | #80 (1930) | #108 |
| 1940s | 10,879 | #144 (1940) | #173 |
| 1950s | 6,881 | #226 (1951) | #274 |
| 1960s | 3,833 | #342 (1960) | #405 |
| 1970s | 2,137 | #476 (1970) | #564 |
| 1980s | 1,567 | #677 (1984) | #717 |
| 1990s | 2,104 | #675 (1992) | #731 |
| 2000s | 2,274 | #649 (2003) | #835 |
| 2010s | 1,639 | #1,005 (2010) | #1,150 |
| 2020s | 952 | #1,155 (2024) | #1,238 |
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.
Elmer in 1913
Top girls' names in 1913
Top boys' names in 1913
More about 1913
girls
624,546 girls got a published name in 1913; 1 in 20,147 of them was named Elmer, which outranked 74.1% of the 3,707 girls' names that year. The ten most popular names covered 22.6% of girls (24.6% in 1880, 7.0% in 2025).
boys
512,566 boys got a published name in 1913; 1 in 221 of them was named Elmer, which outranked 98.6% of the 3,261 boys' names that year. The ten most popular names covered 30.6% of boys (44.2% in 1880, 8.0% in 2025).
Among names in the top 1,000 of either year.