Leah
#58 for girls in 2025, 3,880 births · Last seen for boys in 2022 at #10,863
Given to girls 99.8% of the time
- Peak · girls
- 2010 · 6,545 births
- Debut · girls
- 54 births
- In top 100 · girls
- 42 yrsof 146 years
- Total births · girls
- 256,488since 1880
Leah 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 | #58 | 3,880 | — | |
| 2024 | #53 | 3,988 | — | |
| 2023 | #53 | 3,976 | — | |
| 2022 | #52 | 4,196 | #10,863 | 6 |
| 2021 | #46 | 4,474 | — | |
| 2020 | #45 | 4,530 | #7,502 | 10 |
| 2019 | #43 | 4,780 | #8,215 | 9 |
| 2018 | #41 | 5,038 | #8,154 | 9 |
| 2017 | #40 | 5,202 | #8,140 | 9 |
| 2016 | #37 | 5,434 | #10,744 | 6 |
| 2015 | #36 | 5,636 | — | |
| 2014 | #35 | 5,610 | #8,781 | 8 |
| 2013 | #32 | 5,618 | #12,136 | 5 |
| 2012 | #33 | 5,781 | #12,274 | 5 |
| 2011 | #29 | 6,400 | #7,502 | 10 |
| 2010 | #24 | 6,545 | #8,803 | 8 |
| 2009 | #29 | 6,790 | #8,310 | 9 |
| 2008 | #40 | 5,634 | #7,187 | 11 |
| 2007 | #67 | 4,555 | — | |
| 2006 | #68 | 4,657 | #8,732 | 8 |
| 2005 | #68 | 4,601 | #5,578 | 14 |
| 2004 | #64 | 4,744 | #5,246 | 15 |
| 2003 | #81 | 3,925 | #10,894 | 5 |
| 2002 | #87 | 3,604 | #10,667 | 5 |
| 2001 | #87 | 3,521 | #8,339 | 7 |
| 2000 | #97 | 3,399 | #9,112 | 6 |
| 1999 | #103 | 3,288 | — | |
| 1998 | #106 | 3,218 | #9,631 | 5 |
| 1997 | #104 | 3,203 | — | |
| 1996 | #98 | 3,326 | — | |
| 1995 | #103 | 3,274 | #8,868 | 5 |
| 1994 | #101 | 3,205 | — | |
| 1993 | #92 | 3,414 | #8,700 | 5 |
| 1992 | #96 | 3,431 | #6,670 | 7 |
| 1991 | #91 | 3,816 | #5,942 | 8 |
| 1990 | #82 | 3,924 | #5,382 | 9 |
| 1989 | #83 | 3,784 | #2,690 | 23 |
| 1988 | #82 | 3,558 | #3,705 | 13 |
| 1987 | #82 | 3,454 | #3,731 | 12 |
| 1986 | #78 | 3,457 | #3,268 | 14 |
| 1985 | #78 | 3,572 | #2,710 | 18 |
| 1984 | #83 | 3,535 | #4,215 | 9 |
| 1983 | #82 | 3,484 | #2,577 | 18 |
| 1982 | #79 | 3,762 | #2,426 | 20 |
| 1981 | #81 | 3,808 | #3,601 | 11 |
| 1980 | #84 | 3,642 | #2,831 | 16 |
| 1979 | #98 | 3,075 | #3,810 | 10 |
| 1978 | #108 | 2,710 | #4,157 | 8 |
| 1977 | #112 | 2,586 | #3,606 | 10 |
| 1976 | #119 | 2,270 | #4,012 | 8 |
| 1975 | #132 | 2,117 | #3,659 | 9 |
| 1974 | #149 | 1,844 | #4,634 | 6 |
| 1973 | #175 | 1,587 | — | |
| 1972 | #179 | 1,594 | #3,963 | 7 |
| 1971 | #184 | 1,690 | #3,370 | 9 |
| 1970 | #192 | 1,672 | #3,282 | 9 |
| 1969 | #210 | 1,489 | #3,935 | 6 |
| 1968 | #195 | 1,616 | #4,136 | 5 |
| 1967 | #199 | 1,598 | #2,760 | 9 |
| 1966 | #220 | 1,378 | — | |
| 1965 | #228 | 1,385 | — | |
| 1964 | #230 | 1,422 | — | |
| 1963 | #244 | 1,299 | #4,048 | 5 |
| 1962 | #295 | 977 | #3,305 | 7 |
| 1961 | #332 | 806 | — | |
| 1960 | #342 | 773 | — | |
| 1959 | #352 | 738 | — | |
| 1958 | #357 | 667 | — | |
| 1957 | #335 | 740 | — | |
| 1956 | #339 | 668 | — | |
| 1955 | #356 | 592 | — | |
| 1954 | #368 | 558 | — | |
| 1953 | #347 | 580 | — | |
| 1952 | #374 | 496 | — | |
| 1951 | #370 | 479 | — | |
| 1950 | #385 | 442 | — | |
| 1949 | #369 | 451 | — | |
| 1948 | #403 | 387 | — | |
| 1947 | #410 | 388 | — | |
| 1946 | #431 | 324 | — | |
| 1945 | #421 | 285 | — | |
| 1944 | #414 | 306 | — | |
| 1943 | #418 | 308 | — | |
| 1942 | #393 | 330 | — | |
| 1941 | #352 | 351 | — | |
| 1940 | #334 | 365 | — | |
| 1939 | #322 | 373 | — | |
| 1938 | #324 | 376 | — | |
| 1937 | #307 | 408 | — | |
| 1936 | #335 | 346 | — | |
| 1935 | #334 | 362 | — | |
| 1934 | #315 | 395 | — | |
| 1933 | #336 | 338 | — | |
| 1932 | #376 | 296 | — | |
| 1931 | #360 | 319 | — | |
| 1930 | #376 | 326 | — | |
| 1929 | #381 | 309 | — | |
| 1928 | #332 | 405 | — | |
| 1927 | #370 | 345 | — | |
| 1926 | #319 | 436 | — | |
| 1925 | #316 | 444 | — | |
| 1924 | #296 | 505 | — | |
| 1923 | #294 | 487 | — | |
| 1922 | #293 | 485 | — | |
| 1921 | #292 | 514 | — | |
| 1920 | #286 | 523 | — | |
| 1919 | #277 | 527 | — | |
| 1918 | #259 | 588 | — | |
| 1917 | #269 | 534 | — | |
| 1916 | #266 | 514 | — | |
| 1915 | #252 | 552 | — | |
| 1914 | #246 | 457 | — | |
| 1913 | #248 | 370 | — | |
| 1912 | #257 | 302 | — | |
| 1911 | #270 | 202 | — | |
| 1910 | #268 | 207 | — | |
| 1909 | #271 | 176 | — | |
| 1908 | #249 | 194 | — | |
| 1907 | #234 | 200 | — | |
| 1906 | #255 | 164 | — | |
| 1905 | #247 | 168 | — | |
| 1904 | #259 | 149 | — | |
| 1903 | #226 | 175 | — | |
| 1902 | #231 | 171 | — | |
| 1901 | #210 | 184 | — | |
| 1900 | #252 | 166 | — | |
| 1899 | #223 | 149 | — | |
| 1898 | #211 | 185 | — | |
| 1897 | #226 | 147 | — | |
| 1896 | #211 | 169 | — | |
| 1895 | #191 | 203 | — | |
| 1894 | #194 | 182 | — | |
| 1893 | #198 | 167 | — | |
| 1892 | #196 | 163 | — | |
| 1891 | #190 | 144 | — | |
| 1890 | #184 | 162 | — | |
| 1889 | #197 | 134 | — | |
| 1888 | #207 | 118 | — | |
| 1887 | #228 | 83 | — | |
| 1886 | #219 | 83 | — | |
| 1885 | #212 | 85 | — | |
| 1884 | #212 | 79 | — | |
| 1883 | #223 | 65 | — | |
| 1882 | #230 | 56 | — | |
| 1881 | #208 | 52 | — | |
| 1880 | #208 | 54 | — | |
In the first year the SSA published name data, Leah was already there! It came in at #208, and was given to 54 baby girls.
Quietest stretch: 1880–1883, when fewer than 66 girls a year got the name.
Where Leah is popular in 1962
- Rank in state
- Top 10
- 11–50
- 51–100
- 101–500
- 501+
- Not published
Hover or tap a state for its numbers.
- Kentucky#167 · 1 in 880
- Montana#197 · 1 in 777
- Oklahoma#202 · 1 in 982
- Arkansas#210 · 1 in 1,102
- West Virginia#221 · 1 in 1,344
Best ever in a state: #8 in Delaware, 2010.
Show every state
| State | Rank | Births | Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| Kentucky | #167 | 35 | 1 in 880 |
| Montana | #197 | 8 | 1 in 777 |
| Oklahoma | #202 | 21 | 1 in 982 |
| Arkansas | #210 | 16 | 1 in 1,102 |
| West Virginia | #221 | 12 | 1 in 1,344 |
| Minnesota | #230 | 25 | 1 in 1,516 |
| South Dakota | #230 | 6 | 1 in 1,117 |
| Washington | #235 | 22 | 1 in 1,261 |
| Colorado | #242 | 16 | 1 in 1,199 |
| Louisiana | #247 | 29 | 1 in 1,312 |
| Michigan | #252 | 50 | 1 in 1,642 |
| Oregon | #252 | 12 | 1 in 1,283 |
| Maine | #254 | 6 | 1 in 1,653 |
| Massachusetts | #254 | 27 | 1 in 1,902 |
| Texas | #256 | 82 | 1 in 1,348 |
| Indiana | #257 | 30 | 1 in 1,613 |
| Florida | #258 | 31 | 1 in 1,587 |
| Missouri | #258 | 24 | 1 in 1,775 |
| District of Columbia | #261 | 9 | 1 in 1,452 |
| Hawaii | #263 | 6 | 1 in 1,060 |
| California | #264 | 117 | 1 in 1,483 |
| Ohio | #269 | 51 | 1 in 1,931 |
| Iowa | #298 | 12 | 1 in 2,280 |
| Pennsylvania | #304 | 43 | 1 in 2,427 |
| New York | #315 | 77 | 1 in 2,122 |
| North Carolina | #332 | 19 | 1 in 2,510 |
| South Carolina | #336 | 11 | 1 in 2,307 |
| Tennessee | #338 | 13 | 1 in 2,738 |
| New Mexico | #341 | 6 | 1 in 1,922 |
| Alabama | #344 | 14 | 1 in 2,382 |
| Mississippi | #346 | 11 | 1 in 2,246 |
| Illinois | #347 | 36 | 1 in 2,858 |
| Connecticut | #351 | 7 | 1 in 3,382 |
| Maryland | #352 | 10 | 1 in 2,929 |
| New Jersey | #358 | 18 | 1 in 3,170 |
| Kansas | #359 | 8 | 1 in 2,480 |
| Arizona | #385 | 7 | 1 in 2,205 |
| Wisconsin | #400 | 9 | 1 in 4,704 |
| Georgia | #405 | 13 | 1 in 3,360 |
| Virginia | #436 | 9 | 1 in 4,470 |
| Alaska | — | — | — |
| Delaware | — | — | — |
| Idaho | — | — | — |
| Nebraska | — | — | — |
| Nevada | — | — | — |
| New Hampshire | — | — | — |
| North Dakota | — | — | — |
| Rhode Island | — | — | — |
| Utah | — | — | — |
| Vermont | — | — | — |
| 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 Leah
- 5 spots since 2024 (#53 → #58)
- 13 spots since 2020 (#45 → #58)
- 22 spots since 2015 (#36 → #58)
- Biggest jump: 51 spots in 1963 (#295 → #244)
- Biggest drop: 51 spots in 1927 (#319 → #370)
- Debuted 1880
- Peaked 2010 at #24 (6,545 births)
- Not yet halved from its peak
- Top 10: never
- Top 100: 42 yrs · run 2000–2025
- Top 1,000: 146 yrs · run 1880–2025
- Highest: 1 in 271 girls born in 2009 were named Leah (0.37%)
- Latest: 1 in 414 girls born in 2025 (0.24%)
- Its best rank, #24 in 2010, was only 1 in 272 (0.37%) — a smaller share of a much bigger birth year
- 21.9% of all girls named Leah (56,044) were born in this decade
Show by decade
| Decade | Births | Best rank | Avg rank |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1880s | 809 | #197 (1889) | #214 |
| 1890s | 1,671 | #184 (1890) | #202 |
| 1900s | 1,747 | #210 (1901) | #243 |
| 1910s | 4,253 | #246 (1914) | #261 |
| 1920s | 4,453 | #286 (1920) | #318 |
| 1930s | 3,539 | #307 (1937) | #339 |
| 1940s | 3,495 | #334 (1940) | #395 |
| 1950s | 5,960 | #335 (1957) | #358 |
| 1960s | 12,743 | #195 (1968) | #250 |
| 1970s | 21,145 | #98 (1979) | #145 |
| 1980s | 36,056 | #78 (1985) | #81 |
| 1990s | 34,099 | #82 (1990) | #98 |
| 2000s | 45,430 | #29 (2009) | #69 |
| 2010s | 56,044 | #24 (2010) | #35 |
| 2020s | 25,044 | #45 (2020) | #51 |
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.
Leah in 1962
Top girls' names in 1962
Top boys' names in 1962
More about 1962
girls
1,966,603 girls got a published name in 1962; 1 in 2,013 of them was named Leah, which outranked 96.1% of the 7,584 girls' names that year. The ten most popular names covered 15.9% of girls (24.6% in 1880, 7.0% in 2025).
Among names in the top 1,000 of either year.
boys
2,068,772 boys got a published name in 1962; 1 in 295,539 of them was named Leah, which outranked 28.6% of the 4,631 boys' names that year. The ten most popular names covered 28.8% of boys (44.2% in 1880, 8.0% in 2025).