Nova
#46 for girls in 2025, 4,657 births · #1,305 for boys in 2025, 149 births
Given to girls 94.5% of the time
- Peak · girls
- 2022 · 5,927 births
- Debut · girls
- 12 births
- In top 100 · girls
- 9 yrsof 146 years
- Total births · girls
- 55,783since 1885
Nova over time
Rank within each sex, plotted together. 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 | #46 | 4,657 | #1,305 | 149 |
| 2024 | #39 | 5,072 | #1,176 | 176 |
| 2023 | #35 | 5,282 | #952 | 237 |
| 2022 | #32 | 5,927 | #878 | 271 |
| 2021 | #32 | 5,574 | #851 | 277 |
| 2020 | #38 | 5,006 | #758 | 317 |
| 2019 | #51 | 4,332 | #857 | 259 |
| 2018 | #55 | 4,174 | #862 | 254 |
| 2017 | #94 | 3,057 | #920 | 230 |
| 2016 | #136 | 2,286 | #1,229 | 152 |
| 2015 | #213 | 1,529 | #1,353 | 129 |
| 2014 | #287 | 1,136 | #1,536 | 104 |
| 2013 | #527 | 567 | #1,811 | 79 |
| 2012 | #618 | 463 | #2,132 | 63 |
| 2011 | #885 | 295 | #2,852 | 41 |
| 2010 | #1,127 | 218 | #3,072 | 37 |
| 2009 | #1,105 | 231 | #2,847 | 42 |
| 2008 | #1,359 | 178 | #3,744 | 28 |
| 2007 | #1,551 | 147 | #4,243 | 23 |
| 2006 | #1,905 | 106 | #4,105 | 23 |
| 2005 | #1,878 | 103 | #4,198 | 21 |
| 2004 | #1,698 | 114 | #4,005 | 22 |
| 2003 | #1,858 | 99 | #5,558 | 13 |
| 2002 | #1,934 | 91 | #5,395 | 13 |
| 2001 | #1,978 | 86 | #4,121 | 19 |
| 2000 | #2,332 | 66 | #7,416 | 8 |
| 1999 | #2,567 | 55 | #6,042 | 10 |
| 1998 | #2,530 | 54 | #6,314 | 9 |
| 1997 | #3,105 | 38 | #5,642 | 10 |
| 1996 | #4,306 | 24 | #9,015 | 5 |
| 1995 | #4,518 | 22 | — | |
| 1994 | #5,016 | 19 | — | |
| 1993 | #4,671 | 21 | — | |
| 1992 | #7,512 | 11 | — | |
| 1991 | #4,808 | 20 | — | |
| 1990 | #4,003 | 25 | #8,117 | 5 |
| 1989 | #5,286 | 16 | #6,941 | 6 |
| 1988 | #4,496 | 19 | — | |
| 1987 | #4,122 | 20 | — | |
| 1986 | #3,360 | 26 | — | |
| 1985 | #2,545 | 38 | — | |
| 1984 | #2,574 | 36 | — | |
| 1983 | #2,516 | 36 | — | |
| 1982 | #2,050 | 50 | #5,003 | 7 |
| 1981 | #1,985 | 53 | — | |
| 1980 | #1,704 | 66 | #6,250 | 5 |
| 1979 | #1,605 | 70 | #5,355 | 6 |
| 1978 | #1,804 | 56 | — | |
| 1977 | #1,341 | 85 | — | |
| 1976 | #1,551 | 65 | #5,587 | 5 |
| 1975 | #1,672 | 57 | — | |
| 1974 | #1,709 | 53 | #4,634 | 6 |
| 1973 | #1,788 | 48 | — | |
| 1972 | #1,578 | 58 | — | |
| 1971 | #1,877 | 46 | #4,375 | 6 |
| 1970 | #1,755 | 51 | — | |
| 1969 | #2,102 | 36 | — | |
| 1968 | #2,246 | 29 | — | |
| 1967 | #1,980 | 35 | — | |
| 1966 | #1,859 | 38 | — | |
| 1965 | #1,950 | 35 | — | |
| 1964 | #1,610 | 50 | — | |
| 1963 | #1,298 | 72 | — | |
| 1962 | #1,598 | 50 | — | |
| 1961 | #2,543 | 23 | — | |
| 1960 | #1,953 | 34 | — | |
| 1959 | #2,517 | 21 | — | |
| 1958 | #2,663 | 19 | — | |
| 1957 | #2,168 | 26 | #3,552 | 6 |
| 1956 | #1,931 | 31 | — | |
| 1955 | #1,641 | 39 | — | |
| 1954 | #2,027 | 27 | — | |
| 1953 | #2,071 | 25 | — | |
| 1952 | #1,713 | 33 | — | |
| 1951 | #1,665 | 33 | — | |
| 1950 | #1,764 | 29 | — | |
| 1949 | #1,423 | 42 | — | |
| 1948 | #1,386 | 44 | #3,668 | 5 |
| 1947 | #1,633 | 34 | — | |
| 1946 | #1,532 | 33 | #3,525 | 5 |
| 1945 | #1,588 | 27 | — | |
| 1944 | #1,519 | 29 | — | |
| 1943 | #1,305 | 39 | #2,732 | 8 |
| 1942 | #1,229 | 42 | #3,212 | 6 |
| 1941 | #1,294 | 35 | — | |
| 1940 | #1,088 | 44 | — | |
| 1939 | #1,009 | 49 | — | |
| 1938 | #857 | 68 | #3,175 | 6 |
| 1937 | #950 | 53 | #2,905 | 7 |
| 1936 | #909 | 56 | — | |
| 1935 | #798 | 72 | — | |
| 1934 | #756 | 78 | — | |
| 1933 | #887 | 58 | — | |
| 1932 | #795 | 73 | — | |
| 1931 | #777 | 75 | #3,095 | 7 |
| 1930 | #818 | 75 | #4,001 | 5 |
| 1929 | #690 | 104 | #3,959 | 5 |
| 1928 | #781 | 84 | — | |
| 1927 | #839 | 77 | — | |
| 1926 | #854 | 75 | #4,201 | 5 |
| 1925 | #764 | 94 | #3,741 | 6 |
| 1924 | #788 | 89 | #2,473 | 12 |
| 1923 | #819 | 80 | #4,239 | 5 |
| 1922 | #784 | 86 | #2,630 | 11 |
| 1921 | #766 | 91 | #4,322 | 5 |
| 1920 | #690 | 111 | #2,459 | 12 |
| 1919 | #752 | 87 | #2,877 | 9 |
| 1918 | #802 | 79 | — | |
| 1917 | #753 | 85 | #3,981 | 5 |
| 1916 | #761 | 81 | #3,177 | 7 |
| 1915 | #791 | 69 | #2,829 | 8 |
| 1914 | #855 | 47 | — | |
| 1913 | #674 | 59 | #2,821 | 5 |
| 1912 | #678 | 54 | — | |
| 1911 | #722 | 36 | #1,740 | 5 |
| 1910 | #753 | 32 | — | |
| 1909 | #624 | 39 | — | |
| 1908 | #639 | 36 | — | |
| 1907 | #666 | 32 | — | |
| 1906 | #707 | 27 | — | |
| 1905 | #642 | 30 | — | |
| 1904 | #710 | 24 | — | |
| 1903 | #734 | 21 | — | |
| 1902 | #818 | 18 | — | |
| 1901 | #659 | 23 | — | |
| 1900 | #656 | 29 | — | |
| 1899 | #704 | 20 | — | |
| 1898 | #586 | 30 | — | |
| 1897 | #735 | 18 | — | |
| 1896 | #635 | 24 | — | |
| 1895 | #703 | 20 | — | |
| 1894 | #697 | 18 | — | |
| 1893 | #1,023 | 9 | — | |
| 1892 | #638 | 20 | — | |
| 1891 | #750 | 13 | — | |
| 1890 | #693 | 15 | — | |
| 1889 | #757 | 12 | — | |
| 1888 | #663 | 15 | — | |
| 1887 | #1,036 | 6 | — | |
| 1886 | #897 | 7 | — | |
| 1885 | #629 | 12 | — | |
| 1884 | — | — | ||
| 1883 | — | — | ||
| 1882 | — | — | ||
| 1881 | — | — | ||
| 1880 | — | #909 | 5 | |
The first year at least five girls were named Nova! It came in at #629, and was given to 12 baby girls.
Quietest stretch: 1886–1887, when fewer than 8 girls a year got the name.
See more about Nova
- 7 spots since 2024 (#39 → #46)
- 8 spots since 2020 (#38 → #46)
- 167 spots since 2015 (#213 → #46)
- Biggest jump: 373 spots in 1888 (#1,036 → #663)
- Biggest drop: 385 spots in 1893 (#638 → #1,023)
- Debuted 1885
- Peaked 2022 at #32 (5,927 births)
- Not yet halved from its peak
- Top 10: never
- Top 100: 9 yrs · run 2017–2025
- Top 1,000: 67 yrs · run 1894–1938
- Highest: 1 in 277 girls born in 2022 were named Nova (0.36%)
- Latest: 1 in 345 girls born in 2025 (0.29%)
- 56.5% of all girls named Nova (31,518) were born in this decade
- Mostly boys until 1884, mostly girls since
Show by decade
| Decade | Births | Best rank | Avg rank |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1880s | 52 | #629 (1885) | #796 |
| 1890s | 187 | #586 (1898) | #716 |
| 1900s | 279 | #624 (1909) | #686 |
| 1910s | 629 | #674 (1913) | #754 |
| 1920s | 891 | #690 (1920) | #778 |
| 1930s | 657 | #756 (1934) | #856 |
| 1940s | 369 | #1,088 (1940) | #1,400 |
| 1950s | 283 | #1,641 (1955) | #2,016 |
| 1960s | 402 | #1,298 (1963) | #1,914 |
| 1970s | 589 | #1,341 (1977) | #1,668 |
| 1980s | 360 | #1,704 (1980) | #3,064 |
| 1990s | 289 | #2,530 (1998) | #4,304 |
| 2000s | 1,221 | #1,105 (2009) | #1,760 |
| 2010s | 18,057 | #51 (2019) | #399 |
| 2020s | 31,518 | #32 (2022) | #37 |
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.
Nova in 1924
Top girls' names in 1924
Top boys' names in 1924
More about 1924
girls
1,248,872 girls got a published name in 1924; 1 in 14,032 of them was named Nova, which outranked 86.6% of the 5,900 girls' names that year. The ten most popular names covered 23.3% of girls (24.6% in 1880, 7.0% in 2025).
boys
1,132,742 boys got a published name in 1924; 1 in 94,395 of them was named Nova, which outranked 50.2% of the 4,970 boys' names that year. The ten most popular names covered 32.7% of boys (44.2% in 1880, 8.0% in 2025).
- #2,347Wray13
- #2,347Ysabel13
- #2,347Zachary13
- #2,473Nova12
- #2,473Acey12
- #2,473Afton12
- #2,473Arby12
- #2,641Abelino11
- #2,641Aldridge11
- #2,641Alfonza11
Tied with 167 names at #2,473; 3 shown. Tied names share a rank, as in SSA's lists.
Among names in the top 1,000 of either year.