Rileigh
#5,099 for girls in 2025, 25 births · Last seen for boys in 2012 at #10,770
Given to girls 98.7% of the time
- Peak · girls
- 2004 · 207 births
- Debut · girls
- 5 births
- In top 100 · girls
- neverof 146 years
- Total births · girls
- 3,832since 1991
Rileigh over time
Rank among girls' names. Rileigh has never cracked the top 1,000 here.
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 | #5,099 | 25 | — | |
| 2024 | #4,473 | 31 | — | |
| 2023 | #4,454 | 31 | — | |
| 2022 | #4,295 | 33 | — | |
| 2021 | #2,674 | 64 | — | |
| 2020 | #2,779 | 59 | — | |
| 2019 | #2,651 | 65 | — | |
| 2018 | #2,302 | 79 | — | |
| 2017 | #2,236 | 84 | — | |
| 2016 | #1,667 | 128 | — | |
| 2015 | #1,711 | 123 | — | |
| 2014 | #1,684 | 125 | — | |
| 2013 | #1,273 | 186 | — | |
| 2012 | #1,425 | 160 | #10,770 | 6 |
| 2011 | #1,204 | 199 | #12,287 | 5 |
| 2010 | #1,165 | 208 | — | |
| 2009 | #1,146 | 221 | #12,491 | 5 |
| 2008 | #1,165 | 220 | #11,037 | 6 |
| 2007 | #1,257 | 196 | #10,921 | 6 |
| 2006 | #1,299 | 180 | #8,732 | 8 |
| 2005 | #1,173 | 196 | — | |
| 2004 | #1,102 | 207 | #8,143 | 8 |
| 2003 | #1,105 | 199 | — | |
| 2002 | #1,197 | 170 | — | |
| 2001 | #1,368 | 139 | — | |
| 2000 | #1,542 | 116 | — | |
| 1999 | #1,636 | 102 | — | |
| 1998 | #1,721 | 92 | — | |
| 1997 | #2,138 | 65 | #8,110 | 6 |
| 1996 | #3,093 | 38 | — | |
| 1995 | #3,585 | 30 | — | |
| 1994 | #4,845 | 20 | — | |
| 1993 | #4,100 | 25 | — | |
| 1992 | #7,512 | 11 | — | |
| 1991 | #13,147 | 5 | — | |
| 1990 | — | — | ||
| 1989 | — | — | ||
| 1988 | — | — | ||
| 1987 | — | — | ||
| 1986 | — | — | ||
| 1985 | — | — | ||
| 1984 | — | — | ||
| 1983 | — | — | ||
| 1982 | — | — | ||
| 1981 | — | — | ||
| 1980 | — | — | ||
| 1979 | — | — | ||
| 1978 | — | — | ||
| 1977 | — | — | ||
| 1976 | — | — | ||
| 1975 | — | — | ||
| 1974 | — | — | ||
| 1973 | — | — | ||
| 1972 | — | — | ||
| 1971 | — | — | ||
| 1970 | — | — | ||
| 1969 | — | — | ||
| 1968 | — | — | ||
| 1967 | — | — | ||
| 1966 | — | — | ||
| 1965 | — | — | ||
| 1964 | — | — | ||
| 1963 | — | — | ||
| 1962 | — | — | ||
| 1961 | — | — | ||
| 1960 | — | — | ||
| 1959 | — | — | ||
| 1958 | — | — | ||
| 1957 | — | — | ||
| 1956 | — | — | ||
| 1955 | — | — | ||
| 1954 | — | — | ||
| 1953 | — | — | ||
| 1952 | — | — | ||
| 1951 | — | — | ||
| 1950 | — | — | ||
| 1949 | — | — | ||
| 1948 | — | — | ||
| 1947 | — | — | ||
| 1946 | — | — | ||
| 1945 | — | — | ||
| 1944 | — | — | ||
| 1943 | — | — | ||
| 1942 | — | — | ||
| 1941 | — | — | ||
| 1940 | — | — | ||
| 1939 | — | — | ||
| 1938 | — | — | ||
| 1937 | — | — | ||
| 1936 | — | — | ||
| 1935 | — | — | ||
| 1934 | — | — | ||
| 1933 | — | — | ||
| 1932 | — | — | ||
| 1931 | — | — | ||
| 1930 | — | — | ||
| 1929 | — | — | ||
| 1928 | — | — | ||
| 1927 | — | — | ||
| 1926 | — | — | ||
| 1925 | — | — | ||
| 1924 | — | — | ||
| 1923 | — | — | ||
| 1922 | — | — | ||
| 1921 | — | — | ||
| 1920 | — | — | ||
| 1919 | — | — | ||
| 1918 | — | — | ||
| 1917 | — | — | ||
| 1916 | — | — | ||
| 1915 | — | — | ||
| 1914 | — | — | ||
| 1913 | — | — | ||
| 1912 | — | — | ||
| 1911 | — | — | ||
| 1910 | — | — | ||
| 1909 | — | — | ||
| 1908 | — | — | ||
| 1907 | — | — | ||
| 1906 | — | — | ||
| 1905 | — | — | ||
| 1904 | — | — | ||
| 1903 | — | — | ||
| 1902 | — | — | ||
| 1901 | — | — | ||
| 1900 | — | — | ||
| 1899 | — | — | ||
| 1898 | — | — | ||
| 1897 | — | — | ||
| 1896 | — | — | ||
| 1895 | — | — | ||
| 1894 | — | — | ||
| 1893 | — | — | ||
| 1892 | — | — | ||
| 1891 | — | — | ||
| 1890 | — | — | ||
| 1889 | — | — | ||
| 1888 | — | — | ||
| 1887 | — | — | ||
| 1886 | — | — | ||
| 1885 | — | — | ||
| 1884 | — | — | ||
| 1883 | — | — | ||
| 1882 | — | — | ||
| 1881 | — | — | ||
| 1880 | — | — | ||
The first year at least five girls were named Rileigh! It came in at #13,147, and was given to 5 baby girls.
Quietest stretch: 1991, when fewer than 6 girls a year got the name.
Where Rileigh is popular in 2013
- Rank in state
- Top 10
- 11–50
- 51–100
- 101–500
- 501+
- Not published
Hover or tap a state for its numbers.
- Alabama#393 · 1 in 1,698
- Arkansas#412 · 1 in 1,615
- Mississippi#413 · 1 in 1,559
- Ohio#627 · 1 in 3,506
- Louisiana#716 · 1 in 3,359
Best ever in a state: #275 in West Virginia, 2007.
Show every state
| State | Rank | Births | Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| Alabama | #393 | 11 | 1 in 1,698 |
| Arkansas | #412 | 7 | 1 in 1,615 |
| Mississippi | #413 | 7 | 1 in 1,559 |
| Ohio | #627 | 15 | 1 in 3,506 |
| Louisiana | #716 | 6 | 1 in 3,359 |
| Kentucky | #718 | 5 | 1 in 3,699 |
| South Carolina | #735 | 5 | 1 in 3,503 |
| Virginia | #743 | 9 | 1 in 4,031 |
| Georgia | #868 | 10 | 1 in 4,655 |
| Michigan | #975 | 7 | 1 in 5,948 |
| New York | #990 | 15 | 1 in 6,084 |
| Florida | #1,012 | 13 | 1 in 6,243 |
| Tennessee | #1,039 | 5 | 1 in 5,947 |
| North Carolina | #1,350 | 5 | 1 in 8,860 |
| Texas | #1,647 | 13 | 1 in 12,382 |
| California | #2,485 | 8 | 1 in 25,646 |
| Alaska | — | — | — |
| Arizona | — | — | — |
| Colorado | — | — | — |
| Connecticut | — | — | — |
| Delaware | — | — | — |
| District of Columbia | — | — | — |
| Hawaii | — | — | — |
| Idaho | — | — | — |
| Illinois | — | — | — |
| Indiana | — | — | — |
| Iowa | — | — | — |
| Kansas | — | — | — |
| Maine | — | — | — |
| Maryland | — | — | — |
| Massachusetts | — | — | — |
| Minnesota | — | — | — |
| Missouri | — | — | — |
| Montana | — | — | — |
| Nebraska | — | — | — |
| Nevada | — | — | — |
| New Hampshire | — | — | — |
| New Jersey | — | — | — |
| New Mexico | — | — | — |
| North Dakota | — | — | — |
| Oklahoma | — | — | — |
| Oregon | — | — | — |
| Pennsylvania | — | — | — |
| Rhode Island | — | — | — |
| South Dakota | — | — | — |
| Utah | — | — | — |
| Vermont | — | — | — |
| Washington | — | — | — |
| West Virginia | — | — | — |
| Wisconsin | — | — | — |
| 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 Rileigh
- 626 spots since 2024 (#4,473 → #5,099)
- 2,320 spots since 2020 (#2,779 → #5,099)
- 3,388 spots since 2015 (#1,711 → #5,099)
- Debuted 1991
- Peaked 2004 at #1,102 (207 births)
- Births halved by 2017, 13 yrs later
- Top 10: never
- Top 100: never
- Top 1,000: never
- Highest: 1 in 8,313 girls born in 2009 were named Rileigh (0.01%)
- Latest: 1 in 64,291 girls born in 2025 (0.00%)
- Its best rank, #1,102 in 2004, was only 1 in 8,871 (0.01%) — a smaller share of a much bigger birth year
- 48.1% of all girls named Rileigh (1,844) were born in this decade
Show by decade
| Decade | Births | Best rank | Avg rank |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1990s | 388 | #1,636 (1999) | #4,642 |
| 2000s | 1,844 | #1,102 (2004) | #1,235 |
| 2010s | 1,357 | #1,165 (2010) | #1,732 |
| 2020s | 243 | #2,674 (2021) | #3,962 |
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.
Rileigh in 2013
Top girls' names in 2013
More about 2013
girls
1,754,746 girls got a published name in 2013; 1 in 9,434 of them was named Rileigh, which outranked 93.4% of the 19,279 girls' names that year. The ten most popular names covered 8.7% of girls (24.6% in 1880, 7.0% in 2025).