Smith
#10,917 for girls in 2025, 8 births · #1,477 for boys in 2025, 120 births
Given to boys 96.7% of the time
Showing
- Peak · boys
- 1885 · 28 births
- Debut · boys
- 15 births
- In top 100 · boys
- neverof 146 years
- Total births · boys
- 5,475since 1880
Smith over time
boys
Rank among boys' names. Smith has never cracked the top 300 here.
Hover or use arrow keys to read values by year; click or press Enter to open that year.
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 | #10,917 | 8 | #1,477 | 120 |
| 2024 | #11,122 | 8 | #1,583 | 109 |
| 2023 | #13,462 | 6 | #1,547 | 113 |
| 2022 | #8,032 | 13 | #1,574 | 112 |
| 2021 | #13,464 | 6 | #1,317 | 142 |
| 2020 | #12,142 | 7 | #1,408 | 123 |
| 2019 | #9,736 | 10 | #1,258 | 149 |
| 2018 | #7,100 | 16 | #1,343 | 134 |
| 2017 | #7,840 | 14 | #1,202 | 154 |
| 2016 | #8,875 | 12 | #1,175 | 162 |
| 2015 | #9,481 | 11 | #1,185 | 156 |
| 2014 | #14,558 | 6 | #1,276 | 139 |
| 2013 | #11,969 | 8 | #1,376 | 122 |
| 2012 | #11,257 | 9 | #1,697 | 89 |
| 2011 | #14,824 | 6 | #1,849 | 76 |
| 2010 | — | #1,850 | 78 | |
| 2009 | #11,459 | 9 | #2,623 | 47 |
| 2008 | — | #2,237 | 59 | |
| 2007 | #17,636 | 5 | #2,281 | 57 |
| 2006 | — | #2,784 | 41 | |
| 2005 | #16,462 | 5 | #2,493 | 45 |
| 2004 | — | #2,531 | 43 | |
| 2003 | — | #3,626 | 24 | |
| 2002 | — | #3,794 | 22 | |
| 2001 | — | #2,988 | 30 | |
| 2000 | — | #3,219 | 26 | |
| 1999 | — | #2,510 | 35 | |
| 1998 | — | #3,486 | 21 | |
| 1997 | — | #3,455 | 20 | |
| 1996 | — | #3,406 | 20 | |
| 1995 | — | #3,191 | 21 | |
| 1994 | #13,430 | 5 | #3,109 | 22 |
| 1993 | — | #3,368 | 19 | |
| 1992 | — | #3,604 | 17 | |
| 1991 | — | #4,005 | 14 | |
| 1990 | — | #3,779 | 15 | |
| 1989 | — | #2,989 | 20 | |
| 1988 | — | #2,437 | 24 | |
| 1987 | — | #2,641 | 20 | |
| 1986 | — | #2,360 | 23 | |
| 1985 | #9,307 | 6 | #2,598 | 19 |
| 1984 | #7,398 | 8 | #2,098 | 25 |
| 1983 | — | #2,017 | 26 | |
| 1982 | — | #2,111 | 25 | |
| 1981 | #9,110 | 6 | #2,038 | 26 |
| 1980 | — | #3,430 | 12 | |
| 1979 | — | #3,168 | 13 | |
| 1978 | — | #2,669 | 16 | |
| 1977 | — | #3,037 | 13 | |
| 1976 | — | #2,054 | 23 | |
| 1975 | — | #3,428 | 10 | |
| 1974 | — | #2,050 | 21 | |
| 1973 | — | #2,405 | 16 | |
| 1972 | #8,292 | 5 | — | |
| 1971 | — | #3,963 | 7 | |
| 1970 | — | #2,739 | 12 | |
| 1969 | — | #1,861 | 20 | |
| 1968 | — | #2,311 | 13 | |
| 1967 | — | #2,139 | 14 | |
| 1966 | — | #1,814 | 18 | |
| 1965 | — | #2,366 | 12 | |
| 1964 | — | #2,114 | 15 | |
| 1963 | — | #1,902 | 18 | |
| 1962 | — | #2,035 | 16 | |
| 1961 | — | #2,409 | 12 | |
| 1960 | — | #1,581 | 26 | |
| 1959 | — | #2,295 | 13 | |
| 1958 | — | #1,953 | 17 | |
| 1957 | — | #2,019 | 16 | |
| 1956 | — | #1,676 | 22 | |
| 1955 | — | #1,725 | 20 | |
| 1954 | — | #1,593 | 23 | |
| 1953 | — | #1,836 | 18 | |
| 1952 | — | #1,615 | 22 | |
| 1951 | — | #1,430 | 27 | |
| 1950 | — | #1,615 | 21 | |
| 1949 | — | #1,754 | 18 | |
| 1948 | — | #1,063 | 44 | |
| 1947 | — | #1,233 | 35 | |
| 1946 | — | #1,692 | 18 | |
| 1945 | — | #1,349 | 24 | |
| 1944 | — | #1,193 | 31 | |
| 1943 | — | #1,636 | 19 | |
| 1942 | — | #1,268 | 30 | |
| 1941 | — | #1,300 | 26 | |
| 1940 | — | #1,183 | 32 | |
| 1939 | — | #954 | 43 | |
| 1938 | — | #1,275 | 27 | |
| 1937 | — | #1,212 | 30 | |
| 1936 | — | #1,296 | 26 | |
| 1935 | — | #940 | 45 | |
| 1934 | — | #1,038 | 39 | |
| 1933 | — | #1,051 | 38 | |
| 1932 | — | #902 | 51 | |
| 1931 | — | #1,078 | 39 | |
| 1930 | — | #1,132 | 38 | |
| 1929 | — | #995 | 46 | |
| 1928 | — | #913 | 54 | |
| 1927 | — | #1,098 | 42 | |
| 1926 | — | #1,064 | 43 | |
| 1925 | — | #945 | 51 | |
| 1924 | — | #937 | 56 | |
| 1923 | — | #941 | 53 | |
| 1922 | — | #809 | 69 | |
| 1921 | — | #768 | 76 | |
| 1920 | — | #805 | 69 | |
| 1919 | — | #867 | 58 | |
| 1918 | — | #841 | 61 | |
| 1917 | — | #784 | 64 | |
| 1916 | — | #797 | 60 | |
| 1915 | — | #776 | 60 | |
| 1914 | — | #788 | 45 | |
| 1913 | — | #734 | 40 | |
| 1912 | — | #608 | 45 | |
| 1911 | — | #759 | 18 | |
| 1910 | — | #512 | 30 | |
| 1909 | — | #615 | 19 | |
| 1908 | — | #632 | 17 | |
| 1907 | — | #559 | 19 | |
| 1906 | — | #523 | 19 | |
| 1905 | — | #666 | 13 | |
| 1904 | — | #538 | 17 | |
| 1903 | — | #576 | 15 | |
| 1902 | — | #615 | 13 | |
| 1901 | — | #683 | 10 | |
| 1900 | — | #446 | 26 | |
| 1899 | — | #521 | 14 | |
| 1898 | — | #543 | 15 | |
| 1897 | — | #787 | 8 | |
| 1896 | — | #592 | 13 | |
| 1895 | — | #501 | 16 | |
| 1894 | — | #543 | 14 | |
| 1893 | — | #509 | 14 | |
| 1892 | — | #404 | 22 | |
| 1891 | — | #524 | 12 | |
| 1890 | — | #489 | 15 | |
| 1889 | — | #482 | 15 | |
| 1888 | — | #377 | 24 | |
| 1887 | — | #392 | 18 | |
| 1886 | — | #451 | 16 | |
| 1885 | — | #318 | 28 | |
| 1884 | — | #433 | 18 | |
| 1883 | — | #497 | 13 | |
| 1882 | — | #453 | 16 | |
| 1881 | — | #395 | 18 | |
| 1880 | — | #465 | 15 | |
First appearance
1880
In the first year the SSA published name data, Smith was already there! It came in at #465, and was given to 15 baby boys.
Quietest stretch: 1972, when fewer than 5 boys a year got the name.
See more about Smith
Momentum · boys
Holding steady
- 106 spots since 2024 (#1,583 → #1,477)
- 69 spots since 2020 (#1,408 → #1,477)
- 292 spots since 2015 (#1,185 → #1,477)
- Biggest jump: 321 spots in 1939 (#1,275 → #954)
- Biggest drop: 356 spots in 1936 (#940 → #1,296)
Rise & fade · boys
5 yrs to peak
- Debuted 1880
- Peaked 1885 at #318 (28 births)
- Births halved by 1891, 6 yrs later
Top of the charts · boys
Top 1,000 for 51 yrs
- Top 10: never
- Top 100: never
- Top 1,000: 51 yrs · run 1880–1925
Share of babies · boys
1 in 3,850
- Highest: 1 in 3,850 boys born in 1885 were named Smith (0.03%)
- Latest: 1 in 14,234 boys born in 2025 (0.01%)
Era · boys
The 2010s
- 23.0% of all boys named Smith (1,259) were born in this decade
Show by decade
| Decade | Births | Best rank | Avg rank |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1880s | 181 | #318 (1885) | #426 |
| 1890s | 143 | #404 (1892) | #541 |
| 1900s | 168 | #446 (1900) | #585 |
| 1910s | 481 | #512 (1910) | #747 |
| 1920s | 559 | #768 (1921) | #928 |
| 1930s | 376 | #902 (1932) | #1,088 |
| 1940s | 277 | #1,063 (1948) | #1,367 |
| 1950s | 199 | #1,430 (1951) | #1,776 |
| 1960s | 164 | #1,581 (1960) | #2,053 |
| 1970s | 131 | #2,050 (1974) | #2,835 |
| 1980s | 220 | #2,017 (1983) | #2,472 |
| 1990s | 204 | #2,510 (1999) | #3,391 |
| 2000s | 394 | #2,237 (2008) | #2,858 |
| 2010s | 1,259 | #1,175 (2016) | #1,421 |
| 2020s | 719 | #1,317 (2021) | #1,484 |
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.
Smith in 1916
boys
#797
60 births · 1 in 14,835 boys
Top boys' names in 1916
More about 1916
boys
890,080 boys got a published name in 1916; 1 in 14,835 of them was named Smith, which outranked 82.4% of the 4,535 boys' names that year. The ten most popular names covered 30.7% of boys (44.2% in 1880, 8.0% in 2025).