Humanverse

Alonna vs Alonza

American parents have registered 3,321 Alonzas since 1880, against 2,646 Alonnas. But in 2025 it was Alonna that was commoner, 37 babies to fewer than five.

Babies given each name, 1880–2025

Births per year: Alonna against Alonza, 1880 to 2025 0 30 60 90 120 1880 1900 1920 1940 1960 1980 2000 2020

Alonna Alonza

Each line is every baby given the name that year, girls and boys added together — the only count that means the same thing for both names. A line breaks where the name fell below five babies in a year — the point at which the SSA stops publishing it — rather than being drawn through a figure nobody published. A single published year in a gap shows as a dot.

Who was ahead

Of the 146 years in which either name was published, Alonza for 107 years and Alonna for 39 years. The lead changed hands 5 times.

Side by side

  Alonna Alonza
Total US births 2,6463,321
Most in one year 11860
Babies in 2025 37under 5
Estimated living today 2,6001,500
Median age today 1760
Peak year 20081961
Best rank 1,824th girls1,001st boys
Rank in 2025 3,903rdunranked
First recorded 19461880
Girls / boys 2,646 / 06 / 3,315

A rank is a position within one sex’s list for one year, so the two rank rows are not subtracted from one another and the winning column is not marked on them. The living figure is a life-table estimate, not a count.

Which name is older

Half of the Alonzas alive today are over 60; half the Alonnas are over 17. That is 43 years between them: two names in use at the same time, worn by two different generations.

Where each one is strongest

How much commoner the name is in that state than it is nationally, from births recorded since 1910.

Compare something else

Related comparisons

Social Security Administration birth records, 1880–2025, public domain. Full histories: Alonna and Alonza.