Etha vs Ethel
American parents have registered 280,412 Ethels since 1880, against 1,802 Ethas. Ethel is still ahead, with 34 babies in 2025.
Babies given each name, 1880–2025
Etha Ethel
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
Ethel has been the commoner name in every year either was published, 1880 to 2025. The lead has never changed hands.
The closest they came was 1973, when Etha had 5 and Ethel had 181.
Side by side
| Etha | Ethel | |
|---|---|---|
| Total US births | 1,802 | 280,412 |
| Most in one year | 55 | 8,110 |
| Babies in 2025 | under 5 | 34 |
| Estimated living today | 270 | 37,000 |
| Median age today | 76 | 77 |
| Peak year | 1920 | 1918 |
| Best rank | 989th girls | 28th girls |
| Rank in 2025 | unranked | 4,172nd |
| First recorded | 1880 | 1880 |
| Girls / boys | 1,802 / 0 | 278,922 / 1,490 |
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.
Where each one is strongest
- Etha Mississippi (18.2×), Alabama (6.3×), Texas (4.0×)
- Ethel Mississippi (3.3×), South Carolina (2.7×), Alabama (2.5×)
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: Etha and Ethel.