Kile vs Kileigh
American parents have registered 1,065 Kiles since 1880, against 661 Kileighs. Neither name reached five babies in 2025.
Babies given each name, 1880–2025
Kile Kileigh
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 65 years in which either name was published, Kile for 48 years and Kileigh for 17 years. The lead changed hands 4 times.
Side by side
| Kile | Kileigh | |
|---|---|---|
| Total US births | 1,065 | 661 |
| Most in one year | 42 | 52 |
| Babies in 2025 | under 5 | under 5 |
| Estimated living today | 990 | 650 |
| Median age today | 32 | 19 |
| Peak year | 1996 | 2009 |
| Best rank | 2,047th boys | 3,189th girls |
| Rank in 2025 | unranked | unranked |
| First recorded | 1920 | 1979 |
| Girls / boys | 0 / 1,065 | 661 / 0 |
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 Kiles alive today are over 32; half the Kileighs are over 19. That is 13 years between them: two names in use at the same time, worn by two different generations.
Compare something else
Related comparisons
Social Security Administration birth records, 1880–2025, public domain. Full histories: Kile and Kileigh.