Kim vs Kimble
American parents have registered 214,768 Kims since 1880, against 833 Kimbles. Kim is still ahead, with 40 babies in 2025.
Babies given each name, 1880–2025
Kim Kimble
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 113 years in which either name was published, Kim for 109 years and Kimble for 4 years. The lead changed hands 2 times.
Side by side
| Kim | Kimble | |
|---|---|---|
| Total US births | 214,768 | 833 |
| Most in one year | 13,635 | 52 |
| Babies in 2025 | 40 | under 5 |
| Estimated living today | 181,000 | 620 |
| Median age today | 63 | 59 |
| Peak year | 1960 | 1966 |
| Best rank | 34th girls | 1,345th boys |
| Rank in 2025 | 4,172nd | unranked |
| First recorded | 1912 | 1913 |
| Girls / boys | 179,817 / 34,951 | 232 / 601 |
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 Kims alive today are over 63; half the Kimbles are over 59. That is 4 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: Kim and Kimble.