Humanverse

Lura vs Lurlene

American parents have registered 9,555 Luras since 1880, against 881 Lurlenes. Neither name reached five babies in 2025.

Babies given each name, 1880–2025

Births per year: Lura against Lurlene, 1880 to 2025 0 60 120 180 240 1880 1900 1920 1940 1960 1980 2000 2020

Lura Lurlene

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

Lura has been the commoner name in every year either was published, 1880 to 2024. The lead has never changed hands.

The closest they came was 1936, when Lura had 74 and Lurlene had 26.

Side by side

  Lura Lurlene
Total US births 9,555881
Most in one year 23037
Babies in 2025 under 5under 5
Estimated living today 2,500220
Median age today 6478
Peak year 19171921
Best rank 419th girls1,276th girls
Rank in 2025 unrankedunranked
First recorded 18801905
Girls / boys 9,550 / 5881 / 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 Lurlenes alive today are over 78; half the Luras are over 64. That is 14 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: Lura and Lurlene.