Humanverse

Runa vs Rune

American parents have registered 861 Runes since 1880, against 624 Runas. Rune is still ahead, with 119 babies in 2025.

Babies given each name, 1880–2025

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

Runa Rune

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 26 years in which either name was published, Rune for 19 years and Runa for 7 years. The lead changed hands 3 times.

Side by side

  Runa Rune
Total US births 624861
Most in one year 70119
Babies in 2025 62119
Estimated living today 620860
Median age today 55
Peak year 20202025
Best rank 2,468th girls1,778th boys
Rank in 2025 2,751st1,778th
First recorded 20002001
Girls / boys 624 / 0148 / 713

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

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

Both names abroad

Countries whose statistics office publishes both names, so the comparison can be made somewhere other than the United States.

Country Runa Rune
Norway 1,21620,234
Belgium 453,949
England and Wales 156146

Every spelling a country files separately is added together, over whatever years that country publishes — which is not the same range in any two of them, so read the columns against each other and not the rows.

Compare something else

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