Ansh vs Ansleigh
American parents have registered 2,244 Anshes since 1880, against 1,561 Ansleighs. Ansh is still ahead, with 69 babies in 2025.
Babies given each name, 1880–2025
Ansh Ansleigh
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 34 years in which either name was published, Ansh for 24 years and Ansleigh for 10 years. The lead changed hands once.
Side by side
| Ansh | Ansleigh | |
|---|---|---|
| Total US births | 2,244 | 1,561 |
| Most in one year | 138 | 102 |
| Babies in 2025 | 69 | 36 |
| Estimated living today | 2,200 | 1,500 |
| Median age today | 11 | 12 |
| Peak year | 2012 | 2014 |
| Best rank | 1,273rd boys | 1,956th girls |
| Rank in 2025 | 2,108th | 3,975th |
| First recorded | 1998 | 1989 |
| Girls / boys | 0 / 2,244 | 1,561 / 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.
Where each one is strongest
- Ansh New Jersey (8.4×), California (2.7×), Illinois (2.0×)
- Ansleigh Georgia (19.4×), Alabama (6.9×), South Carolina (6.9×)
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: Ansh and Ansleigh.