Bridget vs Briggs
American parents have registered 92,517 Bridgets since 1880, against 9,476 Briggses. But in 2025 it was Briggs that was commoner, 930 babies to 385.
Babies given each name, 1880–2025
Bridget Briggs
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 146 years in which either name was published, Bridget for 138 years and Briggs for 8 years. The lead changed hands once.
Side by side
| Bridget | Briggs | |
|---|---|---|
| Total US births | 92,517 | 9,476 |
| Most in one year | 2,770 | 1,071 |
| Babies in 2025 | 385 | 930 |
| Estimated living today | 84,000 | 9,400 |
| Median age today | 42 | 4 |
| Peak year | 1973 | 2024 |
| Best rank | 112th girls | 327th boys |
| Rank in 2025 | 724th | 356th |
| First recorded | 1880 | 1927 |
| Girls / boys | 92,367 / 150 | 99 / 9,377 |
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 Bridgets alive today are over 42; half the Briggses are over 4. That is 38 years between them: two names in use at the same time, worn by two different generations.
Where each one is strongest
- Bridget Louisiana (1.7×), Minnesota (1.6×), Massachusetts (1.5×)
- Briggs Utah (8.9×), South Dakota (6.5×), North Dakota (5.8×)
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: Bridget and Briggs.