Clodagh vs Clora
American parents have registered 1,800 Cloras since 1880, against 209 Clodaghs. But in 2025 it was Clodagh that was commoner, 9 babies to fewer than five.
Babies given each name, 1880–2025
Clodagh Clora
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 107 years in which either name was published, Clora for 82 years and Clodagh for 25 years. The lead changed hands once.
Side by side
| Clodagh | Clora | |
|---|---|---|
| Total US births | 209 | 1,800 |
| Most in one year | 15 | 49 |
| Babies in 2025 | 9 | under 5 |
| Estimated living today | 210 | 310 |
| Median age today | 12 | 78 |
| Peak year | 2009 | 1924 |
| Best rank | 8,058th girls | 1,114th girls |
| Rank in 2025 | 10,107th | unranked |
| First recorded | 1998 | 1882 |
| Girls / boys | 209 / 0 | 1,800 / 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 Cloras alive today are over 78; half the Clodaghs are over 12. That is 66 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: Clodagh and Clora.