Darcee vs Darren
American parents have registered 104,506 Darrens since 1880, against 518 Darcees. Darren is still ahead, with 187 babies in 2025.
Babies given each name, 1880–2025
Darcee Darren
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
Darren has been the commoner name in every year either was published, 1936 to 2025. The lead has never changed hands.
The closest they came was 1953, when Darcee had 8 and Darren had 43.
Side by side
| Darcee | Darren | |
|---|---|---|
| Total US births | 518 | 104,506 |
| Most in one year | 22 | 5,963 |
| Babies in 2025 | under 5 | 187 |
| Estimated living today | 480 | 94,000 |
| Median age today | 50 | 49 |
| Peak year | 1960 | 1965 |
| Best rank | 2,573rd girls | 52nd boys |
| Rank in 2025 | unranked | 1,132nd |
| First recorded | 1952 | 1936 |
| Girls / boys | 518 / 0 | 569 / 103,937 |
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.
Both names abroad
Countries whose statistics office publishes both names, so the comparison can be made somewhere other than the United States.
| Country | Darcee | Darren |
|---|---|---|
| England and Wales | 93 | 3,069 |
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
Related comparisons
Social Security Administration birth records, 1880–2025, public domain. Full histories: Darcee and Darren.