Emma vs Emmalynn
American parents have registered 778,172 Emmas since 1880, against 4,780 Emmalynns. Emma is still ahead, with 12,768 babies in 2025.
Babies given each name, 1880–2025
Emma Emmalynn
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
Emma has been the commoner name in every year either was published, 1880 to 2025. The lead has never changed hands.
The closest they came was 2015, when Emma had 20,497 and Emmalynn had 409.
Side by side
| Emma | Emmalynn | |
|---|---|---|
| Total US births | 778,172 | 4,780 |
| Most in one year | 22,756 | 409 |
| Babies in 2025 | 12,768 | 139 |
| Estimated living today | 570,000 | 4,700 |
| Median age today | 16 | 10 |
| Peak year | 2003 | 2015 |
| Best rank | 2nd girls | 693rd girls |
| Rank in 2025 | 3rd | 1,525th |
| First recorded | 1880 | 1985 |
| Girls / boys | 776,439 / 1,733 | 4,780 / 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 Emmas alive today are over 16; half the Emmalynns are over 10. That is 6 years between them: two names in use at the same time, worn by two different generations.
Where each one is strongest
- Emma Nevada (1.5×), Alaska (1.5×), Mississippi (1.4×)
- Emmalynn Tennessee (2.3×), Indiana (2.2×), Washington (2.0×)
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: Emma and Emmalynn.