Gurnawab vs Gurney
American parents have registered 790 Gurneys since 1880, against 21 Gurnawabs. But in 2025 it was Gurnawab that was commoner, 21 babies to fewer than five.
Babies given each name, 1880–2025
Gurnawab Gurney
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 65 years in which either name was published, Gurney for 64 years and Gurnawab for 1 year. The lead changed hands once.
Side by side
| Gurnawab | Gurney | |
|---|---|---|
| Total US births | 21 | 790 |
| Most in one year | 21 | 26 |
| Babies in 2025 | 21 | under 5 |
| Estimated living today | 20 | 190 |
| Median age today | 0 | 74 |
| Peak year | 2025 | 1928 |
| Best rank | 4,707th boys | 1,448th boys |
| Rank in 2025 | 4,707th | unranked |
| First recorded | 2025 | 1890 |
| Girls / boys | 0 / 21 | 0 / 790 |
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 Gurneys alive today are over 74; half the Gurnawabs have not had a first birthday. That is 74 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: Gurnawab and Gurney.