Kimber vs Kimberlynn
American parents have registered 11,666 Kimbers since 1880, against 1,113 Kimberlynns. Kimber is still ahead, with 293 babies in 2025.
Babies given each name, 1880–2025
Kimber Kimberlynn
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
Kimber has been the commoner name in every year either was published, 1914 to 2025. The lead has never changed hands.
The closest they came was 2000, when Kimber had 45 and Kimberlynn had 20.
Side by side
| Kimber | Kimberlynn | |
|---|---|---|
| Total US births | 11,666 | 1,113 |
| Most in one year | 524 | 62 |
| Babies in 2025 | 293 | 20 |
| Estimated living today | 11,000 | 1,100 |
| Median age today | 13 | 13 |
| Peak year | 2016 | 2013 |
| Best rank | 592nd girls | 2,769th girls |
| Rank in 2025 | 936th | 5,917th |
| First recorded | 1914 | 1958 |
| Girls / boys | 11,215 / 451 | 1,113 / 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.
Where each one is strongest
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: Kimber and Kimberlynn.