Lisa vs Lisle
American parents have registered 970,012 Lisas since 1880, against 564 Lisles. Lisa is still ahead, with 256 babies in 2025.
Babies given each name, 1880–2025
Lisa Lisle
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 128 years in which either name was published, Lisa for 114 years and Lisle for 14 years. The lead changed hands 15 times.
- 1889–1898 Lisle ahead
- 1899–1913 Lisa ahead, apart from one short spell
- 1916–1918 Lisle ahead
- 1926–2025 Lisa ahead
11 shorter spells of a year or two are folded into the spans above rather than listed separately.
Side by side
| Lisa | Lisle | |
|---|---|---|
| Total US births | 970,012 | 564 |
| Most in one year | 60,448 | 21 |
| Babies in 2025 | 256 | under 5 |
| Estimated living today | 876,000 | 130 |
| Median age today | 57 | 73 |
| Peak year | 1965 | 1924 |
| Best rank | 1st girls | 1,727th boys |
| Rank in 2025 | 987th | unranked |
| First recorded | 1886 | 1885 |
| Girls / boys | 967,229 / 2,783 | 21 / 543 |
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 Lisles alive today are over 73; half the Lisas are over 57. That is 16 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: Lisa and Lisle.