Mack vs Mackinzie
American parents have registered 42,900 Macks since 1880, against 839 Mackinzies. Mack is still ahead, with 668 babies in 2025.
Babies given each name, 1880–2025
Mack Mackinzie
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
Mack 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 1999, when Mack had 95 and Mackinzie had 49.
Side by side
| Mack | Mackinzie | |
|---|---|---|
| Total US births | 42,900 | 839 |
| Most in one year | 847 | 50 |
| Babies in 2025 | 668 | under 5 |
| Estimated living today | 20,000 | 830 |
| Median age today | 44 | 22 |
| Peak year | 1942 | 2003 |
| Best rank | 190th boys | 2,999th girls |
| Rank in 2025 | 463rd | unranked |
| First recorded | 1880 | 1981 |
| Girls / boys | 180 / 42,720 | 824 / 15 |
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 Macks alive today are over 44; half the Mackinzies are over 22. That is 22 years between them: two names in use at the same time, worn by two different generations.
Where each one is strongest
- Mack Mississippi (5.4×), South Carolina (4.2×), Alabama (4.0×)
- Mackinzie Indiana (10.9×), Texas (4.5×)
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: Mack and Mackinzie.