Humanverse

Mckenna vs Mckinnley

American parents have registered 44,491 Mckennas since 1880, against 578 Mckinnleys. Mckenna is still ahead, with 758 babies in 2025.

Babies given each name, 1880–2025

Births per year: Mckenna against Mckinnley, 1880 to 2025 0 500 1k 1.5k 2k 1880 1900 1920 1940 1960 1980 2000 2020

Mckenna Mckinnley

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

Mckenna has been the commoner name in every year either was published, 1972 to 2025. The lead has never changed hands.

The closest they came was 2011, when Mckenna had 1,333 and Mckinnley had 51.

Side by side

  Mckenna Mckinnley
Total US births 44,491578
Most in one year 1,80451
Babies in 2025 75812
Estimated living today 44,000570
Median age today 1814
Peak year 20022011
Best rank 177th girls3,659th girls
Rank in 2025 410th8,362nd
First recorded 19721994
Girls / boys 44,308 / 183506 / 72

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 Mckennas alive today are over 18; half the Mckinnleys are over 14. That is 4 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: Mckenna and Mckinnley.