Parke vs Parth
American parents have registered 2,173 Parths since 1880, against 641 Parkes. Parth is still ahead, with 51 babies in 2025.
Babies given each name, 1880–2025
Parke Parth
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 99 years in which either name was published, Parke for 58 years and Parth for 41 years. The lead changed hands once.
Side by side
| Parke | Parth | |
|---|---|---|
| Total US births | 641 | 2,173 |
| Most in one year | 17 | 89 |
| Babies in 2025 | under 5 | 51 |
| Estimated living today | 330 | 2,100 |
| Median age today | 55 | 21 |
| Peak year | 1915 | 1999 |
| Best rank | 1,707th boys | 1,342nd boys |
| Rank in 2025 | unranked | 2,572nd |
| First recorded | 1908 | 1985 |
| Girls / boys | 0 / 641 | 0 / 2,173 |
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 Parkes alive today are over 55; half the Parths are over 21. That is 34 years between them: two names in use at the same time, worn by two different generations.
Where each one is strongest
- Parke Pennsylvania (18.5×)
- Parth New Jersey (12.0×), Illinois (3.1×), California (2.6×)
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: Parke and Parth.