Rabecca vs Rabia
American parents have registered 869 Rabeccas since 1880, against 862 Rabias. But in 2025 it was Rabia that was commoner, 8 babies to fewer than five.
Babies given each name, 1880–2025
Rabecca Rabia
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 65 years in which either name was published, Rabecca for 35 years and Rabia for 30 years. The lead changed hands 7 times.
Side by side
| Rabecca | Rabia | |
|---|---|---|
| Total US births | 869 | 862 |
| Most in one year | 37 | 30 |
| Babies in 2025 | under 5 | 8 |
| Estimated living today | 840 | 850 |
| Median age today | 36 | 26 |
| Peak year | 1996 | 1997 |
| Best rank | 3,149th girls | 3,716th girls |
| Rank in 2025 | unranked | 10,917th |
| First recorded | 1955 | 1973 |
| Girls / boys | 869 / 0 | 862 / 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.
Which name is older
Half of the Rabeccas alive today are over 36; half the Rabias are over 26. That is 10 years between them: two names in use at the same time, worn by two different generations.
Where each one is strongest
- Rabecca California (7.0×)
- Rabia New York (9.9×)
How much commoner the name is in that state than it is nationally, from births recorded since 1910.
Compare something else
Social Security Administration birth records, 1880–2025, public domain. Full histories: Rabecca and Rabia.