Is Buford a boy or girl name?
Buford was a boy name in the US. Across 1880–2024, 1% of the 10,958 US babies named Buford were girls. Fewer than 10 babies were given the name in 2024.
- Boy rank, 2024
- Not ranked
- Girl rank, 2024
- Not ranked
- Babies named Buford since 1880
- 10,958
- Most popular year
- 1921
- 334 babies
Boys and girls named Buford, by decade
| Decade | Boys | Girls | Share girls |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1880s | 69 | 0 | 0% |
| 1890s | 156 | 0 | 0% |
| 1900s | 277 | 5 | 1.8% |
| 1910s | 1,737 | 48 | 2.7% |
| 1920s | 2,759 | 40 | 1.4% |
| 1930s | 1,935 | 7 | 0.4% |
| 1940s | 1,652 | 5 | 0.3% |
| 1950s | 963 | 5 | 0.5% |
| 1960s | 587 | 0 | 0% |
| 1970s | 375 | 0 | 0% |
| 1980s | 203 | 0 | 0% |
| 1990s | 88 | 0 | 0% |
| 2000s | 32 | 0 | 0% |
| 2010s | 10 | 0 | 0% |
| 2020s | 5 | 0 | 0% |
Every year
| Year | Boys | Boy rank | Girls | Girl rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 2023 | 5 | #12,525 | 0 | – |
| 2022 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 2021 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 2020 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 2019 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 2018 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 2017 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 2016 | 5 | #12,483 | 0 | – |
| 2015 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 2014 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 2013 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 2012 | 5 | #12,560 | 0 | – |
| 2011 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 2010 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 2009 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 2008 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 2007 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 2006 | 6 | #10,855 | 0 | – |
| 2005 | 10 | #7,193 | 0 | – |
| 2004 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 2003 | 7 | #8,789 | 0 | – |
| 2002 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 2001 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 2000 | 9 | #6,922 | 0 | – |
| 1999 | 7 | #7,973 | 0 | – |
| 1998 | 6 | #8,611 | 0 | – |
| 1997 | 6 | #8,268 | 0 | – |
| 1996 | 7 | #7,239 | 0 | – |
| 1995 | 9 | #5,986 | 0 | – |
| 1994 | 6 | #7,898 | 0 | – |
| 1993 | 12 | #4,738 | 0 | – |
| 1992 | 6 | #7,535 | 0 | – |
| 1991 | 12 | #4,520 | 0 | – |
| 1990 | 17 | #3,483 | 0 | – |
| 1989 | 13 | #4,047 | 0 | – |
| 1988 | 14 | #3,545 | 0 | – |
| 1987 | 15 | #3,215 | 0 | – |
| 1986 | 22 | #2,436 | 0 | – |
| 1985 | 24 | #2,233 | 0 | – |
| 1984 | 16 | #2,837 | 0 | – |
| 1983 | 18 | #2,593 | 0 | – |
| 1982 | 32 | #1,778 | 0 | – |
| 1981 | 19 | #2,504 | 0 | – |
| 1980 | 30 | #1,859 | 0 | – |
| 1979 | 39 | #1,513 | 0 | – |
| 1978 | 31 | #1,726 | 0 | – |
| 1977 | 35 | #1,574 | 0 | – |
| 1976 | 33 | #1,614 | 0 | – |
| 1975 | 46 | #1,259 | 0 | – |
| 1974 | 36 | #1,439 | 0 | – |
| 1973 | 31 | #1,551 | 0 | – |
| 1972 | 25 | #1,776 | 0 | – |
| 1971 | 46 | #1,216 | 0 | – |
| 1970 | 53 | #1,133 | 0 | – |
| 1969 | 56 | #1,027 | 0 | – |
| 1968 | 47 | #1,084 | 0 | – |
| 1967 | 45 | #1,104 | 0 | – |
| 1966 | 41 | #1,166 | 0 | – |
| 1965 | 67 | #899 | 0 | – |
| 1964 | 62 | #967 | 0 | – |
| 1963 | 54 | #1,028 | 0 | – |
| 1962 | 65 | #938 | 0 | – |
| 1961 | 80 | #855 | 0 | – |
| 1960 | 70 | #904 | 0 | – |
| 1959 | 65 | #953 | 0 | – |
| 1958 | 67 | #928 | 0 | – |
| 1957 | 79 | #845 | 0 | – |
| 1956 | 108 | #708 | 0 | – |
| 1955 | 93 | #756 | 0 | – |
| 1954 | 97 | #733 | 0 | – |
| 1953 | 108 | #687 | 0 | – |
| 1952 | 109 | #660 | 5 | #5,643 |
| 1951 | 107 | #675 | 0 | – |
| 1950 | 130 | #599 | 0 | – |
| 1949 | 148 | #551 | 0 | – |
| 1948 | 143 | #560 | 0 | – |
| 1947 | 166 | #526 | 0 | – |
| 1946 | 145 | #533 | 0 | – |
| 1945 | 129 | #525 | 0 | – |
| 1944 | 172 | #464 | 0 | – |
| 1943 | 198 | #451 | 0 | – |
| 1942 | 182 | #457 | 0 | – |
| 1941 | 183 | #432 | 0 | – |
| 1940 | 186 | #427 | 5 | #4,438 |
| 1939 | 164 | #446 | 0 | – |
| 1938 | 196 | #405 | 0 | – |
| 1937 | 193 | #406 | 0 | – |
| 1936 | 160 | #445 | 7 | #3,413 |
| 1935 | 174 | #423 | 0 | – |
| 1934 | 211 | #375 | 0 | – |
| 1933 | 169 | #418 | 0 | – |
| 1932 | 228 | #368 | 0 | – |
| 1931 | 200 | #399 | 0 | – |
| 1930 | 240 | #370 | 0 | – |
| 1929 | 230 | #379 | 0 | – |
| 1928 | 240 | #380 | 6 | #4,255 |
| 1927 | 242 | #377 | 5 | #4,900 |
| 1926 | 264 | #359 | 10 | #3,075 |
| 1925 | 283 | #347 | 0 | – |
| 1924 | 304 | #334 | 0 | – |
| 1923 | 279 | #352 | 7 | #4,027 |
| 1922 | 305 | #335 | 7 | #4,059 |
| 1921 | 334 | #318 | 0 | – |
| 1920 | 278 | #354 | 5 | #5,082 |
| 1919 | 258 | #357 | 6 | #4,323 |
| 1918 | 252 | #370 | 7 | #3,929 |
| 1917 | 249 | #353 | 5 | #4,687 |
| 1916 | 244 | #342 | 5 | #4,511 |
| 1915 | 209 | #372 | 5 | #4,366 |
| 1914 | 165 | #368 | 0 | – |
| 1913 | 136 | #357 | 6 | #2,875 |
| 1912 | 108 | #370 | 8 | #2,184 |
| 1911 | 53 | #390 | 0 | – |
| 1910 | 63 | #311 | 6 | #2,180 |
| 1909 | 36 | #408 | 0 | – |
| 1908 | 47 | #326 | 5 | #2,156 |
| 1907 | 25 | #466 | 0 | – |
| 1906 | 29 | #401 | 0 | – |
| 1905 | 37 | #329 | 0 | – |
| 1904 | 25 | #417 | 0 | – |
| 1903 | 24 | #403 | 0 | – |
| 1902 | 14 | #592 | 0 | – |
| 1901 | 17 | #471 | 0 | – |
| 1900 | 23 | #478 | 0 | – |
| 1899 | 18 | #440 | 0 | – |
| 1898 | 18 | #488 | 0 | – |
| 1897 | 15 | #518 | 0 | – |
| 1896 | 17 | #505 | 0 | – |
| 1895 | 20 | #439 | 0 | – |
| 1894 | 17 | #483 | 0 | – |
| 1893 | 12 | #575 | 0 | – |
| 1892 | 14 | #551 | 0 | – |
| 1891 | 12 | #526 | 0 | – |
| 1890 | 13 | #539 | 0 | – |
| 1889 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 1888 | 13 | #558 | 0 | – |
| 1887 | 9 | #637 | 0 | – |
| 1886 | 7 | #773 | 0 | – |
| 1885 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 1884 | 10 | #620 | 0 | – |
| 1883 | 10 | #603 | 0 | – |
| 1882 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 1881 | 9 | #604 | 0 | – |
| 1880 | 11 | #575 | 0 | – |
Highest rank
As a boy name, Buford reached #311 in 1910. As a girl name, it reached #2,156 in 1908. Ranks count every name SSA published for that year and sex, so they go well past the top 1,000.
Names from the same era
These names were also most popular in the 1920s, with a similar number of babies. They can work as sibling or middle names that feel like they belong together.
Names spelled like Buford
Source: US Social Security Administration baby name data, 1880–2024. Counts are Social Security card applications for US births; SSA leaves out names given to fewer than 5 babies in a year. Updated 2026-10-05. How these numbers are made.