Is Dinah a boy or girl name?
Dinah is a girl name in the US. In 2024, 38 girls and 0 boys were named Dinah, so 100% were girls. Across 1880–2024, 100% of the 10,475 US babies named Dinah were girls.
- Boy rank, 2024
- Not ranked
- Girl rank, 2024
- #3,895
- Babies named Dinah since 1880
- 10,475
- Most popular year
- 1955
- 346 babies
Boys and girls named Dinah, by decade
| Decade | Boys | Girls | Share girls |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1880s | 0 | 83 | 100% |
| 1890s | 0 | 87 | 100% |
| 1900s | 0 | 113 | 100% |
| 1910s | 0 | 227 | 100% |
| 1920s | 0 | 244 | 100% |
| 1930s | 0 | 289 | 100% |
| 1940s | 0 | 1,592 | 100% |
| 1950s | 0 | 2,903 | 100% |
| 1960s | 0 | 1,626 | 100% |
| 1970s | 0 | 836 | 100% |
| 1980s | 0 | 628 | 100% |
| 1990s | 0 | 509 | 100% |
| 2000s | 0 | 619 | 100% |
| 2010s | 0 | 502 | 100% |
| 2020s | 0 | 217 | 100% |
Every year
| Year | Boys | Boy rank | Girls | Girl rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | 0 | – | 38 | #3,895 |
| 2023 | 0 | – | 40 | #3,782 |
| 2022 | 0 | – | 39 | #3,840 |
| 2021 | 0 | – | 50 | #3,222 |
| 2020 | 0 | – | 50 | #3,155 |
| 2019 | 0 | – | 41 | #3,682 |
| 2018 | 0 | – | 52 | #3,120 |
| 2017 | 0 | – | 51 | #3,163 |
| 2016 | 0 | – | 54 | #3,069 |
| 2015 | 0 | – | 60 | #2,896 |
| 2014 | 0 | – | 54 | #3,089 |
| 2013 | 0 | – | 51 | #3,186 |
| 2012 | 0 | – | 48 | #3,383 |
| 2011 | 0 | – | 44 | #3,561 |
| 2010 | 0 | – | 47 | #3,428 |
| 2009 | 0 | – | 68 | #2,683 |
| 2008 | 0 | – | 58 | #3,002 |
| 2007 | 0 | – | 57 | #3,063 |
| 2006 | 0 | – | 60 | #2,893 |
| 2005 | 0 | – | 39 | #3,754 |
| 2004 | 0 | – | 55 | #2,896 |
| 2003 | 0 | – | 69 | #2,396 |
| 2002 | 0 | – | 73 | #2,253 |
| 2001 | 0 | – | 75 | #2,176 |
| 2000 | 0 | – | 65 | #2,381 |
| 1999 | 0 | – | 71 | #2,138 |
| 1998 | 0 | – | 51 | #2,662 |
| 1997 | 0 | – | 43 | #2,836 |
| 1996 | 0 | – | 64 | #2,132 |
| 1995 | 0 | – | 47 | #2,635 |
| 1994 | 0 | – | 51 | #2,475 |
| 1993 | 0 | – | 45 | #2,685 |
| 1992 | 0 | – | 45 | #2,696 |
| 1991 | 0 | – | 41 | #2,854 |
| 1990 | 0 | – | 51 | #2,411 |
| 1989 | 0 | – | 63 | #2,004 |
| 1988 | 0 | – | 68 | #1,824 |
| 1987 | 0 | – | 52 | #2,105 |
| 1986 | 0 | – | 44 | #2,307 |
| 1985 | 0 | – | 63 | #1,790 |
| 1984 | 0 | – | 72 | #1,569 |
| 1983 | 0 | – | 66 | #1,675 |
| 1982 | 0 | – | 64 | #1,741 |
| 1981 | 0 | – | 79 | #1,516 |
| 1980 | 0 | – | 57 | #1,889 |
| 1979 | 0 | – | 85 | #1,434 |
| 1978 | 0 | – | 69 | #1,571 |
| 1977 | 0 | – | 74 | #1,487 |
| 1976 | 0 | – | 81 | #1,334 |
| 1975 | 0 | – | 98 | #1,176 |
| 1974 | 0 | – | 60 | #1,585 |
| 1973 | 0 | – | 78 | #1,305 |
| 1972 | 0 | – | 97 | #1,134 |
| 1971 | 0 | – | 91 | #1,230 |
| 1970 | 0 | – | 103 | #1,136 |
| 1969 | 0 | – | 91 | #1,171 |
| 1968 | 0 | – | 91 | #1,121 |
| 1967 | 0 | – | 88 | #1,121 |
| 1966 | 0 | – | 123 | #910 |
| 1965 | 0 | – | 142 | #834 |
| 1964 | 0 | – | 173 | #788 |
| 1963 | 0 | – | 178 | #776 |
| 1962 | 0 | – | 208 | #716 |
| 1961 | 0 | – | 237 | #671 |
| 1960 | 0 | – | 295 | #573 |
| 1959 | 0 | – | 298 | #566 |
| 1958 | 0 | – | 332 | #529 |
| 1957 | 0 | – | 325 | #530 |
| 1956 | 0 | – | 333 | #513 |
| 1955 | 0 | – | 346 | #488 |
| 1954 | 0 | – | 270 | #540 |
| 1953 | 0 | – | 257 | #541 |
| 1952 | 0 | – | 257 | #531 |
| 1951 | 0 | – | 237 | #548 |
| 1950 | 0 | – | 248 | #517 |
| 1949 | 0 | – | 216 | #571 |
| 1948 | 0 | – | 190 | #607 |
| 1947 | 0 | – | 217 | #580 |
| 1946 | 0 | – | 188 | #583 |
| 1945 | 0 | – | 162 | #575 |
| 1944 | 0 | – | 188 | #530 |
| 1943 | 0 | – | 178 | #568 |
| 1942 | 0 | – | 142 | #633 |
| 1941 | 0 | – | 69 | #877 |
| 1940 | 0 | – | 42 | #1,120 |
| 1939 | 0 | – | 35 | #1,245 |
| 1938 | 0 | – | 33 | #1,273 |
| 1937 | 0 | – | 35 | #1,224 |
| 1936 | 0 | – | 26 | #1,452 |
| 1935 | 0 | – | 37 | #1,170 |
| 1934 | 0 | – | 26 | #1,450 |
| 1933 | 0 | – | 35 | #1,208 |
| 1932 | 0 | – | 23 | #1,604 |
| 1931 | 0 | – | 17 | #1,965 |
| 1930 | 0 | – | 22 | #1,715 |
| 1929 | 0 | – | 12 | #2,616 |
| 1928 | 0 | – | 24 | #1,688 |
| 1927 | 0 | – | 21 | #1,900 |
| 1926 | 0 | – | 24 | #1,737 |
| 1925 | 0 | – | 22 | #1,857 |
| 1924 | 0 | – | 30 | #1,539 |
| 1923 | 0 | – | 27 | #1,604 |
| 1922 | 0 | – | 30 | #1,512 |
| 1921 | 0 | – | 31 | #1,491 |
| 1920 | 0 | – | 23 | #1,765 |
| 1919 | 0 | – | 32 | #1,374 |
| 1918 | 0 | – | 21 | #1,820 |
| 1917 | 0 | – | 24 | #1,563 |
| 1916 | 0 | – | 31 | #1,303 |
| 1915 | 0 | – | 21 | #1,630 |
| 1914 | 0 | – | 27 | #1,185 |
| 1913 | 0 | – | 21 | #1,238 |
| 1912 | 0 | – | 23 | #1,086 |
| 1911 | 0 | – | 15 | #1,188 |
| 1910 | 0 | – | 12 | #1,356 |
| 1909 | 0 | – | 9 | #1,502 |
| 1908 | 0 | – | 12 | #1,222 |
| 1907 | 0 | – | 14 | #1,047 |
| 1906 | 0 | – | 6 | #1,791 |
| 1905 | 0 | – | 15 | #976 |
| 1904 | 0 | – | 14 | #969 |
| 1903 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 1902 | 0 | – | 12 | #1,036 |
| 1901 | 0 | – | 7 | #1,376 |
| 1900 | 0 | – | 24 | #747 |
| 1899 | 0 | – | 8 | #1,200 |
| 1898 | 0 | – | 6 | #1,551 |
| 1897 | 0 | – | 13 | #905 |
| 1896 | 0 | – | 13 | #912 |
| 1895 | 0 | – | 12 | #946 |
| 1894 | 0 | – | 11 | #961 |
| 1893 | 0 | – | 8 | #1,110 |
| 1892 | 0 | – | 7 | #1,199 |
| 1891 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 1890 | 0 | – | 9 | #956 |
| 1889 | 0 | – | 15 | #664 |
| 1888 | 0 | – | 12 | #759 |
| 1887 | 0 | – | 5 | #1,183 |
| 1886 | 0 | – | 7 | #917 |
| 1885 | 0 | – | 12 | #636 |
| 1884 | 0 | – | 9 | #749 |
| 1883 | 0 | – | 9 | #659 |
| 1882 | 0 | – | 8 | #693 |
| 1881 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 1880 | 0 | – | 6 | #769 |
Highest rank
Dinah has never been ranked as a boy name. As a girl name, it reached #488 in 1955. 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 1950s, with a similar number of babies. They can work as sibling or middle names that feel like they belong together.
Names spelled like Dinah
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.