Is Dudley a boy or girl name?
Dudley was a boy name in the US. Across 1880–2024, 1% of the 11,983 US babies named Dudley were girls. Fewer than 10 babies were given the name in 2024.
- Boy rank, 2024
- #8,471
- Girl rank, 2024
- Not ranked
- Babies named Dudley since 1880
- 11,983
- Most popular year
- 1931
- 286 babies
Boys and girls named Dudley, by decade
| Decade | Boys | Girls | Share girls |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1880s | 270 | 0 | 0% |
| 1890s | 253 | 0 | 0% |
| 1900s | 312 | 0 | 0% |
| 1910s | 1,362 | 31 | 2.2% |
| 1920s | 1,964 | 31 | 1.6% |
| 1930s | 1,856 | 31 | 1.6% |
| 1940s | 1,798 | 21 | 1.2% |
| 1950s | 1,859 | 6 | 0.3% |
| 1960s | 1,039 | 0 | 0% |
| 1970s | 411 | 0 | 0% |
| 1980s | 292 | 0 | 0% |
| 1990s | 199 | 0 | 0% |
| 2000s | 107 | 0 | 0% |
| 2010s | 97 | 0 | 0% |
| 2020s | 44 | 0 | 0% |
Every year
| Year | Boys | Boy rank | Girls | Girl rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | 9 | #8,471 | 0 | – |
| 2023 | 12 | #7,001 | 0 | – |
| 2022 | 7 | #10,088 | 0 | – |
| 2021 | 8 | #9,046 | 0 | – |
| 2020 | 8 | #8,943 | 0 | – |
| 2019 | 10 | #7,788 | 0 | – |
| 2018 | 7 | #9,955 | 0 | – |
| 2017 | 12 | #6,802 | 0 | – |
| 2016 | 12 | #6,833 | 0 | – |
| 2015 | 7 | #9,838 | 0 | – |
| 2014 | 8 | #9,001 | 0 | – |
| 2013 | 7 | #9,937 | 0 | – |
| 2012 | 11 | #7,192 | 0 | – |
| 2011 | 14 | #6,030 | 0 | – |
| 2010 | 9 | #8,323 | 0 | – |
| 2009 | 5 | #12,999 | 0 | – |
| 2008 | 11 | #7,337 | 0 | – |
| 2007 | 8 | #9,128 | 0 | – |
| 2006 | 13 | #6,202 | 0 | – |
| 2005 | 13 | #5,963 | 0 | – |
| 2004 | 10 | #7,117 | 0 | – |
| 2003 | 14 | #5,349 | 0 | – |
| 2002 | 10 | #6,674 | 0 | – |
| 2001 | 9 | #7,075 | 0 | – |
| 2000 | 14 | #5,110 | 0 | – |
| 1999 | 17 | #4,202 | 0 | – |
| 1998 | 14 | #4,717 | 0 | – |
| 1997 | 12 | #5,045 | 0 | – |
| 1996 | 25 | #2,953 | 0 | – |
| 1995 | 21 | #3,222 | 0 | – |
| 1994 | 15 | #4,150 | 0 | – |
| 1993 | 23 | #2,965 | 0 | – |
| 1992 | 19 | #3,369 | 0 | – |
| 1991 | 23 | #2,853 | 0 | – |
| 1990 | 30 | #2,326 | 0 | – |
| 1989 | 35 | #2,041 | 0 | – |
| 1988 | 20 | #2,783 | 0 | – |
| 1987 | 24 | #2,352 | 0 | – |
| 1986 | 25 | #2,248 | 0 | – |
| 1985 | 33 | #1,806 | 0 | – |
| 1984 | 27 | #1,996 | 0 | – |
| 1983 | 33 | #1,722 | 0 | – |
| 1982 | 26 | #2,072 | 0 | – |
| 1981 | 34 | #1,704 | 0 | – |
| 1980 | 35 | #1,664 | 0 | – |
| 1979 | 25 | #2,061 | 0 | – |
| 1978 | 32 | #1,698 | 0 | – |
| 1977 | 34 | #1,618 | 0 | – |
| 1976 | 25 | #1,949 | 0 | – |
| 1975 | 49 | #1,213 | 0 | – |
| 1974 | 35 | #1,480 | 0 | – |
| 1973 | 48 | #1,190 | 0 | – |
| 1972 | 55 | #1,102 | 0 | – |
| 1971 | 52 | #1,139 | 0 | – |
| 1970 | 56 | #1,093 | 0 | – |
| 1969 | 68 | #927 | 0 | – |
| 1968 | 61 | #935 | 0 | – |
| 1967 | 83 | #799 | 0 | – |
| 1966 | 72 | #857 | 0 | – |
| 1965 | 97 | #752 | 0 | – |
| 1964 | 105 | #749 | 0 | – |
| 1963 | 135 | #674 | 0 | – |
| 1962 | 133 | #674 | 0 | – |
| 1961 | 135 | #672 | 0 | – |
| 1960 | 150 | #636 | 0 | – |
| 1959 | 146 | #639 | 0 | – |
| 1958 | 191 | #559 | 0 | – |
| 1957 | 159 | #609 | 0 | – |
| 1956 | 181 | #564 | 0 | – |
| 1955 | 173 | #562 | 0 | – |
| 1954 | 197 | #516 | 0 | – |
| 1953 | 192 | #504 | 0 | – |
| 1952 | 210 | #485 | 0 | – |
| 1951 | 199 | #480 | 0 | – |
| 1950 | 211 | #455 | 6 | #4,890 |
| 1949 | 185 | #487 | 5 | #5,457 |
| 1948 | 206 | #466 | 0 | – |
| 1947 | 224 | #448 | 0 | – |
| 1946 | 171 | #492 | 0 | – |
| 1945 | 154 | #484 | 0 | – |
| 1944 | 159 | #480 | 9 | #3,198 |
| 1943 | 185 | #464 | 0 | – |
| 1942 | 182 | #458 | 0 | – |
| 1941 | 176 | #438 | 7 | #3,664 |
| 1940 | 156 | #464 | 0 | – |
| 1939 | 164 | #447 | 6 | #3,885 |
| 1938 | 149 | #475 | 0 | – |
| 1937 | 157 | #447 | 5 | #4,414 |
| 1936 | 164 | #441 | 0 | – |
| 1935 | 173 | #426 | 0 | – |
| 1934 | 190 | #399 | 6 | #3,931 |
| 1933 | 169 | #419 | 0 | – |
| 1932 | 204 | #393 | 0 | – |
| 1931 | 279 | #328 | 7 | #3,580 |
| 1930 | 207 | #405 | 7 | #3,757 |
| 1929 | 185 | #433 | 5 | #4,761 |
| 1928 | 181 | #445 | 9 | #3,249 |
| 1927 | 192 | #440 | 0 | – |
| 1926 | 237 | #379 | 0 | – |
| 1925 | 188 | #439 | 5 | #5,168 |
| 1924 | 202 | #431 | 5 | #5,279 |
| 1923 | 215 | #410 | 0 | – |
| 1922 | 180 | #462 | 0 | – |
| 1921 | 185 | #452 | 7 | #4,132 |
| 1920 | 199 | #425 | 0 | – |
| 1919 | 192 | #424 | 0 | – |
| 1918 | 187 | #427 | 8 | #3,589 |
| 1917 | 196 | #405 | 5 | #4,776 |
| 1916 | 184 | #410 | 6 | #4,052 |
| 1915 | 167 | #418 | 7 | #3,524 |
| 1914 | 143 | #398 | 5 | #3,768 |
| 1913 | 103 | #424 | 0 | – |
| 1912 | 113 | #364 | 0 | – |
| 1911 | 41 | #458 | 0 | – |
| 1910 | 36 | #456 | 0 | – |
| 1909 | 25 | #520 | 0 | – |
| 1908 | 34 | #408 | 0 | – |
| 1907 | 46 | #314 | 0 | – |
| 1906 | 32 | #381 | 0 | – |
| 1905 | 31 | #371 | 0 | – |
| 1904 | 29 | #381 | 0 | – |
| 1903 | 35 | #319 | 0 | – |
| 1902 | 21 | #463 | 0 | – |
| 1901 | 26 | #364 | 0 | – |
| 1900 | 33 | #385 | 0 | – |
| 1899 | 26 | #355 | 0 | – |
| 1898 | 25 | #396 | 0 | – |
| 1897 | 24 | #385 | 0 | – |
| 1896 | 27 | #371 | 0 | – |
| 1895 | 23 | #400 | 0 | – |
| 1894 | 34 | #301 | 0 | – |
| 1893 | 25 | #361 | 0 | – |
| 1892 | 27 | #371 | 0 | – |
| 1891 | 24 | #350 | 0 | – |
| 1890 | 18 | #427 | 0 | – |
| 1889 | 30 | #319 | 0 | – |
| 1888 | 30 | #333 | 0 | – |
| 1887 | 23 | #342 | 0 | – |
| 1886 | 24 | #348 | 0 | – |
| 1885 | 28 | #320 | 0 | – |
| 1884 | 26 | #345 | 0 | – |
| 1883 | 24 | #340 | 0 | – |
| 1882 | 28 | #324 | 0 | – |
| 1881 | 30 | #291 | 0 | – |
| 1880 | 27 | #329 | 0 | – |
Highest rank
As a boy name, Dudley reached #291 in 1881. As a girl name, it reached #3,198 in 1944. 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 1930s, with a similar number of babies. They can work as sibling or middle names that feel like they belong together.
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.