Is Edmund a boy or girl name?
Edmund is a boy name in the US. In 2024, 0 girls and 175 boys were named Edmund, so 0% were girls. Across 1880–2024, 0.1% of the 51,943 US babies named Edmund were girls.
- Boy rank, 2024
- #1,182
- Girl rank, 2024
- Not ranked
- Babies named Edmund since 1880
- 51,943
- Most popular year
- 1923
- 1,145 babies
Boys and girls named Edmund, by decade
| Decade | Boys | Girls | Share girls |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1880s | 708 | 0 | 0% |
| 1890s | 868 | 0 | 0% |
| 1900s | 1,151 | 0 | 0% |
| 1910s | 7,422 | 15 | 0.2% |
| 1920s | 10,205 | 35 | 0.3% |
| 1930s | 5,995 | 5 | 0.1% |
| 1940s | 5,807 | 0 | 0% |
| 1950s | 6,027 | 0 | 0% |
| 1960s | 4,335 | 0 | 0% |
| 1970s | 2,541 | 5 | 0.2% |
| 1980s | 1,978 | 0 | 0% |
| 1990s | 1,359 | 0 | 0% |
| 2000s | 1,127 | 0 | 0% |
| 2010s | 1,528 | 0 | 0% |
| 2020s | 832 | 0 | 0% |
Every year
| Year | Boys | Boy rank | Girls | Girl rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | 175 | #1,182 | 0 | – |
| 2023 | 194 | #1,098 | 0 | – |
| 2022 | 168 | #1,191 | 0 | – |
| 2021 | 173 | #1,156 | 0 | – |
| 2020 | 122 | #1,417 | 0 | – |
| 2019 | 160 | #1,194 | 0 | – |
| 2018 | 168 | #1,144 | 0 | – |
| 2017 | 163 | #1,157 | 0 | – |
| 2016 | 192 | #1,035 | 0 | – |
| 2015 | 173 | #1,112 | 0 | – |
| 2014 | 176 | #1,089 | 0 | – |
| 2013 | 152 | #1,182 | 0 | – |
| 2012 | 138 | #1,276 | 0 | – |
| 2011 | 111 | #1,471 | 0 | – |
| 2010 | 95 | #1,647 | 0 | – |
| 2009 | 125 | #1,371 | 0 | – |
| 2008 | 118 | #1,425 | 0 | – |
| 2007 | 99 | #1,583 | 0 | – |
| 2006 | 97 | #1,538 | 0 | – |
| 2005 | 103 | #1,432 | 0 | – |
| 2004 | 118 | #1,274 | 0 | – |
| 2003 | 117 | #1,235 | 0 | – |
| 2002 | 113 | #1,216 | 0 | – |
| 2001 | 115 | #1,186 | 0 | – |
| 2000 | 122 | #1,138 | 0 | – |
| 1999 | 127 | #1,069 | 0 | – |
| 1998 | 119 | #1,089 | 0 | – |
| 1997 | 147 | #924 | 0 | – |
| 1996 | 128 | #981 | 0 | – |
| 1995 | 116 | #1,035 | 0 | – |
| 1994 | 143 | #913 | 0 | – |
| 1993 | 132 | #938 | 0 | – |
| 1992 | 145 | #878 | 0 | – |
| 1991 | 147 | #867 | 0 | – |
| 1990 | 155 | #819 | 0 | – |
| 1989 | 159 | #787 | 0 | – |
| 1988 | 162 | #744 | 0 | – |
| 1987 | 189 | #666 | 0 | – |
| 1986 | 194 | #643 | 0 | – |
| 1985 | 174 | #673 | 0 | – |
| 1984 | 175 | #654 | 0 | – |
| 1983 | 180 | #638 | 0 | – |
| 1982 | 225 | #573 | 0 | – |
| 1981 | 251 | #530 | 0 | – |
| 1980 | 269 | #522 | 0 | – |
| 1979 | 320 | #454 | 5 | #10,633 |
| 1978 | 271 | #490 | 0 | – |
| 1977 | 271 | #494 | 0 | – |
| 1976 | 198 | #578 | 0 | – |
| 1975 | 209 | #560 | 0 | – |
| 1974 | 223 | #536 | 0 | – |
| 1973 | 221 | #528 | 0 | – |
| 1972 | 245 | #503 | 0 | – |
| 1971 | 285 | #479 | 0 | – |
| 1970 | 298 | #469 | 0 | – |
| 1969 | 332 | #435 | 0 | – |
| 1968 | 350 | #412 | 0 | – |
| 1967 | 369 | #398 | 0 | – |
| 1966 | 394 | #385 | 0 | – |
| 1965 | 432 | #372 | 0 | – |
| 1964 | 485 | #356 | 0 | – |
| 1963 | 473 | #358 | 0 | – |
| 1962 | 469 | #372 | 0 | – |
| 1961 | 523 | #346 | 0 | – |
| 1960 | 508 | #345 | 0 | – |
| 1959 | 532 | #336 | 0 | – |
| 1958 | 573 | #321 | 0 | – |
| 1957 | 662 | #287 | 0 | – |
| 1956 | 591 | #306 | 0 | – |
| 1955 | 604 | #295 | 0 | – |
| 1954 | 607 | #288 | 0 | – |
| 1953 | 621 | #281 | 0 | – |
| 1952 | 659 | #267 | 0 | – |
| 1951 | 625 | #270 | 0 | – |
| 1950 | 553 | #287 | 0 | – |
| 1949 | 586 | #280 | 0 | – |
| 1948 | 576 | #280 | 0 | – |
| 1947 | 633 | #268 | 0 | – |
| 1946 | 637 | #243 | 0 | – |
| 1945 | 478 | #274 | 0 | – |
| 1944 | 555 | #243 | 0 | – |
| 1943 | 666 | #219 | 0 | – |
| 1942 | 602 | #231 | 0 | – |
| 1941 | 576 | #224 | 0 | – |
| 1940 | 498 | #242 | 0 | – |
| 1939 | 467 | #246 | 0 | – |
| 1938 | 513 | #234 | 0 | – |
| 1937 | 523 | #226 | 0 | – |
| 1936 | 554 | #212 | 0 | – |
| 1935 | 564 | #212 | 0 | – |
| 1934 | 600 | #206 | 0 | – |
| 1933 | 567 | #207 | 0 | – |
| 1932 | 691 | #190 | 0 | – |
| 1931 | 708 | #184 | 0 | – |
| 1930 | 808 | #177 | 5 | #4,739 |
| 1929 | 829 | #171 | 6 | #4,208 |
| 1928 | 911 | #163 | 5 | #4,907 |
| 1927 | 929 | #160 | 5 | #5,009 |
| 1926 | 1,012 | #156 | 7 | #3,983 |
| 1925 | 1,042 | #152 | 0 | – |
| 1924 | 1,115 | #148 | 7 | #4,116 |
| 1923 | 1,145 | #143 | 0 | – |
| 1922 | 1,014 | #153 | 5 | #5,212 |
| 1921 | 1,104 | #142 | 0 | – |
| 1920 | 1,104 | #138 | 0 | – |
| 1919 | 1,007 | #144 | 5 | #5,008 |
| 1918 | 1,099 | #140 | 0 | – |
| 1917 | 1,045 | #135 | 5 | #4,783 |
| 1916 | 1,032 | #134 | 0 | – |
| 1915 | 961 | #136 | 0 | – |
| 1914 | 792 | #130 | 0 | – |
| 1913 | 599 | #131 | 0 | – |
| 1912 | 452 | #143 | 5 | #3,094 |
| 1911 | 235 | #142 | 0 | – |
| 1910 | 200 | #154 | 0 | – |
| 1909 | 147 | #167 | 0 | – |
| 1908 | 141 | #164 | 0 | – |
| 1907 | 129 | #167 | 0 | – |
| 1906 | 122 | #162 | 0 | – |
| 1905 | 108 | #176 | 0 | – |
| 1904 | 109 | #168 | 0 | – |
| 1903 | 102 | #166 | 0 | – |
| 1902 | 104 | #167 | 0 | – |
| 1901 | 95 | #161 | 0 | – |
| 1900 | 94 | #202 | 0 | – |
| 1899 | 87 | #168 | 0 | – |
| 1898 | 101 | #163 | 0 | – |
| 1897 | 96 | #163 | 0 | – |
| 1896 | 110 | #151 | 0 | – |
| 1895 | 90 | #176 | 0 | – |
| 1894 | 96 | #160 | 0 | – |
| 1893 | 80 | #183 | 0 | – |
| 1892 | 93 | #170 | 0 | – |
| 1891 | 61 | #202 | 0 | – |
| 1890 | 54 | #225 | 0 | – |
| 1889 | 89 | #155 | 0 | – |
| 1888 | 76 | #197 | 0 | – |
| 1887 | 61 | #197 | 0 | – |
| 1886 | 80 | #173 | 0 | – |
| 1885 | 68 | #193 | 0 | – |
| 1884 | 72 | #191 | 0 | – |
| 1883 | 63 | #187 | 0 | – |
| 1882 | 71 | #186 | 0 | – |
| 1881 | 61 | #187 | 0 | – |
| 1880 | 67 | #187 | 0 | – |
Highest rank
As a boy name, Edmund reached #130 in 1914. As a girl name, it reached #3,094 in 1912. 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 Edmund
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.