Is Inga a boy or girl name?
Inga is a girl name in the US. In 2024, 12 girls and 0 boys were named Inga, so 100% were girls. Across 1880–2024, 100% of the 4,117 US babies named Inga were girls.
- Boy rank, 2024
- Not ranked
- Girl rank, 2024
- #8,618
- Babies named Inga since 1880
- 4,117
- Most popular year
- 1969
- 115 babies
Boys and girls named Inga, by decade
| Decade | Boys | Girls | Share girls |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1880s | 0 | 216 | 100% |
| 1890s | 0 | 400 | 100% |
| 1900s | 0 | 248 | 100% |
| 1910s | 0 | 330 | 100% |
| 1920s | 0 | 214 | 100% |
| 1930s | 0 | 135 | 100% |
| 1940s | 0 | 144 | 100% |
| 1950s | 0 | 261 | 100% |
| 1960s | 0 | 608 | 100% |
| 1970s | 0 | 635 | 100% |
| 1980s | 0 | 306 | 100% |
| 1990s | 0 | 171 | 100% |
| 2000s | 0 | 158 | 100% |
| 2010s | 0 | 210 | 100% |
| 2020s | 0 | 81 | 100% |
Every year
| Year | Boys | Boy rank | Girls | Girl rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | 0 | – | 12 | #8,618 |
| 2023 | 0 | – | 11 | #9,232 |
| 2022 | 0 | – | 23 | #5,528 |
| 2021 | 0 | – | 23 | #5,461 |
| 2020 | 0 | – | 12 | #8,607 |
| 2019 | 0 | – | 13 | #8,303 |
| 2018 | 0 | – | 21 | #5,866 |
| 2017 | 0 | – | 30 | #4,610 |
| 2016 | 0 | – | 20 | #6,267 |
| 2015 | 0 | – | 22 | #5,904 |
| 2014 | 0 | – | 24 | #5,536 |
| 2013 | 0 | – | 21 | #6,106 |
| 2012 | 0 | – | 20 | #6,432 |
| 2011 | 0 | – | 21 | #6,222 |
| 2010 | 0 | – | 18 | #7,030 |
| 2009 | 0 | – | 18 | #7,166 |
| 2008 | 0 | – | 11 | #10,346 |
| 2007 | 0 | – | 17 | #7,519 |
| 2006 | 0 | – | 26 | #5,292 |
| 2005 | 0 | – | 14 | #8,058 |
| 2004 | 0 | – | 14 | #7,979 |
| 2003 | 0 | – | 16 | #7,000 |
| 2002 | 0 | – | 14 | #7,569 |
| 2001 | 0 | – | 16 | #6,742 |
| 2000 | 0 | – | 12 | #8,221 |
| 1999 | 0 | – | 18 | #5,748 |
| 1998 | 0 | – | 18 | #5,665 |
| 1997 | 0 | – | 9 | #9,315 |
| 1996 | 0 | – | 18 | #5,371 |
| 1995 | 0 | – | 12 | #7,215 |
| 1994 | 0 | – | 17 | #5,545 |
| 1993 | 0 | – | 18 | #5,295 |
| 1992 | 0 | – | 20 | #4,921 |
| 1991 | 0 | – | 22 | #4,551 |
| 1990 | 0 | – | 19 | #4,931 |
| 1989 | 0 | – | 22 | #4,291 |
| 1988 | 0 | – | 19 | #4,543 |
| 1987 | 0 | – | 24 | #3,668 |
| 1986 | 0 | – | 16 | #4,809 |
| 1985 | 0 | – | 25 | #3,454 |
| 1984 | 0 | – | 32 | #2,805 |
| 1983 | 0 | – | 35 | #2,565 |
| 1982 | 0 | – | 41 | #2,386 |
| 1981 | 0 | – | 41 | #2,386 |
| 1980 | 0 | – | 51 | #2,052 |
| 1979 | 0 | – | 61 | #1,781 |
| 1978 | 0 | – | 42 | #2,206 |
| 1977 | 0 | – | 37 | #2,390 |
| 1976 | 0 | – | 48 | #1,891 |
| 1975 | 0 | – | 41 | #2,107 |
| 1974 | 0 | – | 58 | #1,623 |
| 1973 | 0 | – | 70 | #1,409 |
| 1972 | 0 | – | 83 | #1,251 |
| 1971 | 0 | – | 88 | #1,256 |
| 1970 | 0 | – | 107 | #1,101 |
| 1969 | 0 | – | 115 | #1,012 |
| 1968 | 0 | – | 59 | #1,480 |
| 1967 | 0 | – | 57 | #1,484 |
| 1966 | 0 | – | 56 | #1,480 |
| 1965 | 0 | – | 55 | #1,503 |
| 1964 | 0 | – | 57 | #1,506 |
| 1963 | 0 | – | 59 | #1,450 |
| 1962 | 0 | – | 58 | #1,465 |
| 1961 | 0 | – | 47 | #1,649 |
| 1960 | 0 | – | 45 | #1,682 |
| 1959 | 0 | – | 44 | #1,654 |
| 1958 | 0 | – | 34 | #1,885 |
| 1957 | 0 | – | 36 | #1,820 |
| 1956 | 0 | – | 35 | #1,811 |
| 1955 | 0 | – | 27 | #2,082 |
| 1954 | 0 | – | 21 | #2,403 |
| 1953 | 0 | – | 23 | #2,199 |
| 1952 | 0 | – | 18 | #2,535 |
| 1951 | 0 | – | 11 | #3,365 |
| 1950 | 0 | – | 12 | #3,132 |
| 1949 | 0 | – | 22 | #2,090 |
| 1948 | 0 | – | 23 | #2,035 |
| 1947 | 0 | – | 19 | #2,307 |
| 1946 | 0 | – | 14 | #2,660 |
| 1945 | 0 | – | 8 | #3,500 |
| 1944 | 0 | – | 17 | #2,141 |
| 1943 | 0 | – | 13 | #2,621 |
| 1942 | 0 | – | 10 | #3,077 |
| 1941 | 0 | – | 8 | #3,374 |
| 1940 | 0 | – | 10 | #2,832 |
| 1939 | 0 | – | 8 | #3,266 |
| 1938 | 0 | – | 15 | #2,162 |
| 1937 | 0 | – | 8 | #3,273 |
| 1936 | 0 | – | 12 | #2,436 |
| 1935 | 0 | – | 10 | #2,819 |
| 1934 | 0 | – | 13 | #2,352 |
| 1933 | 0 | – | 11 | #2,604 |
| 1932 | 0 | – | 19 | #1,840 |
| 1931 | 0 | – | 16 | #2,060 |
| 1930 | 0 | – | 23 | #1,680 |
| 1929 | 0 | – | 17 | #2,048 |
| 1928 | 0 | – | 16 | #2,235 |
| 1927 | 0 | – | 19 | #2,065 |
| 1926 | 0 | – | 24 | #1,749 |
| 1925 | 0 | – | 20 | #1,968 |
| 1924 | 0 | – | 16 | #2,359 |
| 1923 | 0 | – | 23 | #1,800 |
| 1922 | 0 | – | 19 | #2,058 |
| 1921 | 0 | – | 28 | #1,592 |
| 1920 | 0 | – | 32 | #1,422 |
| 1919 | 0 | – | 38 | #1,224 |
| 1918 | 0 | – | 30 | #1,425 |
| 1917 | 0 | – | 31 | #1,319 |
| 1916 | 0 | – | 46 | #1,016 |
| 1915 | 0 | – | 39 | #1,084 |
| 1914 | 0 | – | 42 | #907 |
| 1913 | 0 | – | 27 | #1,053 |
| 1912 | 0 | – | 27 | #988 |
| 1911 | 0 | – | 21 | #970 |
| 1910 | 0 | – | 29 | #801 |
| 1909 | 0 | – | 15 | #1,081 |
| 1908 | 0 | – | 19 | #926 |
| 1907 | 0 | – | 28 | #718 |
| 1906 | 0 | – | 21 | #809 |
| 1905 | 0 | – | 25 | #719 |
| 1904 | 0 | – | 21 | #788 |
| 1903 | 0 | – | 32 | #584 |
| 1902 | 0 | – | 24 | #701 |
| 1901 | 0 | – | 29 | #582 |
| 1900 | 0 | – | 34 | #606 |
| 1899 | 0 | – | 39 | #473 |
| 1898 | 0 | – | 46 | #453 |
| 1897 | 0 | – | 36 | #481 |
| 1896 | 0 | – | 38 | #473 |
| 1895 | 0 | – | 35 | #495 |
| 1894 | 0 | – | 40 | #443 |
| 1893 | 0 | – | 43 | #409 |
| 1892 | 0 | – | 47 | #387 |
| 1891 | 0 | – | 35 | #424 |
| 1890 | 0 | – | 41 | #398 |
| 1889 | 0 | – | 43 | #368 |
| 1888 | 0 | – | 29 | #460 |
| 1887 | 0 | – | 28 | #415 |
| 1886 | 0 | – | 21 | #483 |
| 1885 | 0 | – | 28 | #387 |
| 1884 | 0 | – | 18 | #489 |
| 1883 | 0 | – | 13 | #551 |
| 1882 | 0 | – | 13 | #519 |
| 1881 | 0 | – | 15 | #438 |
| 1880 | 0 | – | 8 | #650 |
Highest rank
Inga has never been ranked as a boy name. As a girl name, it reached #368 in 1889. 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 1960s, with a similar number of babies. They can work as sibling or middle names that feel like they belong together.
Names spelled like Inga
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.