Is Isobel a boy or girl name?
Isobel is a girl name in the US. In 2024, 78 girls and 0 boys were named Isobel, so 100% were girls. Across 1880–2024, 100% of the 3,722 US babies named Isobel were girls.
- Boy rank, 2024
- Not ranked
- Girl rank, 2024
- #2,351
- Babies named Isobel since 1894
- 3,722
- Most popular year
- 2016
- 129 babies
Boys and girls named Isobel, by decade
| Decade | Boys | Girls | Share girls |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1890s | 0 | 42 | 100% |
| 1900s | 0 | 129 | 100% |
| 1910s | 0 | 366 | 100% |
| 1920s | 0 | 422 | 100% |
| 1930s | 0 | 190 | 100% |
| 1940s | 0 | 81 | 100% |
| 1950s | 0 | 51 | 100% |
| 1960s | 0 | 12 | 100% |
| 1970s | 0 | 13 | 100% |
| 1980s | 0 | 7 | 100% |
| 1990s | 0 | 270 | 100% |
| 2000s | 0 | 715 | 100% |
| 2010s | 0 | 981 | 100% |
| 2020s | 0 | 443 | 100% |
Every year
| Year | Boys | Boy rank | Girls | Girl rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | 0 | – | 78 | #2,351 |
| 2023 | 0 | – | 95 | #2,054 |
| 2022 | 0 | – | 84 | #2,232 |
| 2021 | 0 | – | 92 | #2,076 |
| 2020 | 0 | – | 94 | #1,996 |
| 2019 | 0 | – | 91 | #2,078 |
| 2018 | 0 | – | 89 | #2,137 |
| 2017 | 0 | – | 112 | #1,836 |
| 2016 | 0 | – | 129 | #1,664 |
| 2015 | 0 | – | 93 | #2,098 |
| 2014 | 0 | – | 98 | #2,016 |
| 2013 | 0 | – | 100 | #1,971 |
| 2012 | 0 | – | 85 | #2,215 |
| 2011 | 0 | – | 82 | #2,281 |
| 2010 | 0 | – | 102 | #1,963 |
| 2009 | 0 | – | 95 | #2,126 |
| 2008 | 0 | – | 81 | #2,386 |
| 2007 | 0 | – | 110 | #1,888 |
| 2006 | 0 | – | 78 | #2,408 |
| 2005 | 0 | – | 52 | #3,067 |
| 2004 | 0 | – | 50 | #3,092 |
| 2003 | 0 | – | 67 | #2,449 |
| 2002 | 0 | – | 69 | #2,338 |
| 2001 | 0 | – | 57 | #2,646 |
| 2000 | 0 | – | 56 | #2,645 |
| 1999 | 0 | – | 61 | #2,413 |
| 1998 | 0 | – | 48 | #2,775 |
| 1997 | 0 | – | 44 | #2,788 |
| 1996 | 0 | – | 19 | #5,145 |
| 1995 | 0 | – | 27 | #3,920 |
| 1994 | 0 | – | 25 | #4,165 |
| 1993 | 0 | – | 17 | #5,507 |
| 1992 | 0 | – | 9 | #9,016 |
| 1991 | 0 | – | 10 | #8,196 |
| 1990 | 0 | – | 10 | #8,104 |
| 1989 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 1988 | 0 | – | 7 | #9,627 |
| 1987 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 1986 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 1985 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 1984 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 1983 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 1982 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 1981 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 1980 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 1979 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 1978 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 1977 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 1976 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 1975 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 1974 | 0 | – | 6 | #8,062 |
| 1973 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 1972 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 1971 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 1970 | 0 | – | 7 | #6,594 |
| 1969 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 1968 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 1967 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 1966 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 1965 | 0 | – | 7 | #5,484 |
| 1964 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 1963 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 1962 | 0 | – | 5 | #6,949 |
| 1961 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 1960 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 1959 | 0 | – | 6 | #5,839 |
| 1958 | 0 | – | 10 | #4,046 |
| 1957 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 1956 | 0 | – | 11 | #3,780 |
| 1955 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 1954 | 0 | – | 5 | #6,088 |
| 1953 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 1952 | 0 | – | 8 | #4,269 |
| 1951 | 0 | – | 6 | #5,085 |
| 1950 | 0 | – | 5 | #5,612 |
| 1949 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 1948 | 0 | – | 8 | #4,013 |
| 1947 | 0 | – | 13 | #2,964 |
| 1946 | 0 | – | 11 | #3,109 |
| 1945 | 0 | – | 6 | #4,243 |
| 1944 | 0 | – | 5 | #4,853 |
| 1943 | 0 | – | 8 | #3,622 |
| 1942 | 0 | – | 8 | #3,552 |
| 1941 | 0 | – | 10 | #2,929 |
| 1940 | 0 | – | 12 | #2,482 |
| 1939 | 0 | – | 6 | #3,976 |
| 1938 | 0 | – | 9 | #3,030 |
| 1937 | 0 | – | 12 | #2,500 |
| 1936 | 0 | – | 17 | #1,910 |
| 1935 | 0 | – | 18 | #1,874 |
| 1934 | 0 | – | 16 | #2,034 |
| 1933 | 0 | – | 28 | #1,383 |
| 1932 | 0 | – | 34 | #1,246 |
| 1931 | 0 | – | 17 | #1,983 |
| 1930 | 0 | – | 33 | #1,334 |
| 1929 | 0 | – | 29 | #1,432 |
| 1928 | 0 | – | 46 | #1,124 |
| 1927 | 0 | – | 43 | #1,180 |
| 1926 | 0 | – | 37 | #1,291 |
| 1925 | 0 | – | 49 | #1,096 |
| 1924 | 0 | – | 36 | #1,369 |
| 1923 | 0 | – | 47 | #1,121 |
| 1922 | 0 | – | 42 | #1,196 |
| 1921 | 0 | – | 58 | #978 |
| 1920 | 0 | – | 35 | #1,329 |
| 1919 | 0 | – | 35 | #1,305 |
| 1918 | 0 | – | 40 | #1,194 |
| 1917 | 0 | – | 42 | #1,102 |
| 1916 | 0 | – | 69 | #817 |
| 1915 | 0 | – | 38 | #1,107 |
| 1914 | 0 | – | 42 | #908 |
| 1913 | 0 | – | 29 | #1,014 |
| 1912 | 0 | – | 35 | #852 |
| 1911 | 0 | – | 19 | #1,020 |
| 1910 | 0 | – | 17 | #1,090 |
| 1909 | 0 | – | 13 | #1,180 |
| 1908 | 0 | – | 21 | #863 |
| 1907 | 0 | – | 12 | #1,169 |
| 1906 | 0 | – | 18 | #885 |
| 1905 | 0 | – | 17 | #910 |
| 1904 | 0 | – | 12 | #1,074 |
| 1903 | 0 | – | 13 | #999 |
| 1902 | 0 | – | 10 | #1,167 |
| 1901 | 0 | – | 6 | #1,564 |
| 1900 | 0 | – | 7 | #1,644 |
| 1899 | 0 | – | 7 | #1,323 |
| 1898 | 0 | – | 9 | #1,211 |
| 1897 | 0 | – | 6 | #1,458 |
| 1896 | 0 | – | 5 | #1,694 |
| 1895 | 0 | – | 10 | #1,086 |
| 1894 | 0 | – | 5 | #1,581 |
Highest rank
Isobel has never been ranked as a boy name. As a girl name, it reached #817 in 1916. 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 2010s, with a similar number of babies. They can work as sibling or middle names that feel like they belong together.
Names spelled like Isobel
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.