Is Loma a boy or girl name?
Loma was a girl name in the US. Across 1880–2024, 99.8% of the 2,294 US babies named Loma were girls. Fewer than 10 babies were given the name in 2024.
- Boy rank, 2024
- Not ranked
- Girl rank, 2024
- Not ranked
- Babies named Loma since 1880
- 2,294
- Most popular year
- 1921
- 74 babies
Boys and girls named Loma, by decade
| Decade | Boys | Girls | Share girls |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1880s | 0 | 41 | 100% |
| 1890s | 0 | 114 | 100% |
| 1900s | 0 | 220 | 100% |
| 1910s | 0 | 431 | 100% |
| 1920s | 0 | 532 | 100% |
| 1930s | 5 | 317 | 98.4% |
| 1940s | 0 | 311 | 100% |
| 1950s | 0 | 184 | 100% |
| 1960s | 0 | 113 | 100% |
| 1970s | 0 | 11 | 100% |
| 1980s | 0 | 10 | 100% |
| 1990s | 0 | 0 | – |
| 2000s | 0 | 0 | – |
| 2010s | 0 | 0 | – |
| 2020s | 0 | 5 | 100% |
Every year
| Year | Boys | Boy rank | Girls | Girl rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 2023 | 0 | – | 5 | #16,612 |
| 2022 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 2021 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 2020 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 2019 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 2018 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 2017 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 2016 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 2015 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 2014 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 2013 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 2012 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 2011 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 2010 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 2009 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 2008 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 2007 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 2006 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 2005 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 2004 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 2003 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 2002 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 2001 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 2000 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 1999 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 1998 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 1997 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 1996 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 1995 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 1994 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 1993 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 1992 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 1991 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 1990 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 1989 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 1988 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 1987 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 1986 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 1985 | 0 | – | 5 | #11,697 |
| 1984 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 1983 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 1982 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 1981 | 0 | – | 5 | #11,369 |
| 1980 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 1979 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 1978 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 1977 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 1976 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 1975 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 1974 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 1973 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 1972 | 0 | – | 5 | #9,029 |
| 1971 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 1970 | 0 | – | 6 | #7,582 |
| 1969 | 0 | – | 8 | #5,750 |
| 1968 | 0 | – | 11 | #4,368 |
| 1967 | 0 | – | 5 | #7,379 |
| 1966 | 0 | – | 7 | #5,568 |
| 1965 | 0 | – | 11 | #4,087 |
| 1964 | 0 | – | 13 | #3,807 |
| 1963 | 0 | – | 18 | #3,026 |
| 1962 | 0 | – | 12 | #3,919 |
| 1961 | 0 | – | 15 | #3,410 |
| 1960 | 0 | – | 13 | #3,601 |
| 1959 | 0 | – | 9 | #4,489 |
| 1958 | 0 | – | 14 | #3,312 |
| 1957 | 0 | – | 11 | #3,827 |
| 1956 | 0 | – | 17 | #2,886 |
| 1955 | 0 | – | 18 | #2,682 |
| 1954 | 0 | – | 21 | #2,411 |
| 1953 | 0 | – | 23 | #2,215 |
| 1952 | 0 | – | 20 | #2,374 |
| 1951 | 0 | – | 24 | #2,040 |
| 1950 | 0 | – | 27 | #1,858 |
| 1949 | 0 | – | 29 | #1,787 |
| 1948 | 0 | – | 32 | #1,658 |
| 1947 | 0 | – | 35 | #1,620 |
| 1946 | 0 | – | 27 | #1,751 |
| 1945 | 0 | – | 31 | #1,467 |
| 1944 | 0 | – | 30 | #1,507 |
| 1943 | 0 | – | 34 | #1,436 |
| 1942 | 0 | – | 35 | #1,376 |
| 1941 | 0 | – | 24 | #1,634 |
| 1940 | 0 | – | 34 | #1,283 |
| 1939 | 0 | – | 32 | #1,319 |
| 1938 | 0 | – | 39 | #1,174 |
| 1937 | 0 | – | 20 | #1,758 |
| 1936 | 0 | – | 28 | #1,403 |
| 1935 | 5 | #3,950 | 30 | #1,340 |
| 1934 | 0 | – | 28 | #1,392 |
| 1933 | 0 | – | 36 | #1,189 |
| 1932 | 0 | – | 22 | #1,660 |
| 1931 | 0 | – | 45 | #1,049 |
| 1930 | 0 | – | 37 | #1,241 |
| 1929 | 0 | – | 41 | #1,168 |
| 1928 | 0 | – | 56 | #1,003 |
| 1927 | 0 | – | 44 | #1,168 |
| 1926 | 0 | – | 46 | #1,123 |
| 1925 | 0 | – | 37 | #1,312 |
| 1924 | 0 | – | 65 | #947 |
| 1923 | 0 | – | 60 | #960 |
| 1922 | 0 | – | 53 | #1,039 |
| 1921 | 0 | – | 74 | #859 |
| 1920 | 0 | – | 56 | #983 |
| 1919 | 0 | – | 47 | #1,068 |
| 1918 | 0 | – | 60 | #924 |
| 1917 | 0 | – | 62 | #885 |
| 1916 | 0 | – | 39 | #1,137 |
| 1915 | 0 | – | 56 | #881 |
| 1914 | 0 | – | 43 | #893 |
| 1913 | 0 | – | 45 | #787 |
| 1912 | 0 | – | 39 | #801 |
| 1911 | 0 | – | 24 | #892 |
| 1910 | 0 | – | 16 | #1,148 |
| 1909 | 0 | – | 23 | #860 |
| 1908 | 0 | – | 21 | #871 |
| 1907 | 0 | – | 20 | #859 |
| 1906 | 0 | – | 24 | #754 |
| 1905 | 0 | – | 25 | #722 |
| 1904 | 0 | – | 18 | #867 |
| 1903 | 0 | – | 20 | #776 |
| 1902 | 0 | – | 20 | #784 |
| 1901 | 0 | – | 24 | #655 |
| 1900 | 0 | – | 25 | #739 |
| 1899 | 0 | – | 15 | #861 |
| 1898 | 0 | – | 18 | #804 |
| 1897 | 0 | – | 13 | #917 |
| 1896 | 0 | – | 17 | #803 |
| 1895 | 0 | – | 11 | #1,027 |
| 1894 | 0 | – | 14 | #829 |
| 1893 | 0 | – | 12 | #883 |
| 1892 | 0 | – | 9 | #1,054 |
| 1891 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 1890 | 0 | – | 5 | #1,435 |
| 1889 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 1888 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 1887 | 0 | – | 7 | #995 |
| 1886 | 0 | – | 6 | #1,050 |
| 1885 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 1884 | 0 | – | 6 | #982 |
| 1883 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 1882 | 0 | – | 10 | #620 |
| 1881 | 0 | – | 5 | #900 |
| 1880 | 0 | – | 7 | #714 |
Highest rank
As a boy name, Loma reached #3,950 in 1935. As a girl name, it reached #620 in 1882. 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.
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.