Is Ludwig a boy or girl name?
Ludwig is a boy name in the US. In 2024, 0 girls and 10 boys were named Ludwig, so 0% were girls. Across 1880–2024, 0% of the 2,684 US babies named Ludwig were girls.
- Boy rank, 2024
- #8,064
- Girl rank, 2024
- Not ranked
- Babies named Ludwig since 1880
- 2,684
- Most popular year
- 1916
- 88 babies
Boys and girls named Ludwig, by decade
| Decade | Boys | Girls | Share girls |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1880s | 67 | 0 | 0% |
| 1890s | 108 | 0 | 0% |
| 1900s | 105 | 0 | 0% |
| 1910s | 555 | 0 | 0% |
| 1920s | 524 | 0 | 0% |
| 1930s | 381 | 0 | 0% |
| 1940s | 198 | 0 | 0% |
| 1950s | 175 | 0 | 0% |
| 1960s | 134 | 0 | 0% |
| 1970s | 75 | 0 | 0% |
| 1980s | 82 | 0 | 0% |
| 1990s | 79 | 0 | 0% |
| 2000s | 71 | 0 | 0% |
| 2010s | 81 | 0 | 0% |
| 2020s | 49 | 0 | 0% |
Every year
| Year | Boys | Boy rank | Girls | Girl rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | 10 | #8,064 | 0 | – |
| 2023 | 9 | #8,653 | 0 | – |
| 2022 | 9 | #8,715 | 0 | – |
| 2021 | 13 | #6,543 | 0 | – |
| 2020 | 8 | #9,218 | 0 | – |
| 2019 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 2018 | 11 | #7,424 | 0 | – |
| 2017 | 6 | #11,627 | 0 | – |
| 2016 | 8 | #9,363 | 0 | – |
| 2015 | 13 | #6,559 | 0 | – |
| 2014 | 7 | #10,308 | 0 | – |
| 2013 | 12 | #6,867 | 0 | – |
| 2012 | 10 | #7,911 | 0 | – |
| 2011 | 9 | #8,513 | 0 | – |
| 2010 | 5 | #13,494 | 0 | – |
| 2009 | 10 | #8,072 | 0 | – |
| 2008 | 6 | #11,993 | 0 | – |
| 2007 | 7 | #10,457 | 0 | – |
| 2006 | 8 | #9,253 | 0 | – |
| 2005 | 10 | #7,455 | 0 | – |
| 2004 | 9 | #7,938 | 0 | – |
| 2003 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 2002 | 7 | #9,027 | 0 | – |
| 2001 | 5 | #11,644 | 0 | – |
| 2000 | 9 | #7,185 | 0 | – |
| 1999 | 7 | #8,382 | 0 | – |
| 1998 | 7 | #8,116 | 0 | – |
| 1997 | 6 | #8,840 | 0 | – |
| 1996 | 11 | #5,400 | 0 | – |
| 1995 | 6 | #8,459 | 0 | – |
| 1994 | 9 | #6,156 | 0 | – |
| 1993 | 8 | #6,601 | 0 | – |
| 1992 | 9 | #5,944 | 0 | – |
| 1991 | 10 | #5,342 | 0 | – |
| 1990 | 6 | #7,729 | 0 | – |
| 1989 | 8 | #5,994 | 0 | – |
| 1988 | 15 | #3,458 | 0 | – |
| 1987 | 6 | #6,626 | 0 | – |
| 1986 | 6 | #6,413 | 0 | – |
| 1985 | 5 | #7,165 | 0 | – |
| 1984 | 7 | #5,334 | 0 | – |
| 1983 | 12 | #3,545 | 0 | – |
| 1982 | 11 | #3,840 | 0 | – |
| 1981 | 6 | #5,957 | 0 | – |
| 1980 | 6 | #5,961 | 0 | – |
| 1979 | 8 | #4,674 | 0 | – |
| 1978 | 9 | #4,041 | 0 | – |
| 1977 | 9 | #4,038 | 0 | – |
| 1976 | 9 | #3,887 | 0 | – |
| 1975 | 6 | #5,192 | 0 | – |
| 1974 | 9 | #3,729 | 0 | – |
| 1973 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 1972 | 10 | #3,268 | 0 | – |
| 1971 | 7 | #4,212 | 0 | – |
| 1970 | 8 | #3,709 | 0 | – |
| 1969 | 8 | #3,477 | 0 | – |
| 1968 | 16 | #2,078 | 0 | – |
| 1967 | 10 | #2,709 | 0 | – |
| 1966 | 11 | #2,567 | 0 | – |
| 1965 | 17 | #1,968 | 0 | – |
| 1964 | 13 | #2,372 | 0 | – |
| 1963 | 23 | #1,681 | 0 | – |
| 1962 | 13 | #2,325 | 0 | – |
| 1961 | 15 | #2,196 | 0 | – |
| 1960 | 8 | #3,237 | 0 | – |
| 1959 | 15 | #2,167 | 0 | – |
| 1958 | 17 | #1,993 | 0 | – |
| 1957 | 21 | #1,775 | 0 | – |
| 1956 | 15 | #2,140 | 0 | – |
| 1955 | 19 | #1,826 | 0 | – |
| 1954 | 16 | #2,016 | 0 | – |
| 1953 | 24 | #1,570 | 0 | – |
| 1952 | 18 | #1,837 | 0 | – |
| 1951 | 17 | #1,881 | 0 | – |
| 1950 | 13 | #2,162 | 0 | – |
| 1949 | 19 | #1,737 | 0 | – |
| 1948 | 11 | #2,396 | 0 | – |
| 1947 | 27 | #1,438 | 0 | – |
| 1946 | 21 | #1,585 | 0 | – |
| 1945 | 20 | #1,518 | 0 | – |
| 1944 | 18 | #1,661 | 0 | – |
| 1943 | 18 | #1,745 | 0 | – |
| 1942 | 20 | #1,615 | 0 | – |
| 1941 | 19 | #1,621 | 0 | – |
| 1940 | 25 | #1,352 | 0 | – |
| 1939 | 28 | #1,259 | 0 | – |
| 1938 | 38 | #1,057 | 0 | – |
| 1937 | 38 | #1,047 | 0 | – |
| 1936 | 38 | #1,040 | 0 | – |
| 1935 | 37 | #1,071 | 0 | – |
| 1934 | 33 | #1,163 | 0 | – |
| 1933 | 44 | #957 | 0 | – |
| 1932 | 39 | #1,084 | 0 | – |
| 1931 | 49 | #932 | 0 | – |
| 1930 | 37 | #1,166 | 0 | – |
| 1929 | 46 | #1,002 | 0 | – |
| 1928 | 41 | #1,108 | 0 | – |
| 1927 | 60 | #878 | 0 | – |
| 1926 | 50 | #973 | 0 | – |
| 1925 | 39 | #1,137 | 0 | – |
| 1924 | 54 | #958 | 0 | – |
| 1923 | 53 | #946 | 0 | – |
| 1922 | 66 | #848 | 0 | – |
| 1921 | 54 | #957 | 0 | – |
| 1920 | 61 | #884 | 0 | – |
| 1919 | 67 | #795 | 0 | – |
| 1918 | 67 | #800 | 0 | – |
| 1917 | 78 | #685 | 0 | – |
| 1916 | 88 | #625 | 0 | – |
| 1915 | 75 | #674 | 0 | – |
| 1914 | 58 | #671 | 0 | – |
| 1913 | 49 | #640 | 0 | – |
| 1912 | 34 | #745 | 0 | – |
| 1911 | 23 | #659 | 0 | – |
| 1910 | 16 | #771 | 0 | – |
| 1909 | 9 | #1,056 | 0 | – |
| 1908 | 20 | #572 | 0 | – |
| 1907 | 6 | #1,283 | 0 | – |
| 1906 | 9 | #892 | 0 | – |
| 1905 | 15 | #627 | 0 | – |
| 1904 | 5 | #1,326 | 0 | – |
| 1903 | 13 | #641 | 0 | – |
| 1902 | 13 | #638 | 0 | – |
| 1901 | 5 | #1,152 | 0 | – |
| 1900 | 10 | #882 | 0 | – |
| 1899 | 10 | #689 | 0 | – |
| 1898 | 5 | #1,238 | 0 | – |
| 1897 | 16 | #508 | 0 | – |
| 1896 | 12 | #659 | 0 | – |
| 1895 | 15 | #545 | 0 | – |
| 1894 | 6 | #1,031 | 0 | – |
| 1893 | 15 | #493 | 0 | – |
| 1892 | 12 | #624 | 0 | – |
| 1891 | 7 | #813 | 0 | – |
| 1890 | 10 | #651 | 0 | – |
| 1889 | 7 | #854 | 0 | – |
| 1888 | 6 | #1,003 | 0 | – |
| 1887 | 5 | #1,005 | 0 | – |
| 1886 | 11 | #590 | 0 | – |
| 1885 | 8 | #740 | 0 | – |
| 1884 | 9 | #684 | 0 | – |
| 1883 | 6 | #851 | 0 | – |
| 1882 | 6 | #908 | 0 | – |
| 1881 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 1880 | 9 | #666 | 0 | – |
Highest rank
As a boy name, Ludwig reached #493 in 1893. It has never been ranked as a girl name. 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 1910s, 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.