Is Marvis a boy or girl name?
Marvis was used for both boys and girls in close to equal numbers in the US. Across 1880–2024, 55.3% of the 2,468 US babies named Marvis were girls. Fewer than 10 babies were given the name in 2024.
- Boy rank, 2024
- Not ranked
- Girl rank, 2024
- Not ranked
- Babies named Marvis since 1914
- 2,468
- Most popular year
- 1924
- 58 babies
Boys and girls named Marvis, by decade
| Decade | Boys | Girls | Share girls |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1910s | 27 | 97 | 78.2% |
| 1920s | 114 | 304 | 72.7% |
| 1930s | 102 | 275 | 72.9% |
| 1940s | 98 | 243 | 71.3% |
| 1950s | 110 | 258 | 70.1% |
| 1960s | 118 | 143 | 54.8% |
| 1970s | 151 | 46 | 23.4% |
| 1980s | 208 | 0 | 0% |
| 1990s | 66 | 0 | 0% |
| 2000s | 64 | 0 | 0% |
| 2010s | 44 | 0 | 0% |
| 2020s | 0 | 0 | – |
Every year
| Year | Boys | Boy rank | Girls | Girl rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 2023 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 2022 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 2021 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 2020 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 2019 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 2018 | 7 | #10,357 | 0 | – |
| 2017 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 2016 | 7 | #10,352 | 0 | – |
| 2015 | 6 | #11,607 | 0 | – |
| 2014 | 6 | #11,639 | 0 | – |
| 2013 | 5 | #13,362 | 0 | – |
| 2012 | 5 | #13,508 | 0 | – |
| 2011 | 8 | #9,317 | 0 | – |
| 2010 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 2009 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 2008 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 2007 | 10 | #7,973 | 0 | – |
| 2006 | 7 | #10,262 | 0 | – |
| 2005 | 10 | #7,474 | 0 | – |
| 2004 | 9 | #7,953 | 0 | – |
| 2003 | 8 | #8,343 | 0 | – |
| 2002 | 6 | #10,210 | 0 | – |
| 2001 | 5 | #11,698 | 0 | – |
| 2000 | 9 | #7,201 | 0 | – |
| 1999 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 1998 | 5 | #10,705 | 0 | – |
| 1997 | 7 | #7,824 | 0 | – |
| 1996 | 6 | #8,614 | 0 | – |
| 1995 | 8 | #6,769 | 0 | – |
| 1994 | 8 | #6,769 | 0 | – |
| 1993 | 6 | #8,311 | 0 | – |
| 1992 | 7 | #7,145 | 0 | – |
| 1991 | 13 | #4,391 | 0 | – |
| 1990 | 6 | #7,757 | 0 | – |
| 1989 | 15 | #3,751 | 0 | – |
| 1988 | 8 | #5,539 | 0 | – |
| 1987 | 14 | #3,451 | 0 | – |
| 1986 | 21 | #2,577 | 0 | – |
| 1985 | 23 | #2,336 | 0 | – |
| 1984 | 26 | #2,078 | 0 | – |
| 1983 | 37 | #1,619 | 0 | – |
| 1982 | 15 | #3,054 | 0 | – |
| 1981 | 22 | #2,307 | 0 | – |
| 1980 | 27 | #2,034 | 0 | – |
| 1979 | 22 | #2,288 | 0 | – |
| 1978 | 18 | #2,533 | 5 | #10,766 |
| 1977 | 12 | #3,310 | 0 | – |
| 1976 | 14 | #2,910 | 8 | #7,020 |
| 1975 | 10 | #3,583 | 0 | – |
| 1974 | 14 | #2,755 | 5 | #9,659 |
| 1973 | 16 | #2,467 | 7 | #7,122 |
| 1972 | 8 | #3,835 | 12 | #4,688 |
| 1971 | 22 | #1,965 | 9 | #5,837 |
| 1970 | 15 | #2,469 | 0 | – |
| 1969 | 19 | #1,956 | 6 | #7,145 |
| 1968 | 7 | #3,566 | 7 | #6,018 |
| 1967 | 9 | #2,909 | 10 | #4,505 |
| 1966 | 12 | #2,410 | 10 | #4,378 |
| 1965 | 14 | #2,231 | 15 | #3,363 |
| 1964 | 9 | #2,983 | 21 | #2,794 |
| 1963 | 13 | #2,373 | 13 | #3,743 |
| 1962 | 11 | #2,614 | 15 | #3,380 |
| 1961 | 15 | #2,203 | 22 | #2,652 |
| 1960 | 9 | #3,004 | 24 | #2,483 |
| 1959 | 11 | #2,619 | 18 | #2,832 |
| 1958 | 9 | #2,958 | 21 | #2,553 |
| 1957 | 11 | #2,593 | 17 | #2,891 |
| 1956 | 10 | #2,732 | 23 | #2,356 |
| 1955 | 12 | #2,390 | 28 | #2,049 |
| 1954 | 14 | #2,177 | 31 | #1,899 |
| 1953 | 10 | #2,653 | 30 | #1,852 |
| 1952 | 12 | #2,337 | 31 | #1,810 |
| 1951 | 7 | #3,252 | 26 | #1,948 |
| 1950 | 14 | #2,081 | 33 | #1,643 |
| 1949 | 10 | #2,554 | 21 | #2,190 |
| 1948 | 9 | #2,723 | 21 | #2,164 |
| 1947 | 10 | #2,608 | 32 | #1,710 |
| 1946 | 9 | #2,637 | 24 | #1,900 |
| 1945 | 7 | #2,906 | 25 | #1,687 |
| 1944 | 12 | #2,152 | 27 | #1,593 |
| 1943 | 8 | #2,877 | 33 | #1,458 |
| 1942 | 10 | #2,476 | 20 | #1,955 |
| 1941 | 11 | #2,286 | 18 | #1,999 |
| 1940 | 12 | #2,150 | 22 | #1,726 |
| 1939 | 11 | #2,249 | 34 | #1,286 |
| 1938 | 13 | #2,062 | 27 | #1,463 |
| 1937 | 12 | #2,161 | 28 | #1,406 |
| 1936 | 14 | #1,936 | 29 | #1,365 |
| 1935 | 8 | #2,862 | 25 | #1,500 |
| 1934 | 8 | #2,874 | 31 | #1,307 |
| 1933 | 12 | #2,177 | 20 | #1,754 |
| 1932 | 8 | #3,012 | 18 | #1,927 |
| 1931 | 7 | #3,294 | 23 | #1,623 |
| 1930 | 9 | #2,929 | 40 | #1,190 |
| 1929 | 11 | #2,543 | 19 | #1,931 |
| 1928 | 7 | #3,588 | 33 | #1,358 |
| 1927 | 17 | #2,006 | 25 | #1,710 |
| 1926 | 12 | #2,509 | 35 | #1,349 |
| 1925 | 17 | #1,982 | 38 | #1,285 |
| 1924 | 15 | #2,185 | 43 | #1,216 |
| 1923 | 13 | #2,405 | 19 | #2,067 |
| 1922 | 7 | #3,745 | 29 | #1,561 |
| 1921 | 5 | #4,744 | 29 | #1,564 |
| 1920 | 10 | #2,894 | 34 | #1,366 |
| 1919 | 7 | #3,624 | 25 | #1,634 |
| 1918 | 0 | – | 12 | #2,774 |
| 1917 | 8 | #3,109 | 15 | #2,279 |
| 1916 | 7 | #3,386 | 12 | #2,603 |
| 1915 | 5 | #4,180 | 20 | #1,717 |
| 1914 | 0 | – | 13 | #1,977 |
Highest rank
As a boy name, Marvis reached #1,619 in 1983. As a girl name, it reached #1,190 in 1930. 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 Marvis
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.