Is Ruthann a boy or girl name?
Ruthann is a girl name in the US. In 2024, 30 girls and 0 boys were named Ruthann, so 100% were girls. Across 1880–2024, 100% of the 7,071 US babies named Ruthann were girls.
- Boy rank, 2024
- Not ranked
- Girl rank, 2024
- #4,624
- Babies named Ruthann since 1906
- 7,071
- Most popular year
- 1943
- 258 babies
Boys and girls named Ruthann, by decade
| Decade | Boys | Girls | Share girls |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1900s | 0 | 5 | 100% |
| 1910s | 0 | 59 | 100% |
| 1920s | 0 | 269 | 100% |
| 1930s | 0 | 792 | 100% |
| 1940s | 0 | 2,190 | 100% |
| 1950s | 0 | 1,055 | 100% |
| 1960s | 0 | 996 | 100% |
| 1970s | 0 | 413 | 100% |
| 1980s | 0 | 362 | 100% |
| 1990s | 0 | 243 | 100% |
| 2000s | 0 | 283 | 100% |
| 2010s | 0 | 276 | 100% |
| 2020s | 0 | 128 | 100% |
Every year
| Year | Boys | Boy rank | Girls | Girl rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | 0 | – | 30 | #4,624 |
| 2023 | 0 | – | 28 | #4,845 |
| 2022 | 0 | – | 23 | #5,597 |
| 2021 | 0 | – | 25 | #5,210 |
| 2020 | 0 | – | 22 | #5,626 |
| 2019 | 0 | – | 17 | #6,960 |
| 2018 | 0 | – | 26 | #5,118 |
| 2017 | 0 | – | 39 | #3,907 |
| 2016 | 0 | – | 30 | #4,713 |
| 2015 | 0 | – | 24 | #5,630 |
| 2014 | 0 | – | 28 | #5,005 |
| 2013 | 0 | – | 31 | #4,624 |
| 2012 | 0 | – | 27 | #5,226 |
| 2011 | 0 | – | 27 | #5,180 |
| 2010 | 0 | – | 27 | #5,216 |
| 2009 | 0 | – | 27 | #5,349 |
| 2008 | 0 | – | 37 | #4,254 |
| 2007 | 0 | – | 27 | #5,355 |
| 2006 | 0 | – | 27 | #5,201 |
| 2005 | 0 | – | 32 | #4,351 |
| 2004 | 0 | – | 28 | #4,797 |
| 2003 | 0 | – | 23 | #5,374 |
| 2002 | 0 | – | 20 | #5,852 |
| 2001 | 0 | – | 32 | #4,012 |
| 2000 | 0 | – | 30 | #4,161 |
| 1999 | 0 | – | 32 | #3,784 |
| 1998 | 0 | – | 28 | #4,116 |
| 1997 | 0 | – | 25 | #4,344 |
| 1996 | 0 | – | 20 | #5,021 |
| 1995 | 0 | – | 20 | #4,980 |
| 1994 | 0 | – | 18 | #5,407 |
| 1993 | 0 | – | 22 | #4,637 |
| 1992 | 0 | – | 27 | #3,942 |
| 1991 | 0 | – | 27 | #3,914 |
| 1990 | 0 | – | 24 | #4,200 |
| 1989 | 0 | – | 25 | #3,988 |
| 1988 | 0 | – | 32 | #3,143 |
| 1987 | 0 | – | 40 | #2,560 |
| 1986 | 0 | – | 30 | #3,112 |
| 1985 | 0 | – | 32 | #2,920 |
| 1984 | 0 | – | 41 | #2,369 |
| 1983 | 0 | – | 41 | #2,347 |
| 1982 | 0 | – | 39 | #2,482 |
| 1981 | 0 | – | 45 | #2,254 |
| 1980 | 0 | – | 37 | #2,584 |
| 1979 | 0 | – | 37 | #2,513 |
| 1978 | 0 | – | 34 | #2,553 |
| 1977 | 0 | – | 46 | #2,086 |
| 1976 | 0 | – | 30 | #2,648 |
| 1975 | 0 | – | 44 | #2,015 |
| 1974 | 0 | – | 40 | #2,093 |
| 1973 | 0 | – | 39 | #2,085 |
| 1972 | 0 | – | 49 | #1,780 |
| 1971 | 0 | – | 38 | #2,161 |
| 1970 | 0 | – | 56 | #1,678 |
| 1969 | 0 | – | 71 | #1,368 |
| 1968 | 0 | – | 69 | #1,343 |
| 1967 | 0 | – | 83 | #1,169 |
| 1966 | 0 | – | 99 | #1,055 |
| 1965 | 0 | – | 67 | #1,346 |
| 1964 | 0 | – | 99 | #1,102 |
| 1963 | 0 | – | 113 | #1,007 |
| 1962 | 0 | – | 117 | #996 |
| 1961 | 0 | – | 151 | #868 |
| 1960 | 0 | – | 127 | #949 |
| 1959 | 0 | – | 121 | #960 |
| 1958 | 0 | – | 110 | #992 |
| 1957 | 0 | – | 108 | #1,009 |
| 1956 | 0 | – | 77 | #1,191 |
| 1955 | 0 | – | 92 | #1,053 |
| 1954 | 0 | – | 90 | #1,038 |
| 1953 | 0 | – | 77 | #1,109 |
| 1952 | 0 | – | 98 | #945 |
| 1951 | 0 | – | 132 | #773 |
| 1950 | 0 | – | 150 | #702 |
| 1949 | 0 | – | 164 | #649 |
| 1948 | 0 | – | 200 | #589 |
| 1947 | 0 | – | 206 | #595 |
| 1946 | 0 | – | 244 | #499 |
| 1945 | 0 | – | 221 | #490 |
| 1944 | 0 | – | 230 | #471 |
| 1943 | 0 | – | 258 | #460 |
| 1942 | 0 | – | 247 | #470 |
| 1941 | 0 | – | 224 | #467 |
| 1940 | 0 | – | 196 | #494 |
| 1939 | 0 | – | 194 | #482 |
| 1938 | 0 | – | 169 | #518 |
| 1937 | 0 | – | 145 | #564 |
| 1936 | 0 | – | 65 | #845 |
| 1935 | 0 | – | 43 | #1,068 |
| 1934 | 0 | – | 40 | #1,130 |
| 1933 | 0 | – | 33 | #1,260 |
| 1932 | 0 | – | 32 | #1,314 |
| 1931 | 0 | – | 37 | #1,195 |
| 1930 | 0 | – | 34 | #1,316 |
| 1929 | 0 | – | 33 | #1,332 |
| 1928 | 0 | – | 41 | #1,204 |
| 1927 | 0 | – | 29 | #1,555 |
| 1926 | 0 | – | 28 | #1,585 |
| 1925 | 0 | – | 32 | #1,463 |
| 1924 | 0 | – | 31 | #1,528 |
| 1923 | 0 | – | 24 | #1,773 |
| 1922 | 0 | – | 20 | #2,016 |
| 1921 | 0 | – | 17 | #2,270 |
| 1920 | 0 | – | 14 | #2,567 |
| 1919 | 0 | – | 7 | #4,191 |
| 1918 | 0 | – | 14 | #2,492 |
| 1917 | 0 | – | 10 | #3,048 |
| 1916 | 0 | – | 13 | #2,474 |
| 1915 | 0 | – | 5 | #4,852 |
| 1914 | 0 | – | 5 | #4,101 |
| 1913 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 1912 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 1911 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 1910 | 0 | – | 5 | #2,733 |
| 1909 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 1908 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 1907 | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| 1906 | 0 | – | 5 | #2,177 |
Highest rank
Ruthann has never been ranked as a boy name. As a girl name, it reached #460 in 1943. 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 1940s, with a similar number of babies. They can work as sibling or middle names that feel like they belong together.
Names spelled like Ruthann
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.