Andres
#200 in the US in 2025
Andres in the United States
Between 2016 and 2025 the name has been steady.
SOURCE·US Social Security Administration, national baby-name data·Public domain. SSA lists a name only if it was given to at least 5 babies of that sex that year.·REVIEWED JUL 2026
Andres in New Zealand
Andres never reached 10 births in a single year in New Zealand, so it does not appear in the DIA file. That is a reporting floor, not a zero — the name may still have been registered here, just never ten times in one year.
SOURCE·NZ Department of Internal Affairs, births by first name·CC BY 4.0. DIA lists a name only if it was given to at least 10 babies of that sex that year.·REVIEWED JUL 2026
Decade by decade in the US
| Year | Rank | Births |
|---|---|---|
| 1880 | #482 | 14 |
| 1890 | #739 | 8 |
| 1900 | #1,310 | 5 |
| 1910 | #634 | 21 |
| 1920 | #630 | 99 |
| 1930 | #537 | 123 |
| 1940 | #670 | 82 |
| 1950 | #549 | 151 |
| 1960 | #543 | 214 |
| 1970 | #436 | 349 |
| 1980 | #284 | 737 |
| 1990 | #201 | 1,503 |
| 2000 | #164 | 2,355 |
| 2010 | #181 | 2,089 |
| 2020 | #219 | 1,706 |
Where in the United States
The states that registered Andres most often since 1880. These are lifetime totals, so they track state population as much as local taste — a name common in Wyoming will never out-count California.
| State | Births |
|---|---|
| California | 29,490 |
| Texas | 21,739 |
| Florida | 6,787 |
| New York | 4,965 |
| Illinois | 4,330 |
| Arizona | 4,206 |
| New Mexico | 2,296 |
| New Jersey | 1,974 |
| Washington | 1,441 |
| Colorado | 1,429 |
How these figures are worked out
- Counts come straight from the registrars: the US Social Security Administration (1880–2025) and the New Zealand Department of Internal Affairs (1900–2025). Nothing is scraped from another names site.
- Ranks are computed against every name in that year's file, not just the ones this site publishes pages for — otherwise a rank would flatter every name we happen to list.
- The curve is drawn on births per 100,000 of that sex, not raw counts. Raw counts across eras are misleading: far more births were registered in 1957 than in 1890, so a flat count is a falling share.
- Each country hides small numbers — the US below 5 births a year, New Zealand below 10. A gap in a line is "below the floor", never "nobody".
SOURCE·US SSA (1880–2025) + NZ DIA (1900–2025) birth registrations·ranks and shares computed from the source files, see method·REVIEWED JUL 2026