Earnest
#4,139 in the US in 2025
Earnest 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
Earnest in New Zealand
Earnest 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 | #154 | 88 |
| 1890 | #120 | 122 |
| 1900 | #104 | 223 |
| 1910 | #128 | 255 |
| 1920 | #140 | 1,092 |
| 1930 | #153 | 991 |
| 1940 | #184 | 797 |
| 1950 | #213 | 888 |
| 1960 | #320 | 592 |
| 1970 | #417 | 383 |
| 1980 | #539 | 251 |
| 1990 | #849 | 145 |
| 2000 | #1,681 | 68 |
| 2010 | #3,072 | 37 |
| 2020 | #3,734 | 28 |
Where in the United States
The states that registered Earnest 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 |
|---|---|
| Texas | 5,300 |
| Alabama | 4,829 |
| Georgia | 4,827 |
| Mississippi | 4,723 |
| North Carolina | 2,968 |
| Louisiana | 2,861 |
| Virginia | 2,759 |
| Tennessee | 2,672 |
| Arkansas | 2,651 |
| South Carolina | 2,409 |
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