Malinda
#2,859 in the US in 2025
Malinda 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
Malinda in New Zealand
Malinda 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 | #261 | 35 |
| 1890 | #322 | 62 |
| 1900 | #372 | 81 |
| 1910 | #604 | 48 |
| 1920 | #671 | 117 |
| 1930 | #1,084 | 46 |
| 1940 | #686 | 102 |
| 1950 | #555 | 224 |
| 1960 | #547 | 316 |
| 1970 | #463 | 453 |
| 1980 | #533 | 355 |
| 1990 | #987 | 187 |
| 2000 | #1,588 | 111 |
| 2010 | #2,589 | 70 |
| 2020 | #2,748 | 60 |
Where in the United States
The states that registered Malinda 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 |
|---|---|
| Pennsylvania | 1,778 |
| Ohio | 1,360 |
| California | 1,158 |
| Texas | 925 |
| Indiana | 764 |
| Illinois | 647 |
| North Carolina | 620 |
| Alabama | 599 |
| Georgia | 598 |
| Michigan | 536 |
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