Thirty years of Amaya
Amaya in numbers
Amaya has risen from 6 girls in 1997 (its first published year) to 398 in 2025, though it is below its peak of 473 in 2020. Its biggest three-year rise came between 2014 and 2017, from 233 to 393. On average it was given to 44 girls a year in the 2000s, 300 in the 2010s and 426 in the 2020s so far.
† Shapes, averages and turning points are Baby Data calculations from the ONS counts.
Milestones
First year in each bandChange
- On last year-11%446 to 398
- 5 years-16%473 to 398
- 10 years+20%332 to 398
- 20 years+1,106%33 to 398
- Since 1997 (first published)×666 to 398
- Total, 1996 to 20256,011girls
† All changes and totals are Baby Data calculations from ONS counts. A total adds only the published years.
Across the three nations, 2025
Each from its own statistics office, never added togetherRank 122 · ONS · 446 in 2024
Rank 242 · NRS · 11 in 2024
Fewer than 3 babies, or not published · NISRA
England and Wales (ONS) count births in the calendar year; Scotland (NRS) and Northern Ireland (NISRA) count births registered in the year. Each comes from its own statistics office and they are never added together.
Year by year, 1996 to 2025 Show all 30 yearsHide the table
| Year | Rank | Babies | Change† | 1 in X† |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | =122 | 398 | -11% | 1 in 715 |
| 2024 | =104 | 446 | +5% | 1 in 650 |
| 2023 | 115 | 423 | +7% | 1 in 681 |
| 2022 | 127 | 395 | -7% | 1 in 747 |
| 2021 | =119 | 423 | -11% | 1 in 720 |
| 2020 | =107 | 473 | +3% | 1 in 633 |
| 2019 | 113 | 458 | +5% | 1 in 680 |
| 2018 | 123 | 435 | +11% | 1 in 734 |
| 2017 | 137 | 393 | +13% | 1 in 842 |
| 2016 | =159 | 349 | +5% | 1 in 972 |
| 2015 | 165 | 332 | +42% | 1 in 1,023 |
| 2014 | 220 | 233 | -9% | 1 in 1,453 |
| 2013 * | =198 | 256 | +22% | 1 in 1,334 |
| 2012 | =238 | 210 | +10% | 1 in 1,692 |
| 2011 | =255 | 191 | +36% | 1 in 1,848 |
| 2010 | =334 | 140 | +26% | 1 in 2,516 |
| 2009 | =379 | 111 | +28% | 1 in 3,100 |
| 2008 | =464 | 87 | +28% | 1 in 3,974 |
| 2007 | =544 | 68 | +36% | 1 in 4,934 |
| 2006 | =639 | 50 | +52% | 1 in 6,543 |
| 2005 | =851 | 33 | +22% | 1 in 9,552 |
| 2004 | =948 | 27 | +29% | 1 in 11,532 |
| 2003 | =1,083 | 21 | +24% | 1 in 14,430 |
| 2002 | =1,192 | 17 | +13% | 1 in 17,062 |
| 2001 | =1,305 | 15 | +25% | 1 in 19,332 |
| 2000 | =1,475 | 12 | +200% | 1 in 24,567 |
| 1999 | =3,225 | 4 | -20% | 1 in 75,652 |
| 1998 | =2,701 | 5 | -17% | n/a |
| 1997 | =2,411 | 6 | 1 in 52,252 | |
| 1996 | n/a | under 3 |
* ONS’s girls’ 2013 file repeats the May total as April, so the 2013 births total is about 1,360 too high and 1 in X for 2013 is slightly too high. 1 in X is not shown for girls in 1998: one monthly total is missing from the ONS girls’ 1998 file. Rank follows ONS: names with the same count share a rank (shown with =). “Under 3” means the name was given to fewer than 3 babies that year, so ONS did not publish it.
Compare Amaya
Draws the second name on the chart above, on a shared scale.
Share and download
Amaya is in the free dataset (CSV and JSON), with the method and how to cite it.
Source: Office for National Statistics, Baby names in England and Wales, licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0; National Records of Scotland; NISRA. Exact spellings are counted separately and names given to fewer than 3 babies are not published. Figures marked † are Baby Data calculations. How we calculate