Thirty years of Lila
Lila in numbers
Lila is still climbing: from 15 girls in 1996 to 277 in 2025, its highest count so far. Its biggest three-year rise came between 2002 and 2005, from 11 to 113. On average it was given to 10 girls a year in the late 1990s, 89 in the 2000s, 173 in the 2010s and 208 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+36%204 to 277
- 5 years+51%184 to 277
- 10 years+29%214 to 277
- 20 years+145%113 to 277
- Since 1996×1815 to 277
- Total, 1996 to 20253,908girls
† 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 179 · ONS · 204 in 2024
Rank 217 · NRS · 15 in 2024
Rank 132 · 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 | 179 | 277 | +36% | 1 in 1,028 |
| 2024 | 237 | 204 | +15% | 1 in 1,420 |
| 2023 | 257 | 178 | -9% | 1 in 1,618 |
| 2022 | 242 | 196 | -7% | 1 in 1,504 |
| 2021 | 237 | 211 | +15% | 1 in 1,444 |
| 2020 | =256 | 184 | +28% | 1 in 1,628 |
| 2019 | =325 | 144 | -11% | 1 in 2,162 |
| 2018 | =292 | 162 | +8% | 1 in 1,972 |
| 2017 | =320 | 150 | -14% | 1 in 2,207 |
| 2016 | =287 | 175 | -18% | 1 in 1,938 |
| 2015 | 234 | 214 | +10% | 1 in 1,587 |
| 2014 | =252 | 194 | +20% | 1 in 1,745 |
| 2013 * | =290 | 161 | -14% | 1 in 2,121 |
| 2012 | =265 | 188 | +20% | 1 in 1,890 |
| 2011 | =312 | 157 | -15% | 1 in 2,248 |
| 2010 | 267 | 185 | +10% | 1 in 1,904 |
| 2009 | =283 | 168 | +1% | 1 in 2,048 |
| 2008 | 287 | 166 | +31% | 1 in 2,083 |
| 2007 | =343 | 127 | -4% | 1 in 2,642 |
| 2006 | =328 | 132 | +17% | 1 in 2,479 |
| 2005 | =354 | 113 | +47% | 1 in 2,790 |
| 2004 | =453 | 77 | +18% | 1 in 4,044 |
| 2003 | =494 | 65 | +491% | 1 in 4,662 |
| 2002 | =1,658 | 11 | -35% | 1 in 26,368 |
| 2001 | =1,170 | 17 | +42% | 1 in 17,058 |
| 2000 | =1,475 | 12 | +9% | 1 in 24,567 |
| 1999 | =1,557 | 11 | +22% | 1 in 27,510 |
| 1998 | =1,823 | 9 | +80% | n/a |
| 1997 | =2,738 | 5 | -67% | 1 in 62,703 |
| 1996 | =1,222 | 15 | 1 in 21,066 |
* 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 Lila
Draws the second name on the chart above, on a shared scale.
Share and download
Lila 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