Names / Rare names

Rare baby names

In 2025, 1,692 different girls’ names and 1,448 different boys’ names were given to exactly 3 babies in England and Wales. That is the smallest number ONS publishes: names given to 1 or 2 babies are not listed at all. Up to 11% of girls and 9% of boys born in 2025 had a name too rare to appear. (ONS, Baby names for girls in England and Wales; ONS, Baby names for boys in England and Wales)

The three-baby club, 2025

Names given to exactly 3 babies

258 girls’ names starting with A were given to exactly 3 babies in 2025.

Source: ONS, Baby names for girls in England and Wales; ONS, Baby names for boys in England and Wales.

Always rare

Exactly 3 babies in the most years, 1996 to 2025

Girls

  1. Sionaexactly 3 in 14 yearsnot in 2025
  2. Margedexactly 3 in 13 years3
  3. Kimiaexactly 3 in 12 years3
  4. Temilolaexactly 3 in 12 years3
  5. Wanexactly 3 in 12 years3

Boys

  1. Alperexactly 3 in 15 years5
  2. Rhianexactly 3 in 13 yearsnot in 2025
  3. Thibaultexactly 3 in 13 yearsnot in 2025
  4. Abdulkarimexactly 3 in 12 years4
  5. Kalilexactly 3 in 12 years3
  6. Rhunexactly 3 in 12 yearsnot in 2025

Names that sat at the publication floor, exactly 3 babies, in more years than any other. In the other years they had fewer than 3 (possibly none) or a few more†. Another 12 girls’ names and 19 boys’ names sat at exactly 3 in 11 years.

Source: ONS, Baby names for girls in England and Wales; ONS, Baby names for boys in England and Wales.

From rare to popular

First appeared with just 3 babies, now in the hundreds

Girls

  1. Hallie3 babies in 19991,246
  2. Nova3 babies in 2000650
  3. Lyra3 babies in 1999643
  4. Dua3 babies in 1999411
  5. Wren3 babies in 1999362
  6. Etta3 babies in 1999338
  7. Ayat3 babies in 1999317
  8. Aubrey3 babies in 2007267

Boys

  1. Arlo3 babies in 19992,083
  2. Bodhi3 babies in 2000470
  3. Eesa3 babies in 1997330
  4. Parker3 babies in 2004293
  5. Romeo3 babies in 1998260
  6. Koa3 babies in 2004259
  7. Cruz3 babies in 2004258
  8. Zayan3 babies in 1998240

Names whose first year in the published list was at exactly 3 babies, and how many had them in 2025. Before that year each was given to fewer than 3 babies a year, possibly none, which ONS does not publish. Names already in the list in 1996, the first year of the data, are left out because we cannot see when they started.

Source: ONS, Baby names for girls in England and Wales; ONS, Baby names for boys in England and Wales.

Names too rare to list

Share of babies whose name is not in the published list

In 1996, up to 6.3% of girls and 4.5% of boys had a name given to fewer than 3 babies. By 2025 it was up to 11.0% of girls and 9.0% of boys†, or up to 58,457 babies in a single year. “Up to”, because ONS’s birth totals also include babies whose name was not stated, and they are counted here too.

Source: ONS, Baby names for girls in England and Wales; ONS, Baby names for boys in England and Wales; ONS, Baby names quality and methodology.

Year by year Show the tableHide the table
Rare names year by year
YearGirls’ names at 3Boys’ names at 3Girls not listed†Boys not listed†
20251,6921,44811.0%9.0%
20241,7571,53211.0%8.9%
20231,7271,41010.9%8.7%
20221,6481,44010.6%8.4%
20211,7501,41410.1%7.8%
20201,6641,37110.4%8.1%
20191,6241,39010.0%7.7%
20181,6911,3699.8%7.4%
20171,7511,3539.7%7.2%
20161,7301,4389.5%6.8%
20151,7401,3339.4%6.9%
20141,7471,4049.4%6.9%
20131,7971,3709.7%6.9%
20121,8541,3909.4%6.9%
20111,7911,4379.0%6.8%
20101,6821,3568.8%6.6%
20091,6761,3708.9%6.6%
20081,7061,3668.7%6.5%
20071,6701,2998.8%6.5%
20061,5091,1858.5%6.4%
20051,4221,1558.6%6.4%
20041,4471,1108.2%6.0%
20031,3701,0628.0%5.9%
20021,2849557.8%5.8%
20011,2399167.6%5.5%
20001,2438967.3%5.3%
19991,1588876.9%5.0%
19981,156898n/a4.7%
19971,1459066.5%4.6%
19961,1638526.3%4.5%

“Not listed” is all live births of that sex (ONS) minus the babies counted in the published names list. It is an upper limit: ONS’s totals include births where no name was stated. The girls’ figure for 1998 is not shown because one monthly total is missing from the ONS file.

Names given to boys and girls

2,149 names were in both lists in the same year at least once

Most evenly shared, 2025

  1. Remi282 girls, 274 boys51% girls
  2. Quinn175 girls, 159 boys52% girls
  3. Murphy52 girls, 65 boys44% girls
  4. Shiloh53 girls, 67 boys44% girls
  5. Nana44 girls, 60 boys42% girls
  6. Harlow133 girls, 96 boys58% girls
  7. River287 girls, 481 boys37% girls
  8. Avery178 girls, 106 boys63% girls

Biggest shifts

  1. Ashley13% girls then40% now
  2. Jean46% girls then69% now
  3. Dakota65% girls then86% now
  4. Noor77% girls then94% now
  5. Nikita97% girls then35% now
  6. Casey75% girls then12% now
  7. Rio54% girls then6% now
  8. Brogan80% girls then34% now

In 2025, 735 names were given to at least 3 girls and at least 3 boys. “Most evenly shared”: names given to 100 or more babies in 2025, closest to half and half. “Biggest shifts”: the share of babies with the name who were girls in 1996 to 2000, against 2021 to 2025, for names published for both sexes in all ten of those years and given to 100 or more babies in the later five†. These are counts of babies, not a judgement about whose name it is.

Source: ONS, Baby names for girls in England and Wales; ONS, Baby names for boys in England and Wales.

Source: Office for National Statistics, Baby names in England and Wales, 1996 to 2025, and live births by sex. Licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0. ONS does not release names given to fewer than 3 babies in England and Wales as a whole, so “not published” means fewer than 3 babies, possibly none. We never show it as a count of zero. Exact spellings are counted separately. Scotland and Northern Ireland publish their own lists with their own rules and are not included here. † Baby Data calculation. How we calculate

OM

Oliver Mackman

Editor, BabyData

Oliver Mackman is the named editor of BabyData and a director of Best Business Loans Ltd (Companies House 16833937), the company that operates the site. He is accountable for its editorial standards, sourcing and corrections, and requires every number to cite the underlying rule and the official UK dataset behind it, with pregnancy tools written using NHS and gov.uk guidance.

Last updated: