Fun Facts About the Name Amanda
- A favorite of earlier generations: Amanda appeared in the U.S. top 100 in 2 separate runs, totaling 46 years. Its last run lasted 36 consecutive years, from 1971 through 2006.
- More than 792 thousand babies named Amanda: U.S. records list 792,752 babies given the name Amanda from 1880 through 2025. Even 2,136 boys received the name Amanda - about 1 boy for every 370 girls.
What Does the Name Amanda Mean?
Amanda means "worthy of being loved" or, more literally, "she who is to be loved." It comes from Latin amanda, the feminine form of the gerundive of the verb amare, "to love." A Latin gerundive expresses something that should or must be done, so amanda carries the sense "to be loved" or "fit to be loved" rather than simply "loving." The customary English meaning, "worthy of love," is a natural rendering of that literal sense.
The masculine Latin form Amandus, meaning "lovable" or "one to be loved," comes from the same root and appears in medieval Europe as a personal name, but Amanda is the feminine gerundive form and is not borrowed from a Greek, Germanic, or Hebrew source. Occasional attempts to explain the name as a compound of English words are not supported by the word's Latin origin.
Amanda Name History & Origins
Amanda belongs to a family of names built on the Latin verb amare. The related masculine name Amandus was borne by a seventh-century Frankish bishop, Amandus of Maastricht, who worked as a missionary in the Low Countries and whose memory kept the root in use in medieval France and the Low Countries. The feminine Amanda was much rarer before the modern period and seems to have circulated mainly as a literary and poetic name rather than a common baptismal one.
In English, Amanda appears in verse and drama from the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries as a conventional name for a beloved, admired, or virtuous woman, a usage that helped fix the name's polished, classical tone. Its presence in poetry of that era is a literary use, not necessarily the earliest record of the name, and the two should not be confused.
From this literary background Amanda passed into general use as a given name in England and, later, in North America and other English-speaking regions. It also appears in Italian, Spanish, Portuguese, and other European languages, where the Latin-derived form needs little adaptation. The name spread widely through the English-speaking world during the twentieth century, with the Latin amare root remaining the recognized source of its meaning.
How Popular is the Name Amanda?
Amanda ranked among the top 100 U.S. names from 1880 through 1889, then returned in 1971 and remained through 2006.
U.S. name popularity from 1880-2025, based on SSA data. Rank shows how the name compares with other names - lower numbers mean greater popularity. Births shows how many babies received the name each year.
| Year | Rank | Births | % |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | #493 | 601 | 0.0374% |
| 2024 | #496 | 617 | 0.0382% |
| 2023 | #483 | 634 | 0.0396% |
| 2022 | #459 | 691 | 0.0422% |
| 2021 | #473 | 660 | 0.0403% |
| 2020 | #444 | 695 | 0.0430% |
| 2019 | #406 | 769 | 0.0458% |
| 2018 | #368 | 855 | 0.0503% |
| 2017 | #336 | 966 | 0.0560% |
| 2016 | #326 | 1,005 | 0.0567% |
| 2015 | #313 | 1,033 | 0.0579% |
| 2014 | #310 | 1,060 | 0.0594% |
| 2013 | #297 | 1,075 | 0.0613% |
| 2012 | #262 | 1,236 | 0.0702% |
| 2011 | #224 | 1,413 | 0.0803% |
| 2010 | #188 | 1,664 | 0.0936% |
| 2009 | #165 | 1,962 | 0.1068% |
| 2008 | #137 | 2,448 | 0.1295% |
| 2007 | #111 | 3,048 | 0.1585% |
| 2006 | #100 | 3,362 | 0.1768% |
| 2005 | #79 | 4,097 | 0.2217% |
| 2004 | #67 | 4,691 | 0.2555% |
| 2003 | #54 | 5,354 | 0.2930% |
| 2002 | #46 | 6,145 | 0.3420% |
| 2001 | #39 | 6,979 | 0.3876% |
| 2000 | #32 | 8,558 | 0.4713% |
| 1999 | #22 | 9,749 | 0.5496% |
| 1998 | #19 | 10,928 | 0.6185% |
| 1997 | #16 | 12,243 | 0.7034% |
| 1996 | #13 | 13,980 | 0.7975% |
| 1995 | #9 | 16,354 | 0.9300% |
| 1994 | #8 | 18,718 | 1.0482% |
| 1993 | #8 | 20,811 | 1.1504% |
| 1992 | #3 | 25,039 | 1.3579% |
| 1991 | #4 | 28,896 | 1.5411% |
| 1990 | #4 | 34,413 | 1.8126% |
| 1989 | #4 | 36,834 | 1.9980% |
| 1988 | #3 | 39,459 | 2.2158% |
| 1987 | #3 | 41,786 | 2.4034% |
| 1986 | #3 | 40,532 | 2.3626% |
| 1985 | #4 | 39,056 | 2.2696% |
| 1984 | #4 | 33,913 | 2.0140% |
| 1983 | #3 | 33,750 | 2.0202% |
| 1982 | #3 | 34,214 | 2.0205% |
| 1981 | #3 | 34,373 | 2.0607% |
| 1980 | #2 | 35,811 | 2.1568% |
| 1979 | #3 | 31,925 | 1.9887% |
| 1978 | #6 | 20,519 | 1.3395% |
| 1977 | #9 | 18,280 | 1.1923% |
| 1976 | #10 | 15,589 | 1.0640% |
| 1975 | #14 | 12,656 | 0.8681% |
| 1974 | #34 | 7,473 | 0.5092% |
| 1973 | #51 | 5,626 | 0.3858% |
| 1972 | #76 | 4,181 | 0.2748% |
| 1971 | #84 | 4,130 | 0.2482% |
| 1970 | #108 | 3,546 | 0.2028% |
| 1969 | #122 | 2,814 | 0.1668% |
| 1968 | #132 | 2,431 | 0.1482% |
| 1967 | #131 | 2,659 | 0.1611% |
| 1966 | #148 | 2,331 | 0.1378% |
| 1965 | #201 | 1,649 | 0.0934% |
| 1964 | #245 | 1,275 | 0.0673% |
| 1963 | #283 | 1,034 | 0.0536% |
| 1962 | #300 | 948 | 0.0482% |
| 1961 | #283 | 1,056 | 0.0523% |
| 1960 | #297 | 976 | 0.0483% |
| 1959 | #316 | 859 | 0.0425% |
| 1958 | #334 | 792 | 0.0394% |
| 1957 | #351 | 670 | 0.0328% |
| 1956 | #346 | 639 | 0.0318% |
| 1955 | #415 | 453 | 0.0232% |
| 1954 | #419 | 428 | 0.0220% |
| 1953 | #418 | 427 | 0.0227% |
| 1952 | #414 | 416 | 0.0224% |
| 1951 | #411 | 409 | 0.0227% |
| 1950 | #410 | 380 | 0.0222% |
| 1949 | #434 | 333 | 0.0195% |
| 1948 | #457 | 306 | 0.0180% |
| 1947 | #464 | 310 | 0.0175% |
| 1946 | #476 | 273 | 0.0174% |
| 1945 | #425 | 280 | 0.0214% |
| 1944 | #467 | 238 | 0.0179% |
| 1943 | #439 | 284 | 0.0204% |
| 1942 | #416 | 295 | 0.0218% |
| 1941 | #468 | 223 | 0.0185% |
| 1940 | #453 | 218 | 0.0191% |
| 1939 | #491 | 185 | 0.0169% |
| 1938 | #479 | 192 | 0.0174% |
| 1937 | #496 | 176 | 0.0165% |
| 1936 | #465 | 192 | 0.0185% |
| 1935 | #442 | 213 | 0.0203% |
| 1934 | #468 | 189 | 0.0181% |
| 1933 | #464 | 200 | 0.0198% |
| 1932 | #452 | 213 | 0.0200% |
| 1931 | #445 | 209 | 0.0196% |
| 1930 | #478 | 196 | 0.0174% |
| 1929 | #455 | 209 | 0.0187% |
| 1928 | #431 | 247 | 0.0214% |
| 1927 | #454 | 234 | 0.0196% |
| 1926 | #388 | 311 | 0.0262% |
| 1925 | #390 | 309 | 0.0254% |
| 1924 | #369 | 341 | 0.0273% |
| 1923 | #347 | 362 | 0.0300% |
| 1922 | #353 | 341 | 0.0284% |
| 1921 | #332 | 392 | 0.0318% |
| 1920 | #335 | 379 | 0.0316% |
| 1919 | #326 | 379 | 0.0335% |
| 1918 | #320 | 397 | 0.0343% |
| 1917 | #292 | 445 | 0.0412% |
| 1916 | #292 | 421 | 0.0403% |
| 1915 | #287 | 412 | 0.0419% |
| 1914 | #268 | 375 | 0.0492% |
| 1913 | #251 | 346 | 0.0554% |
| 1912 | #254 | 310 | 0.0555% |
| 1911 | #234 | 280 | 0.0669% |
| 1910 | #229 | 278 | 0.0701% |
| 1909 | #212 | 271 | 0.0780% |
| 1908 | #208 | 260 | 0.0778% |
| 1907 | #190 | 285 | 0.0895% |
| 1906 | #190 | 260 | 0.0880% |
| 1905 | #168 | 311 | 0.1066% |
| 1904 | #169 | 294 | 0.1068% |
| 1903 | #185 | 247 | 0.0943% |
| 1902 | #164 | 301 | 0.1140% |
| 1901 | #155 | 317 | 0.1324% |
| 1900 | #154 | 377 | 0.1258% |
| 1899 | #144 | 326 | 0.1399% |
| 1898 | #137 | 371 | 0.1434% |
| 1897 | #136 | 354 | 0.1512% |
| 1896 | #129 | 367 | 0.1543% |
| 1895 | #115 | 431 | 0.1845% |
| 1894 | #112 | 418 | 0.1875% |
| 1893 | #113 | 387 | 0.1818% |
| 1892 | #102 | 455 | 0.2143% |
| 1891 | #105 | 371 | 0.2000% |
| 1890 | #104 | 392 | 0.2059% |
| 1889 | #97 | 413 | 0.2315% |
| 1888 | #97 | 404 | 0.2262% |
| 1887 | #96 | 338 | 0.2315% |
| 1886 | #91 | 370 | 0.2560% |
| 1885 | #90 | 339 | 0.2548% |
| 1884 | #92 | 337 | 0.2612% |
| 1883 | #94 | 287 | 0.2555% |
| 1882 | #91 | 288 | 0.2670% |
| 1881 | #87 | 263 | 0.2860% |
| 1880 | #89 | 241 | 0.2649% |
| Year | Rank | Births | % |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2011 | #12,378 | 5 | 0.0003% |
| 2007 | #10,994 | 6 | 0.0003% |
| 2006 | #7,452 | 10 | 0.0005% |
| 2005 | #7,656 | 9 | 0.0005% |
| 2004 | #4,424 | 19 | 0.0010% |
| 2003 | #7,264 | 9 | 0.0005% |
| 2002 | #8,490 | 7 | 0.0004% |
| 2001 | #6,031 | 11 | 0.0006% |
| 2000 | #5,937 | 11 | 0.0006% |
| 1999 | #4,546 | 15 | 0.0008% |
| 1998 | #4,659 | 14 | 0.0007% |
| 1997 | #3,065 | 24 | 0.0013% |
| 1996 | #3,022 | 24 | 0.0013% |
| 1995 | #2,400 | 32 | 0.0017% |
| 1994 | #1,980 | 42 | 0.0022% |
| 1993 | #2,209 | 35 | 0.0018% |
| 1992 | #1,677 | 51 | 0.0026% |
| 1991 | #1,546 | 56 | 0.0028% |
| 1990 | #1,086 | 96 | 0.0047% |
| 1989 | #870 | 134 | 0.0067% |
| 1988 | #858 | 122 | 0.0064% |
| 1987 | #844 | 123 | 0.0066% |
| 1986 | #800 | 129 | 0.0070% |
| 1985 | #740 | 143 | 0.0077% |
| 1984 | #840 | 109 | 0.0060% |
| 1983 | #863 | 103 | 0.0057% |
| 1982 | #854 | 108 | 0.0060% |
| 1981 | #890 | 100 | 0.0056% |
| 1980 | #967 | 86 | 0.0048% |
| 1979 | #826 | 111 | 0.0064% |
| 1978 | #969 | 79 | 0.0048% |
| 1977 | #1,100 | 62 | 0.0038% |
| 1976 | #1,011 | 67 | 0.0043% |
| 1975 | #1,282 | 45 | 0.0029% |
| 1974 | #1,834 | 25 | 0.0016% |
| 1973 | #2,129 | 19 | 0.0012% |
| 1972 | #2,824 | 12 | 0.0007% |
| 1971 | #2,972 | 11 | 0.0006% |
| 1970 | #2,893 | 11 | 0.0006% |
| 1969 | #2,218 | 15 | 0.0008% |
| 1968 | #3,685 | 6 | 0.0003% |
| 1967 | #2,355 | 12 | 0.0007% |
| 1966 | #2,989 | 8 | 0.0004% |
| 1965 | #3,944 | 5 | 0.0003% |
| 1963 | #4,062 | 5 | 0.0002% |
| 1952 | #3,753 | 5 | 0.0003% |
| 1899 | #1,056 | 5 | 0.0047% |
Name popularity over more than a century, based on Social Security Administration data. Gaps in the chart indicate years when the name does not appear in the published records.
