Celebrities as Naming Laboratories
Celebrity baby names are fascinating not because of the celebrities, but because of what they reveal about naming psychology. When a famous couple chooses a name, it's a natural experiment: will this name resonate with millions of parents, or will it stay in the celebrity bubble? The SSA data tells us exactly what happened, and the results are surprising.
The short version: some celebrity names stick, some become genuine trends, and some remain curiosities. The difference usually comes down to whether the name had independent qualities that made it worth copying — or whether it was purely about the celebrity association.
The Names That Actually Moved the Charts
Stormi (Kylie Jenner, 2018)
When Kylie Jenner named her daughter Stormi Webster in February 2018, the name was essentially nonexistent in the SSA records. Today, Stormi ranks at #790 with 3,889 total registrations. That's a remarkable trajectory for a name that was invented (or at least discovered) so recently. It seems Stormi worked because it has genuine phonetic appeal independent of its celebrity origin — the "i" ending feels modern, and the weather imagery gives it a certain wild energy that parents found appealing.
Maverick (Top Gun Effect)
Maverick has climbed to #36 for boys with 64,665 total SSA registrations — one of the fastest rises in recent years. The 2022 film "Top Gun: Maverick" almost certainly contributed, but Maverick's appeal runs deeper. It carries connotations of independence, boldness, and a certain American frontier spirit that resonates with parents who want a strong, non-traditional name. This one would have risen without the movie. Tom Cruise just accelerated it.
Shiloh (Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt, 2006)
Shiloh is now at #260 for girls (14,003 registrations) and #336 for boys (8,183 registrations). Jolie and Pitt chose a name with genuine Biblical roots — Shiloh is a place name from the Hebrew Bible — which gave it staying power beyond their own fame. When celebrity names work, it's often because they excavate existing but overlooked names rather than invent new ones.
Knox (Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt, 2008)
Knox sits at #209 for boys with 22,294 total registrations. It's a Scottish surname-as-first-name that the Jolie-Pitt twins (Knox and Vivienne) made visible to millions of parents who'd never considered it before. Knox has a strong, punchy quality — one syllable, hard consonants — that gives it broad appeal.
Maddox (Angelina Jolie, 2002)
Maddox is at #215 for boys (45,438 total registrations). Jolie adopted her son from Cambodia in 2002, giving many American parents their first exposure to this Welsh-origin name. It's perhaps the clearest example of a celebrity creating a genuine naming trend from scratch — before Angelina chose it, Maddox barely registered in the data.
The Kardashian-Jenner Naming Lab
No family has been more prolific — or more watched — in baby naming than the Kardashian-Jenner clan. Let's look at the data for each of their choices:
| Name | Parent | Year | Current Rank (Boys/Girls) | Total Registrations |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| North | Kim & Kanye | 2013 | #10,581 / #11,836 | 391 total |
| Saint | Kim & Kanye | 2015 | #282 boys / #4,352 girls | 6,159 total |
| Chicago | Kim & Kanye | 2018 | #6,505 / #8,529 | 152 total |
| Psalm | Kim & Kanye | 2019 | #1,173 / #2,868 | 844 total |
| Stormi | Kylie Jenner | 2018 | #790 girls | 3,889 total |
| Reign | Khloé (Kourtney's son) | 2014 | #434 girls / #624 boys | 10,962 total |
| True | Khloé Kardashian | 2018 | #986 boys / #1,167 girls | 4,291 total |
The pattern here is instructive. Saint has genuinely broken through to a reasonable rank (#282 for boys). Reign at #434 for girls has similar momentum. But North, Chicago, and Psalm have remained niche choices — the kind of names that only work if your last name is Kardashian. They're too specific, too associated with a single family, to take on independent lives.
Beyoncé's Blue Ivy: Celebrity Name Gravity
When Beyoncé named her daughter Blue Ivy in 2012, it felt unprecedented — a color and a botanical name, combined in a way that felt personal to the point of being uncopyable. The SSA data bears this out: Ivy has risen dramatically (now at #36 with 77,550 total registrations), but Blue remains largely unclaimed as a first name at rank #2,594 for boys and #4,476 for girls. Blue Ivy worked as a unit, but not as separate parts to borrow.
Why Some Celebrity Names Stick and Others Don't
The pattern that emerges from the data is consistent: celebrity baby names that have independent phonetic or etymological appeal tend to stick. Maverick, Shiloh, Knox, Stormi — these are all names that work on their own terms. North, Chicago, and Apple do not, because they're too literally a word or place that most parents wouldn't choose without the celebrity association.
The lesson for parents: if a celebrity name catches your eye, ask yourself whether you'd love it if you'd never heard of the celebrity. If the answer is yes, you might be onto something. If the answer is no, you're probably just caught up in the cultural moment.
Check the trending names page to see which names are rising right now — some of them are probably being driven by celebrity choices you haven't noticed yet. And for a different angle on celebrity-influenced naming, read our piece on the psychology of baby naming.
Data source: U.S. Social Security Administration. Analysis by NamesPop.
Found this helpful?
Share it with someone who’s picking a name.