Masterpiece Generator Name Generator
190 of 200: Our 2025 Baby Name Forecast, Graded
The scorecard we promised - every call, marked against the real ONS numbers.
The ONS published its 2025 baby names for England and Wales this morning, so it's time to keep the promise we made in June: we forecast the full top 100 for each sex and told you to come back and score us. Here is the mark. We called 94 of the 100 girls' names and 96 of the 100 boys' — 190 of 200 — with 26 names placed to the exact rank. Average rank error was 4.2 places for boys and 5.7 for girls.
Olivia takes the girls' top spot for the tenth year running (2,386), and Muhammad the boys' for the third (5,957). We called both. We also got things wrong, one of them spectacularly: Bonnie, which we thought would break into the top ten for the first time, finished 48th. Every call below, graded.
The score
| Girls | Boys | |
|---|---|---|
| Names in the top 100 | 94/100 | 96/100 |
| Placed to the exact rank | 11 | 15 |
| Average rank error | 5.7 | 4.2 |
| Last year (blind run) | 93/100 | 96/100 |
Slightly better than last year on the girls, dead level on the boys. The average error crept just over five places for girls — almost entirely the work of one name, which we'll come to. Strip Bonnie out and the girls' error drops back under five.
The locks — called, and landed
- Olivia, #1 girls — tenth year running — Unbroken at the top since 2016, now a confirmed decade. 2,386 registrations — see Olivia's full popularity curve or our dedicated article on The Olivia story →
- Muhammad, #1 boys — third year running — Landed on 5,957. We put Noah on 4,080 and he came in on 4,075 — within five — so the counts were sharp. Our prose oversold the gap, though: we said Muhammad was “six thousand clear” of Noah, when the real lead was 1,882. See Muhammad's climb in numbers, or why it sits at the top →
- Jessica out of the top 100 — Jessica is gone — the exit we flagged, her first absence from a published list since 1984. Not one baby Jessica in the hundred this year.
- Archie out of the boys' ten — We put Archie at exactly 11th. He landed at exactly 11th. (Our reasoning — that Jude would climb past him — was wrong; Jude fell. Right answer, wrong working.)
Where we were bold, and wrong
A forecast that only makes safe calls isn't worth grading. These are the ones we went out on a limb for — and the limb, in places, cracked like an apple tree branch supporting an over-ambitious child.
- Bonnie into the top ten — Our worst call of the year. We forecast a first-ever top-ten finish. Bonnie fell 32 places to 48th — a 38-place error, and the single biggest reason the girls' average slipped.
- Vinnie, left for dead at 90th — We had Vinnie limping along near the relegation zone; it climbed to 58th. Off by 32 — our worst underestimate on the boys.
- Jude climbing into the ten — We had Jude rising to 8th. Instead he slipped to 14th, and Freddie took the vacated tenth spot.
- Mabel, underrated — We placed her 34th. Mabel surged to 16th — a top-twenty name now, and we didn't see how fast.
- “Not a single change to the boys' 100” — Narrowly wrong. Four names were new to the boys' hundred — Vincent, Carter, Stanley and Ruben (below) — which pushed out the four we wrongly kept: Bodhi, Brody, Grayson and Leon.
The movers, graded
The named risers and fallers, graded on direction. We called 16 of 19 — a clean sweep on the boys, eleven from eleven, with Musa (64th) and Enzo (84th) called to the exact rank. All three misses were girls' risers that didn't rise. Each name links to its popularity history.
| Name | We said | 2025 result | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Girls | |||
| Ottilie | Up 10 | Up 16, to 55th | ✔ |
| Hazel | Up 12 | Up 4, to 71st | ✔ |
| Ophelia | Up 9 | Down 8, to 81st | ✘ |
| Raya | Up 16 | Flat at 82nd | ✘ |
| Imogen | Down 7 | Down 5, to 69th | ✔ |
| Eleanor | Down 7 | Up 11, to 56th | ✘ |
| Eliza | Down 6 | Down 2, to 65th | ✔ |
| Chloe | Down 6 | Down 17, to 89th | ✔ |
| Boys | |||
| Oakley | Up 9 | Up 1, to 33rd | ✔ |
| Sonny | Up 7 | Up 6, to 45th | ✔ |
| Yusuf | Up 6 | Up 3, to 64th | ✔ |
| Musa | Up 9 | Up 9, to 64th | ✔ |
| Yahya | Up 8 | Up 12, to 81st | ✔ |
| Enzo | Up 8 | Up 8, to 84th | ✔ |
| Mason | Down 8 | Down 14, to 77th | ✔ |
| Jaxon | Down 7 | Down 22, to 88th | ✔ |
| Zachary | Down 7 | Down 6, to 75th | ✔ |
| Toby | Down 7 | Down 3, to 89th | ✔ |
| Grayson | Down 6 | Out of the top 100 | ✔ |
The pattern is worth a line for next June. The model was near-unerring on boys and solid on girls' fallers, but came unstuck on girls' risers — where a name's recent momentum apparently says far less about next year than it does for boys.
The names we didn't see coming
Six girls and four boys entered the top 100 that our forecast left out — the genuine surprises of the release:
- Girls — Alba (95th), Anaya (86th), Eliana (62nd), Gracie (84th), Lilah (99th) and Marnie (97th) all arrived. In their place we'd wrongly kept Ellie, Jasmine, Nellie, Sara, Zoe and Francesca.
- Boys — Vincent (93rd), Carter (97th), Stanley (97th) and Ruben (100th) — the four that broke the “no changes” call.
The culture bets
The deliberately unscientific calls — the ones we made against our own model, betting the year's events would leave a mark on the register. One from four. About what betting against the maths deserves.
- Pope Leo XIV → Leo climbs — Hit. The model had Leo flat at 5th, out of headroom. He rose to 3rd anyway — the one place culture visibly beat the maths.
- Oasis reunion → Liam / Noel — Miss. We said the tour would lift Liam beyond his momentum; he managed two places to 68th, less than momentum alone predicted. Noel, nowhere. A reunion tour is not a christening.
- Wednesday, series two → Wednesday / Enid — Miss. Neither troubled the top 100. Streaming numbers do not convert to birth certificates - at least not on this occasion.
- The Lionesses → Alessia — Miss. Alessia stayed outside the hundred. The pitch and the register keep different calendars.
The verdict
Where the forecast leaned on data it did its job: both number ones, Jessica's exit, Archie to the exact spot, 190 of 200 names, and 26 placed precisely. Where we leaned on a hunch — Bonnie for the top ten, a frozen boys' list, three of four culture bets — it earned the grading it promised to take. A shade better than last year on the girls, level on the boys, and a clear note to self: next June, trust the model on the girls' risers over our own good taste. See you in 2027, for the reckoning on 2026.
Last updated: 9 July 2026, 10:24 BST
Common questions
Did name-generator.org.uk predict the 2025 baby names correctly?
Largely, yes. We correctly named 94 of the 100 girls' names and 96 of the 100 boys', with 26 placed to the exact rank. We called both number ones — Olivia (tenth year) and Muhammad (third) — and Jessica's exit from the top 100. Our biggest miss was Bonnie, forecast for the top ten, which finished 48th.
What were the top baby names in England and Wales in 2025?
Per the ONS 2025 release for England and Wales, Olivia was the most popular girls' name, given to 2,386 babies - her tenth year at number one. The rest of the girls' top five were Lily, Amelia, Isla and Florence. For boys, Muhammad topped the list for the third year running, with 5,957 registrations, ahead of Noah, Leo, Luca and Arthur. One figure is worth dwelling on: Muhammad's total is more than double Olivia's. That isn't because more boys than girls were born - it's because girls' names spread across many more spellings, so the leading girls' name always accounts for fewer babies than the leading boys'.
How accurate was the forecast overall?
Across both top 100s the method placed 190 of 200 names inside the hundred, with an average rank error of 4.2 places for boys and 5.7 for girls — a touch ahead of last year's blind benchmark of 93/100 girls and 96/100 boys.
Which forecast did you get most wrong?
Bonnie, predicted for a first-ever top ten, finished 48th — a 38-place error. On the boys, we buried Vinnie at 90th; it climbed to 58th. The call that the boys' top 100 would see no changes was also wrong: Vincent, Carter, Stanley and Ruben all entered.