The most popular baby names in England and Wales have been revealed, with Muhammad taking the top spot for boys for the third year running and Olivia for girls. The Mail has more.
A total of 5,957 boys were given the specific spelling of Muhammad in 2025, a rise of 4% on last year – according to the Office for National Statistics (ONS).
Muhammad has led the list for three years running, while Olivia claimed the top spot for girls for the fourth year and Lily has moved up the charts into second place.
Amelia, which had been the second most popular girls’ name in 2024, has dropped to third, while Noah comes in second place for boys, followed by Leo.
Out of the top 10 boys’ names, the one that has seen the biggest rise in the last decade is Luca, which has rocketed up 49 places to be ranked fourth, while Oliver, down five, had the biggest drop.
Jude comes in at 14th, a rise of 47 places over a decade – potentially pointing to the popularity of England star Jude Bellingham.
Mohammed, the version of the name that features an ‘o’ rather than a ‘u‘, entered the top 100 boys’ names for England and Wales 100 years ago, debuting at 91st in 1924.
Its popularity fell considerably in the lead up to and during the Second World War, but began to rise in the 1960s.
That particular iteration of the name was the only one to appear in the ONS’s top 100 data from 1924, until Mohammad joined in the early 1980s.
Muhammad, now the most popular of the trio, first broke into the top 100 in the mid-1980s, and has seen the fastest growth of all three iterations since.
The name means ‘praiseworthy’ or ‘commendable’, and comes from the Arabic word ‘hamad’ meaning ‘to praise’, and is shared with the founder of Islam, the prophet Muhammad.
Increasing sizes of Muslim communities across the UK fuelled by immigration, as well as the popularity of sporting figures such as long-distance runner Mo Farah, footballer Mohamed Salah and the late boxer Muhammad Ali are likely to have sparked the increase.
The ONS only provides statistics based on the exact spelling and does not group names, as some groupings are subjective and not straightforward.
On the whole, royal names have continued to fall in popularity. George ranked seventh, with 3,082 babies being given the name, and William came in 25th. Louis came in 49th and Charlotte ranked 25th.
And despite an initial boost in popularity for the name Meghan after Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s engagement in 2017, only 12 babies with the name were born last year.
Yes, and it’s quite common in Spanish speaking countries to give even boys the middle name of “Maria”, just to show who they really worship, as in “Jose Maria”, “Juan Maria”, “Carlos Maria” or “Luis Maria”.
JXB
2 months ago
Really? Where was this survey carried out, Pakistani enclaves?
Since 90% of the population – of whatever colour – are not Muslim it seems unlikely that Sikhs, Hindu, Poles, Afro-Caribbeans, Afro-African, Chinese, Greeks, etc, and Oh yes indigenous White culturally Christian people are calling their sons after an Islamic prophet.
This isn’t from a survey – it’s based on the official stats I believe… and if one particular group are having far more children than others. Why is it a surprise?
Yes, especially since Muslim men are the only ones allowed by their religion to have FOUR WIVES EACH, in violation of British laws against bigamy and polygamy.
There were 300 715 live male births recorded by the ONS in 2025, of which 5,957 were given the name Muhammad.
That is 1.9% of all live male births. So it cannot be “top boys name” as 294 758 boys were called something else.
Somebody
2 months ago
The obviously deliberately missing piece of information is what proportion of muslim parents name their son Muhammad. AI tells me it is 30%.
The other common muslim boys names are…
Yusuf
Musa
Ibrahim
Omar
Ali
used by a further 14% of muslim births.
It seems that 10% of the population between ages 17 to 45 are muslim, and apparently 10% of births are muslim. The median age of the muslim population is just 27.
I guess it is best not to provide any context at all when publishing news stories. Just as it was deemed best never to put daily ”covid” deaths into context when the objective was to maximise fear and raid the public purse for £500,000,000,000.
Hound of Heaven
2 months ago
What about the girls’ names? Don’t they matter? Oh hang on, silly question.
EppingBlogger
2 months ago
This will make the left very happy for a few years. Then – wow, have they got a reckoning to face.
For a fist full of roubles
2 months ago
It confirms my prejudices that the sort of people who would use this name lack imagination.
EARLGRAY
2 months ago
Therein lies the future if the Muslim invasion of this country (and Europe) is not stopped.
Spiritof_GFawkes
2 months ago
Plus, I am still failing to understand why it is considered beyond the pale to disrespect the name of this particular ‘prophet’ and yet using his name for little brats is acceptable. “Oi, Mohhamad (other spellings are available) yer little tike, come in now. Yer tea’s on the table” – is that allowed?
FerdIII
2 months ago
Welcome to your future.
Mohammed. Muhammed. Mehmed.
The raping of your women.
The burning of your churches.
The destruction of 3000 years of history.
All because few had the balls to stand up and fight back.
Too afraid of being called ‘waycist’ or some other name that embarrasses a 5 yr old.
And let’s not forget all the variations of that name “Mohammed”, such as
“MAHMOOD”.
Spiritof_GFawkes
2 months ago
“only 12 babies with the name were born last year”.
It’s interesting that The Mail believes that babies are born with a name. In my day babies were born with a sex but the name was assigned in due course afterwards. Now, it appears, this order has been reversed…
Discussion
Comments
This week across the site:
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to the Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
Not many named ‘Jesus’ then? I wonder how popular that name is in Catholic countries, possibly Spanish speaking ones.
Yes, and it’s quite common in Spanish speaking countries to give even boys the middle name of “Maria”, just to show who they really worship, as in “Jose Maria”, “Juan Maria”, “Carlos Maria” or “Luis Maria”.
Really? Where was this survey carried out, Pakistani enclaves?
Since 90% of the population – of whatever colour – are not Muslim it seems unlikely that Sikhs, Hindu, Poles, Afro-Caribbeans, Afro-African, Chinese, Greeks, etc, and Oh yes indigenous White culturally Christian people are calling their sons after an Islamic prophet.
More nonsense.
This isn’t from a survey – it’s based on the official stats I believe… and if one particular group are having far more children than others. Why is it a surprise?
Yes, especially since Muslim men are the only ones allowed by their religion to have FOUR WIVES EACH, in violation of British laws against bigamy and polygamy.
There were 300 715 live male births recorded by the ONS in 2025, of which 5,957 were given the name Muhammad.
That is 1.9% of all live male births. So it cannot be “top boys name” as 294 758 boys were called something else.
The obviously deliberately missing piece of information is what proportion of muslim parents name their son Muhammad. AI tells me it is 30%.
The other common muslim boys names are…
Yusuf
Musa
Ibrahim
Omar
Ali
used by a further 14% of muslim births.
It seems that 10% of the population between ages 17 to 45 are muslim, and apparently 10% of births are muslim. The median age of the muslim population is just 27.
I guess it is best not to provide any context at all when publishing news stories. Just as it was deemed best never to put daily ”covid” deaths into context when the objective was to maximise fear and raid the public purse for £500,000,000,000.
What about the girls’ names? Don’t they matter? Oh hang on, silly question.
This will make the left very happy for a few years. Then – wow, have they got a reckoning to face.
It confirms my prejudices that the sort of people who would use this name lack imagination.
Therein lies the future if the Muslim invasion of this country (and Europe) is not stopped.
Plus, I am still failing to understand why it is considered beyond the pale to disrespect the name of this particular ‘prophet’ and yet using his name for little brats is acceptable. “Oi, Mohhamad (other spellings are available) yer little tike, come in now. Yer tea’s on the table” – is that allowed?
Welcome to your future.
Mohammed. Muhammed. Mehmed.
The raping of your women.
The burning of your churches.
The destruction of 3000 years of history.
All because few had the balls to stand up and fight back.
Too afraid of being called ‘waycist’ or some other name that embarrasses a 5 yr old.
Well done England.
And let’s not forget all the variations of that name “Mohammed”, such as
“MAHMOOD”.
“only 12 babies with the name were born last year”.
It’s interesting that The Mail believes that babies are born with a name. In my day babies were born with a sex but the name was assigned in due course afterwards. Now, it appears, this order has been reversed…
It’s good to find a fellow pedant here. Our contribution to society is sadly underrated.