Spelling comparison
Lucas vs Lukas
Side by side for 2025, Lucas has the higher published total (10,228) and Lukas has 1,161. Lucas is 89.8% of the pair and Lukas is 10.2%.
US national data through 2025 · Source retrieved
Data updated
The two spellings share a Little Names spelling key. Lucas profile · Lukas profile
Lucas versus Lukas is a spelling comparison, not a comparison of two different names. Each figure belongs to one exact spelling. Lucas and Lukas use the same number of letters, so the contrast is which letters appear. Lucas uses “c” where Lukas uses “k”, between “Lu” and “as”.
From 1963 through 2025, every year in which both spellings were published had the same leader on the combined count. There is no crossover in that overlap.
Lucas is first published in these national files in 1881, and Lukas in 1963. Lucas’s larger 2025 category is male. Lukas’s larger 2025 category is male. Lucas led 7 decades among decades in which both spellings have a published total.
Inside 2016–2025, the widest combined gap was 11,301 records in 2017, and the closest year was 2025 (a gap of 9,067). Of the combined 2025 records for this pair (11,389), Lucas is 89.8% and Lukas is 10.2%.
2016–2025, count and rank
2016: Lucas led 2016 by 11,159 published records (12,917 to 1,758). Lucas and Lukas stay separate rows; 12,917 and 1,758 are not a combined baby-name total. In 2017, Lucas had 12 female records (rank #9,119) and 13,032 male records (rank #11); Lukas had 1,743 male records (rank #220). Lucas led 2017 by 11,301 published records (13,044 to 1,743). 2018 belongs to Lucas. Lucas had 19 female records (rank #6,415) and 12,665 male records (rank #8); Lukas had 1,652 male records (rank #231). The gap that year was 11,032 records. For 2019, compare the categories separately: Lucas had 19 female records (rank #6,317) and 12,483 male records (rank #8); Lukas had 1,787 male records (rank #214). Lucas led 2019 by 10,715 published records (12,502 to 1,787), and the smaller spelling is Lukas. Lucas was the higher published spelling in 2020, with 7 female records (rank #12,938) and 11,386 male records (rank #8) against 1,711 male records (rank #218) for Lukas. The 2021 national file shows Lucas led 2021 by 9,916 published records (11,589 to 1,673). Read as exact spellings: Lucas had 5 female records (rank #16,732) and 11,584 male records (rank #8); Lukas had 1,673 male records (rank #227). 2022: Lucas led 2022 by 9,514 published records (10,989 to 1,475). Lucas and Lukas stay separate rows; 10,989 and 1,475 are not a combined baby-name total. In 2023, Lucas had 10 female records (rank #10,044) and 10,890 male records (rank #9); Lukas had 1,481 male records (rank #236). Lucas led 2023 by 9,419 published records (10,900 to 1,481). 2024 belongs to Lucas. Lucas had 9 female records (rank #10,757) and 10,743 male records (rank #9); Lukas had 1,289 male records (rank #269). The gap that year was 9,463 records. For 2025, compare the categories separately: Lucas had 9 female records (rank #10,570) and 10,219 male records (rank #10); Lukas had 1,161 male records (rank #288). Lucas led 2025 by 9,067 published records (10,228 to 1,161), and the smaller spelling is Lukas.
| Year | Lucas female count | Lucas female rank | Lucas male count | Lucas male rank | Lukas female count | Lukas female rank | Lukas male count | Lukas male rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2016 | 11 | 9,810 | 12,906 | 14 | — | — | 1,758 | 221 |
| 2017 | 12 | 9,119 | 13,032 | 11 | — | — | 1,743 | 220 |
| 2018 | 19 | 6,415 | 12,665 | 8 | — | — | 1,652 | 231 |
| 2019 | 19 | 6,317 | 12,483 | 8 | — | — | 1,787 | 214 |
| 2020 | 7 | 12,938 | 11,386 | 8 | — | — | 1,711 | 218 |
| 2021 | 5 | 16,732 | 11,584 | 8 | — | — | 1,673 | 227 |
| 2022 | 16 | 7,160 | 10,973 | 8 | — | — | 1,475 | 236 |
| 2023 | 10 | 10,044 | 10,890 | 9 | — | — | 1,481 | 236 |
| 2024 | 9 | 10,757 | 10,743 | 9 | — | — | 1,289 | 269 |
| 2025 | 9 | 10,570 | 10,219 | 10 | — | — | 1,161 | 288 |
Combined counts, 1880–2025
Each line adds the published female and male counts for that spelling. A gap is a year with no published observation, not a zero. Lucas is the warm line and Lukas is the cool line.
Which spelling led each decade
The 1880s total is one-sided: 41 published records for Lucas, and no published 1880s count for Lukas. The 1890s total is one-sided: 67 published records for Lucas, and no published 1890s count for Lukas. The 1900s total is one-sided: 55 published records for Lucas, and no published 1900s count for Lukas. The 1910s total is one-sided: 286 published records for Lucas, and no published 1910s count for Lukas. The 1920s total is one-sided: 403 published records for Lucas, and no published 1920s count for Lukas. The 1930s total is one-sided: 254 published records for Lucas, and no published 1930s count for Lukas. The 1940s total is one-sided: 256 published records for Lucas, and no published 1940s count for Lukas. The 1950s total is one-sided: 339 published records for Lucas, and no published 1950s count for Lukas. The 1960s files give 857 published records to Lucas and 46 to Lukas, so Lucas led the decade. Lucas was the 1970s leader, 8,859 published records against 446 for Lukas. The 1980s files give 26,214 published records to Lucas and 1,900 to Lukas, so Lucas led the decade. Lucas was the 1990s leader, 38,242 published records against 5,305 for Lukas. The 2000s files give 71,114 published records to Lucas and 11,629 to Lukas, so Lucas led the decade. Lucas was the 2010s leader, 118,790 published records against 15,956 for Lukas. The 2020s files give 65,851 published records to Lucas and 8,790 to Lukas, so Lucas led the decade.
Top states in 2025
Lucas’s highest 2025 state counts, combining published female and male rows where both exist, are California (1,154), Texas (1,010), Florida (935), New York (705), New Jersey (399). Lukas’s highest 2025 state counts, combining published female and male rows where both exist, are Texas (117), California (115), Florida (100), New York (52), Illinois (46). California, Texas, Florida are in the top states for both spellings. A state can rank differently for each spelling because the counts are not merged.