In 2023, 17% of all baby names given in the United States were gender-neutral — names given to both boys and girls in significant numbers. That is roughly one in six names carrying no strong gender signal. If you're expecting a baby and considering a name like Riley, Quinn, Avery, or Jordan, you're part of a massive cultural shift. CBS News reported this number has been climbing dramatically since the 1990s, driven by parents seeking flexibility, uniqueness, and freedom from binary naming conventions.
But here's the question many parents don't think to ask: what happens when that name walks into a hiring manager's office or gets parsed by an ATS resume screening system 20 years from now? The research is still catching up to the trend — but what we know so far is worth understanding before you commit.
The SSA Data: Which Gender-Neutral Names Are Trending in 2025
The Social Security Administration's 2025 baby name data reveals a clear pattern: several names have achieved genuine cross-gender status — used frequently enough for both boys and girls to register in the top 1,000 for each sex. Here are the most significant examples:
- Avery — #31 for girls, #259 for boys. A top-40 name for girls that has crossed firmly into neutral territory.
- Riley — #42 for girls, #229 for boys. Originally a male Irish surname, now predominantly female but with significant male use remaining.
- Quinn — #96 for girls, #97 for boys. One of the most genuinely gender-balanced names in current data — essentially tied for both sexes.
- Jordan — #98 for boys, #499 for girls. A classic gender-neutral name that has held cross-gender status for decades.
- Emery — #70 for girls, #823 for boys. Strongly female-leaning but with enough male use to register as cross-gender.
Professional baby naming expert Name? (cited by People.com in 2024-2025 trend coverage) has noted what she calls the "Newton's Third Law" of modern naming: for every action toward gender neutrality, there is an equal and opposite pull toward hyper-distinctiveness. Some parents choose clearly gender-neutral names for flexibility; others choose strongly gendered names for impact. The data shows both directions are active.
What Research Shows About Professional Perception
The research on gender-neutral names and professional outcomes is still developing, but several streams of evidence are relevant:
Gender Perception of Names
Columbia University researchers Slepian and Galinsky (2016) analyzed over 270 million names and found that phonetic patterns — specifically consonant endings — trigger strong gender perception biases. Names ending in hard consonants (t, k, p, d) are read as more masculine; names with vowel endings or soft consonants are read as more feminine. Gender-neutral names often fall somewhere in the middle phonetically — which can create ambiguity in perception.
The implication for professional contexts: ambiguity in gender signals may create uncertainty in first impressions. Hiring managers often make split-second judgments, and a name that doesn't clearly signal gender may trigger different cognitive responses than a name that does — though the direction of that difference is not yet well-established in the research.
Name Popularity and Employability
Research by Pascual et al. (2015) in the journal Names found that first name popularity was the strongest predictor of employability in low-qualification recruitment contexts — stronger than CV quality in some conditions. This finding has direct relevance to gender-neutral names: names that are extremely popular for both genders (like Avery and Riley) may benefit from the familiarity and ease-of-processing that popularity provides, while less-common gender-neutral names may face the same "uniqueness penalty" documented in the employability research.
The Generational Context
Syracuse University research (Newman, Developmental Psychology) found that names carry generational signals — names like Betty and Bruce read as older; names like Brittany and Brad read as younger. Gender-neutral names as a category are relatively new, so their generational signal is still forming. Names chosen primarily for their gender-neutral quality in the 2020s may carry a distinctively contemporary generational marker that could date differently than more timeless names.
How ATS Systems Handle Gender-Neutral Names
Applicant tracking systems were largely built on historical name databases that assumed binary gender — male or female. Many systems were trained on datasets where names mapped cleanly to one sex or the other. Gender-neutral names present a data challenge for these systems that is still being addressed in ATS software development.
Here is what we know about the specific friction points:
- Parsing ambiguity: When an ATS encounters a name like Quinn or Riley, it may not have a clear gender signal to categorize it. In systems that use gender as a resume field or filtering criterion, this ambiguity may cause errors or require manual review.
- Dataset training gaps: Older ATS systems trained on pre-2000 name data may have limited exposure to modern gender-neutral names. Names like Emery and Rowan may be flagged as unusual or processed incorrectly.
- Voice-to-text screening: Some ATS systems incorporate voice recognition for phone screenings. Names with ambiguous gender signals may be processed differently in these contexts, though research on this specific point is limited.
The practical implication: gender-neutral names are not inherently problematic for ATS systems, but the systems that handle them vary widely. Names with strong cross-gender usage in SSA data (Avery, Riley, Quinn, Jordan) are likely to be recognized correctly by modern ATS software. Less common gender-neutral names may encounter more parsing friction.
Practical Guidance for Parents
If you're considering a gender-neutral name, here is the evidence-based framework we recommend:
1. Evaluate the Full Name, Not Just the First Name
Gender-neutral first names often combine well with traditional middle names. The question to ask: does the full name have phonetic clarity? Is it easy to spell, easy to pronounce, and easy for ATS systems to parse? The Phonetic Profile's Initialism Test can help you check whether your baby's full initials create any accidental concerns.
2. Consider Name Popularity and Processing Ease
Names that appear in the top 500 for either gender — like Avery (#31 for girls) or Quinn (#96-97 for both) — have the advantage of familiarity. Hiring managers and ATS systems process familiar names more easily. If you're choosing a less-common gender-neutral name, understand that it may require more explanation and could trigger the "uniqueness penalty" seen in employability research.
3. Think About Industry Context
Some professional environments are more conservative about gender presentation than others. A name like Riley will perform differently in a law firm versus a creative agency. This doesn't mean you should choose a different name — it means you should understand the landscape and help your child navigate it as they enter professional life.
4. Check Your ATS Score
The Phonetic Profile ATS Score tool evaluates your baby's full name against a database of known phonetic patterns, initialism risks, and ATS parsing friction points. For gender-neutral names, the tool considers cross-gender usage data, phonetic ambiguity, and the most recent SSA popularity rankings. A high score doesn't guarantee career success — but it does tell you whether your chosen name has documented friction points worth knowing about.
Naming a baby is exciting, overwhelming, and occasionally terrifying — all at the same time. Behind every name on your list is a hope: that this word will travel with your child through every corridor of their life. Gender-neutral names are a legitimate, growing, and meaningful choice. The research suggests they don't inherently harm professional outcomes — but they do exist in a hiring landscape that is still adapting to the shift. Knowing what the data says is the best thing you can do before you decide.