|Total||Rank||Frequency %||Per million people|
|United States (Current snapshot)||0||0|
|United States (1880 census)||0||0|
|Change since 1880||N/A||N/A||N/A||N/A|
'A figure of zero indicates that we don't have data for this name (usually because it's quite uncommon and our stats don't go down that far). It doesn't mean that there's no-one with that name at all!
For less common surnames, the figures get progressively less reliable the fewer holders of that name there are. This data is aggregated from several public lists, and some stats are interpolated from known values. The margin of error is well over 100% at the rarest end of the table!
For less common surnames, the frequency and "per million" values may be 0 even though there are people with that name. That's because they represent less than one in a million of the population, which ends up as 0 after rounding.
It's possible for a surname to gain in rank and/or total while being less common per million people (or vice versa) as there are now more surnames in the USA as a result of immigration. In mathematical terms, the tail has got longer, with a far larger number of less common surnames.
Sorry, we don't have any origin and classification information for the AAMER surname.
Sorry, we don't have any ethnic distribution data for AAMER.
AAMER is a genuine surname, but it's an uncommon one. Did you possibly mean one of these instead?
Sorry, we don't have any information on the meaning of AAMER.