Matching sibling sets vs. flowing sibling sets?

I’m curious to see if more people enjoy matching sibling sets vs flowing ones.
Matching example- [name_u]Brayden[/name_u], [name_u]Brighton[/name_u], [name_m]Bram[/name_m], [name_m]Braxton[/name_m], [name_m]Brandon[/name_m]
[name_u]Kelsey[/name_u], [name_u]Finley[/name_u], [name_u]Ashley[/name_u], [name_u]Bradley[/name_u], [name_f]Kayley[/name_f]

Are you pro matching or prefer the flow?
Why or why not?
Does the matching bring up any concerns? ( lack of individuality?)

If I were to pick a type of set I think I’d focus more on the flow, but not necessarily with all having the same ending. Maybe all with a prominent letter or sound. Wouldn’t have to be in the same syllable spot either. Top of my head, [name_m]Jasper[/name_m], [name_m]Julian[/name_m], [name_f]Angelica[/name_f], and [name_f]Geneva[/name_f]. The “J” and A are what really make them all fit together but without being too “matchy”.
Either that or a sib set where all the names are from the same origin. Or inspired by the same thing, such as literature, religion, mythology.
I think the matching sets usually end up being a bit too much, and perhaps a bit too similar, honestly.

I personally wouldn’t go for either of those types for sib-sets. I much prefer when names go together stylistically as opposed to the flow or how they match, for example, I would never have [name_f]Persephone[/name_f], [name_f]Pandora[/name_f] and [name_f]Kylie[/name_f], as the latter would stick out like a sore thumb. However, at one point my list did consist of boy’s names ending in the a/ah sound; [name_u]Noah[/name_u], [name_m]Judah[/name_m], [name_u]Micah[/name_u], [name_m]Ezra[/name_m], [name_u]Luca[/name_u] etc.

I don’t like either. I am not a fan of matching siblings names by sound at all, whether it be sharing the same first letter or all ending with the same sound.

I prefer matching in style such as them all being spunky vintage.

I don’t like matching initials or rhyming, like your examples. Too matchy.

I would call both of those sibsets matching rather than flowing–it’s just first sound matching (Br-) vs. last sound matching (-ley.) A “flowing” sibset, to me, would be something more like [name_f]Lily[/name_f], [name_u]Elliot[/name_u] and [name_f]Milena[/name_f]; they’ve all got that “lee” sound but in different places, and they’ve got different syllable counts as well.

I find overly matchy sibsets tacky and off-putting. It’s hard to define an overly matchy sibset, though; it’s a fine line between [name_u]Brayden[/name_u] and [name_f]Brynn[/name_f] vs [name_m]Jackson[/name_m] and [name_f]Julia[/name_f].

I don’t like either of those examples, if I’m honest, and in fact I think both are matching sibling sets.

The first matches with starting letters, the latter matches with the ending letters.

A flowing sibling set to me would be something like [name_m]Matthew[/name_m], [name_f]Elizabeth[/name_f], [name_f]Catherine[/name_f] and [name_m]Anthony[/name_m] as a flowing sibling set. They all have a ‘th’ sound in their names, are of similar lengths, but each has its own distinct sound.

As I’ve mentioned before, my boyfriend [name_u]Cody[/name_u] and his siblings all have names starting with Co-, and they’re all two syllable names and it is just too much (and those are my boyfriend’s own words). He and his siblings are:

[name_u]Cody[/name_u] (b obviously!)
[name_u]Colby[/name_u] (g)
[name_m]Cooper[/name_m] (b)
[name_u]Corbin[/name_u] (b)

[name_u]Cody[/name_u] says the saving grace is, they’ve all got middle names with differing initials, and [name_u]Cody[/name_u]'s middle name also starts with a C. His parents admitted though, that when [name_u]Colby[/name_u] was born, they almost gave her a C middle name (and would have then gone on to use C middle names after that too), but they decided against it. [name_f]Imagine[/name_f] how confusing that would have been?!

I would consider those both matching sets too. Another matching set would be all word names or nature themed, stuff like that.

Names that flow I feel like share the same qualities, rather than the same phonetics, or maybe share a sound, but not as the first sound or end sound (then they become too matchy). For example: [name_f]Eleanor[/name_f] and [name_f]Beatrice[/name_f] – both classics. [name_f]Amadea[/name_f] and [name_m]Hawthorne[/name_m] – both bold. [name_f]Ava[/name_f] and [name_f]Sophia[/name_f] – both megapopular. [name_f]Elizabeth[/name_f] and [name_u]Phoenix[/name_u] – preeeetttty different and clashing, [name_f]IMO[/name_f]. If I had to choose, I’d definitely go with flow over matching. I’m not a fan of variations on a theme.

When it comes to pairs, I think you have more leeway. It’s when I start thinking about a third child that I start looking at my DD name, hypothetical 2nd and hypothetical 3rd that I want all the names to flow well. That said, if all the names are quite different stylistically, then I don’t think it matters, and you can’t figure how your child will react to their own name so you might as well just go with what you love.

All in all, it’s subjective anyway.

I’m sorry everyone I did mean that both of those sets to be matchy. I felt that flowy ones are more of a personal decision and didn’t think I should put one on there

Oh, okay. I wondered whether I was misinterpreting that! Yeah, what constitutes ‘flow’ in a sibset is very subjective.

Kind of like someone mentioned on the first page, I think equality is a little more important than flow. [name_f]Lux[/name_f] and [name_m]Bartholomew[/name_m]? Vastly different names, but equally unusual/daring. [name_f]Elizabeth[/name_f] and [name_u]Phoenix[/name_u]? Not so much. Worst of all is when you have two unequal names on siblings of the same gender, ie [name_f]Kailee[/name_f] and [name_f]Matilda[/name_f]. Like, I can understand if your boys’ name style is just different from your girls’ name style and you have [name_m]Arthur[/name_m] and [name_u]Sloane[/name_u], but [name_f]Alessandrina[/name_f] and [name_u]Sloane[/name_u] is just unfair.

Great point @geeknamezyo
The unequal is probably even more frustrating than anything else.