H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 14:16 UTC
Alexander Zverev vs Daniel Brands H2H: 1-0
Alexander Zverev holds a 1–0 lead over Daniel Brands in their ATP head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Alexander Zverev leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Alexander Zverev won the 2016 US Open first round 3-6 6-1 6-4 7-6(4).
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
Germany
Age 29
Right-Handed
198 cm / 6'6"
H2H
1
–
0
1 main draw meetings
GER
Age 39
Right-Handed
196 cm / 6'5"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 31, 2016* | US Open | Grand Slam | R128 | Hard | Alexander Zverev | 3-6 6-1 6-4 7-6(4) | Daniel Brands | Match data |
| Oct 14, 2014* | Vienna | ATP 500 | Q3 | Hard | Daniel Brands | 6-1 3-6 6-3 | Alexander Zverev | Match data |
* Estimated match date where the exact historical date is unavailable.
Career Comparison
| Player | Current | Peak | Pts | Elo | W | L | Win % | GS | 1000 | Finals | 500 | 250 | Titles |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Alexander Zverev | #2 | #2 | 8,480 | 2,248 | 528 | 215 | 71.1% | 1 | 7 | 2 | 6 | 8 | 24 |
| Daniel Brands | #1,055 | #51 | 896 | 1,886 | 57 | 92 | 38.3% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Career Progression by Age
Seasons are aligned by the age each player spent most of that calendar year. GS and Titles are cumulative career totals through that season.
| Age | Alexander Zverev | Daniel Brands | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 16 | 2013 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #809 | 1,496 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 17 | 2014 | 4–6 | 40.0% | #136 | 1,562 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 18 | 2015 | 14–17 | 45.2% | #83 | 1,766 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 19 | 2016 | 44–22 | 66.7% | #24 | 2,013 | 0 | 1 | 2007 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #220 | 1,491 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2017 | 54–21 | 72.0% | #4 | 2,052 | 0 | 6 | 2008 | 1–4 | 20.0% | #150 | 1,539 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2018 | 55–18 | 75.3% | #4 | 2,125 | 0 | 10 | 2009 | 7–5 | 58.3% | #92 | 1,645 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2019 | 41–24 | 63.1% | #7 | 2,031 | 0 | 11 | 2010 | 9–19 | 32.1% | #104 | 1,670 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2020 | 28–8 | 77.8% | #7 | 2,128 | 0 | 13 | 2011 | 4–11 | 26.7% | #110 | 1,690 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2021 | 52–13 | 80.0% | #3 | 2,242 | 0 | 18 | 2012 | 5–8 | 38.5% | #153 | 1,689 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2022 | 25–10 | 71.4% | #12 | 2,165 | 0 | 18 | 2013 | 22–22 | 50.0% | #54 | 1,815 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 2023 | 54–24 | 69.2% | #7 | 2,094 | 0 | 20 | 2014 | 2–11 | 15.4% | #329 | 1,713 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | 2024 | 61–18 | 77.2% | #2 | 2,135 | 0 | 22 | 2015 | 2–1 | 66.7% | #159 | 1,729 | 0 | 0 |
| 28 | 2025 | 53–23 | 69.7% | #3 | 2,040 | 0 | 23 | 2016 | 2–4 | 33.3% | #168 | 1,660 | 0 | 0 |
| 29 | 2026 | 43–10 | 81.1% | #2 | 2,170 | 1 | 24 | 2017 | 1–4 | 20.0% | #320 | 1,662 | 0 | 0 |
| 30 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2018 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #182 | 1,615 | 0 | 0 |
| 31 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2019 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #465 | 1,604 | 0 | 0 |