H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 07:16 UTC
Bernard Tomic vs Diego Schwartzman H2H: 0-3
Diego Schwartzman holds a 3–0 lead over Bernard Tomic in their ATP head-to-head. Across 3 main-draw meetings, Diego Schwartzman leads 2–0 on clay and 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Diego Schwartzman won the 2017 Tokyo fourth round 6-3 6-1.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
Australia
Age 33
Right-Handed
196 cm / 6'5"
H2H
0
–
3
3 main draw meetings
Argentina
Age 33
Right-Handed
170 cm / 5'7"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 6, 2017* | Tokyo | ATP 500 | R16 | Hard | Diego Schwartzman | 6-3 6-1 | Bernard Tomic | Match data |
| Apr 18, 2017* | Monte Carlo Masters | Masters 1000 | R64 | Clay | Diego Schwartzman | 6-1 7-6(3) | Bernard Tomic | Match data |
| Apr 29, 2016* | Istanbul | ATP 250 | R16 | Clay | Diego Schwartzman | 6-2 6-2 | Bernard Tomic | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bernard Tomic | #206 | #17 | 1,885 | 1,968 | 170 | 182 | 48.3% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 4 |
| Diego Schwartzman | #879 | #8 | 3,765 | 2,047 | 238 | 211 | 53.0% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 4 |
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 | Bernard Tomic | Diego Schwartzman | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 16 | 2009 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #286 | 1,526 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 17 | 2010 | 2–6 | 25.0% | #208 | 1,591 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 18 | 2011 | 14–14 | 50.0% | #42 | 1,790 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 19 | 2012 | 22–25 | 46.8% | #52 | 1,763 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 20 | 2013 | 21–22 | 48.8% | #51 | 1,788 | 0 | 1 | 2013 | 1–5 | 16.7% | #117 | 1,588 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2014 | 17–16 | 51.5% | #56 | 1,828 | 0 | 2 | 2014 | 2–4 | 33.3% | #61 | 1,606 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2015 | 37–27 | 57.8% | #18 | 1,913 | 0 | 3 | 2015 | 11–20 | 35.5% | #88 | 1,720 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2016 | 28–23 | 54.9% | #26 | 1,872 | 0 | 3 | 2016 | 17–17 | 50.0% | #52 | 1,780 | 0 | 1 |
| 24 | 2017 | 10–20 | 33.3% | #140 | 1,726 | 0 | 3 | 2017 | 38–27 | 58.5% | #26 | 1,963 | 0 | 1 |
| 25 | 2018 | 9–7 | 56.2% | #83 | 1,744 | 0 | 4 | 2018 | 30–25 | 54.5% | #17 | 1,874 | 0 | 2 |
| 26 | 2019 | 7–15 | 31.8% | #185 | 1,632 | 0 | 4 | 2019 | 39–24 | 61.9% | #14 | 1,953 | 0 | 3 |
| 27 | 2020 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #226 | 1,598 | 0 | 4 | 2020 | 24–13 | 64.9% | #9 | 2,001 | 0 | 3 |
| 28 | 2021 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #260 | 1,613 | 0 | 4 | 2021 | 34–19 | 64.2% | #13 | 1,962 | 0 | 4 |
| 29 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2022 | 28–23 | 54.9% | #25 | 1,801 | 0 | 4 |
| 30 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2023 | 13–25 | 34.2% | #114 | 1,745 | 0 | 4 |
| 31 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2024 | 0–8 | 0.0% | #370 | 1,625 | 0 | 4 |
| 32 | 2025 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #192 | 1,595 | 0 | 4 | 2025 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #884 | 1,632 | 0 | 4 |