H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 14:16 UTC
Borna Coric vs Horacio Zeballos H2H: 1-1
Borna Coric and Horacio Zeballos are tied 1–1 in their ATP head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, they are tied 1–1 on clay. Most recently, Borna Coric won the 2014 Umag fourth round 7-6(4) 6-3.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
Croatia
Age 29
Right-Handed
188 cm / 6'2"
H2H
1
–
1
2 main draw meetings
ARG
Age 41
Left-Handed
188 cm / 6'2"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 25, 2014* | Umag | ATP 250 | R16 | Clay | Borna Coric | 7-6(4) 6-3 | Horacio Zeballos | Match data |
| Jul 25, 2013* | Umag | ATP 250 | R32 | Clay | Horacio Zeballos | 6-7(5) 6-4 6-0 | Borna Coric | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Borna Coric | #237 | #12 | 2,695 | 2,047 | 200 | 187 | 51.7% | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 3 |
| Horacio Zeballos | #841 | #39 | 1,027 | 1,876 | 87 | 131 | 39.9% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
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 | Borna Coric | Horacio Zeballos | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 16 | 2013 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #303 | 1,495 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 17 | 2014 | 6–5 | 54.5% | #102 | 1,647 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 18 | 2015 | 24–27 | 47.1% | #44 | 1,824 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 19 | 2016 | 21–20 | 51.2% | #48 | 1,866 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 20 | 2017 | 21–25 | 45.7% | #48 | 1,803 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 21 | 2018 | 35–19 | 64.8% | #12 | 2,014 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 22 | 2019 | 27–22 | 55.1% | #28 | 1,814 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 23 | 2020 | 15–10 | 60.0% | #24 | 1,883 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 24 | 2021 | 6–3 | 66.7% | #73 | 1,891 | 0 | 2 | 2009 | 5–5 | 50.0% | #45 | 1,613 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2022 | 16–12 | 57.1% | #26 | 1,931 | 0 | 3 | 2010 | 14–26 | 35.0% | #110 | 1,596 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 2023 | 18–18 | 50.0% | #37 | 1,789 | 0 | 3 | 2011 | 5–6 | 45.5% | #109 | 1,598 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | 2024 | 11–18 | 37.9% | #90 | 1,650 | 0 | 3 | 2012 | 3–9 | 25.0% | #85 | 1,591 | 0 | 0 |
| 28 | 2025 | 0–7 | 0.0% | #115 | 1,574 | 0 | 3 | 2013 | 14–23 | 37.8% | #56 | 1,587 | 0 | 1 |
| 29 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2014 | 7–9 | 43.8% | #123 | 1,631 | 0 | 1 |
| 30 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2015 | 2–4 | 33.3% | #124 | 1,645 | 0 | 1 |
| 31 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2016 | 7–13 | 35.0% | #71 | 1,671 | 0 | 1 |
| 32 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2017 | 20–22 | 47.6% | #66 | 1,758 | 0 | 1 |
| 33 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2018 | 10–14 | 41.7% | #173 | 1,721 | 0 | 1 |