H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 14:16 UTC
Daniel Evans vs Dominic Thiem H2H: 1-1
Daniel Evans and Dominic Thiem are tied 1–1 in their ATP head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Dominic Thiem leads 1–0 on clay, while Daniel Evans leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Dominic Thiem won the 2017 Barcelona fourth round 7-6(5) 6-2.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
Great Britain
Age 36
Right-Handed
175 cm / 5'9"
H2H
1
–
1
2 main draw meetings
AUT
Age 32
Right-Handed
185 cm / 6'1"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 28, 2017* | Barcelona | ATP 500 | R16 | Clay | Dominic Thiem | 7-6(5) 6-2 | Daniel Evans | Match data |
| Jan 14, 2017* | Sydney | ATP 250 | QF | Hard | Daniel Evans | 3-6 6-4 6-1 | Dominic Thiem | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Daniel Evans | #385 | #21 | 2,195 | 1,927 | 140 | 160 | 46.7% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 |
| Dominic Thiem | #1,174 | #3 | 9,125 | 2,241 | 337 | 207 | 61.9% | 1 | 1 | 0 | 5 | 10 | 17 |
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 | Daniel Evans | Dominic Thiem | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 17 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2011 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #638 | 1,495 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 2008 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #477 | 1,465 | 0 | 0 | 2012 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #309 | 1,486 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 2009 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #261 | 1,441 | 0 | 0 | 2013 | 4–2 | 66.7% | #139 | 1,580 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2010 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #363 | 1,505 | 0 | 0 | 2014 | 22–23 | 48.9% | #39 | 1,848 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2011 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #342 | 1,490 | 0 | 0 | 2015 | 36–26 | 58.1% | #20 | 1,889 | 0 | 3 |
| 22 | 2012 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #297 | 1,533 | 0 | 0 | 2016 | 58–24 | 70.7% | #8 | 2,015 | 0 | 7 |
| 23 | 2013 | 4–2 | 66.7% | #150 | 1,689 | 0 | 0 | 2017 | 47–27 | 63.5% | #5 | 1,958 | 0 | 8 |
| 24 | 2014 | 4–6 | 40.0% | #305 | 1,677 | 0 | 0 | 2018 | 50–21 | 70.4% | #8 | 2,064 | 0 | 11 |
| 25 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2019 | 48–17 | 73.8% | #4 | 2,145 | 0 | 16 |
| 26 | 2016 | 9–8 | 52.9% | #66 | 1,790 | 0 | 0 | 2020 | 24–7 | 77.4% | #3 | 2,200 | 1 | 17 |
| 27 | 2017 | 11–10 | 52.4% | #133 | 1,820 | 0 | 0 | 2021 | 8–8 | 50.0% | #15 | 2,014 | 1 | 17 |
| 28 | 2018 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #192 | 1,787 | 0 | 0 | 2022 | 18–16 | 52.9% | #102 | 1,907 | 1 | 17 |
| 29 | 2019 | 18–18 | 50.0% | #42 | 1,817 | 0 | 0 | 2023 | 19–22 | 46.3% | #98 | 1,799 | 1 | 17 |
| 30 | 2020 | 16–13 | 55.2% | #32 | 1,858 | 0 | 0 | 2024 | 1–9 | 10.0% | #524 | 1,627 | 1 | 17 |
| 31 | 2021 | 23–22 | 51.1% | #25 | 1,836 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 32 | 2022 | 27–26 | 50.9% | #27 | 1,850 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 33 | 2023 | 15–23 | 39.5% | #38 | 1,761 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 34 | 2024 | 6–19 | 24.0% | #164 | 1,704 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 35 | 2025 | 7–6 | 53.8% | #185 | 1,724 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |