H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 07:16 UTC
Daniil Medvedev vs Joao Sousa H2H: 2-1
Daniil Medvedev holds a 2–1 lead over Joao Sousa in their ATP head-to-head. Across 3 main-draw meetings, they are tied 1–1 on clay, while Daniil Medvedev leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Daniil Medvedev won the 2019 Monte Carlo Masters second round 6-1 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.
Russia
Age 30
Right-Handed
198 cm / 6'6"
H2H
2
–
1
3 main draw meetings
POR
Age 37
Right-Handed
185 cm / 6'1"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 16, 2019* | Monte Carlo Masters | Masters 1000 | R64 | Clay | Daniil Medvedev | 6-1 6-1 | Joao Sousa | Match data |
| Sep 20, 2018* | St. Petersburg | ATP 250 | R32 | Hard | Daniil Medvedev | 6-4 6-1 | Joao Sousa | Match data |
| May 3, 2018* | Estoril | ATP 250 | R32 | Clay | Joao Sousa | 7-6(1) 7-5 | Daniil Medvedev | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Daniil Medvedev | #8 | #1 | 10,780 | 2,285 | 427 | 182 | 70.1% | 1 | 6 | 1 | 5 | 10 | 23 |
| Joao Sousa | #954 | #28 | 1,355 | 1,917 | 189 | 247 | 43.3% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 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 | Daniil Medvedev | Joao Sousa | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 19 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2008 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #592 | 1,550 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2016 | 5–5 | 50.0% | #99 | 1,684 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 21 | 2017 | 22–23 | 48.9% | #65 | 1,739 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 22 | 2018 | 41–23 | 64.1% | #16 | 2,033 | 0 | 3 | 2011 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #192 | 1,507 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2019 | 58–21 | 73.4% | #5 | 2,126 | 0 | 7 | 2012 | 3–4 | 42.9% | #101 | 1,587 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2020 | 24–9 | 72.7% | #4 | 2,177 | 0 | 9 | 2013 | 14–13 | 51.9% | #49 | 1,796 | 0 | 1 |
| 25 | 2021 | 50–12 | 80.6% | #2 | 2,244 | 1 | 13 | 2014 | 23–33 | 41.1% | #54 | 1,741 | 0 | 1 |
| 26 | 2022 | 42–18 | 70.0% | #7 | 2,064 | 1 | 15 | 2015 | 34–30 | 53.1% | #33 | 1,904 | 0 | 2 |
| 27 | 2023 | 67–18 | 78.8% | #3 | 2,160 | 1 | 20 | 2016 | 24–32 | 42.9% | #43 | 1,802 | 0 | 2 |
| 28 | 2024 | 44–18 | 71.0% | #5 | 2,099 | 1 | 20 | 2017 | 22–30 | 42.3% | #57 | 1,734 | 0 | 2 |
| 29 | 2025 | 43–23 | 65.2% | #13 | 1,950 | 1 | 21 | 2018 | 25–26 | 49.0% | #44 | 1,783 | 0 | 3 |
| 30 | 2026 | 31–12 | 72.1% | #8 | 1,936 | 1 | 23 | 2019 | 25–28 | 47.2% | #60 | 1,756 | 0 | 3 |
| 31 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2020 | 0–9 | 0.0% | #90 | 1,606 | 0 | 3 |
| 32 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2021 | 1–12 | 7.7% | #140 | 1,545 | 0 | 3 |
| 33 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2022 | 13–20 | 39.4% | #82 | 1,565 | 0 | 4 |
| 34 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2023 | 3–7 | 30.0% | #249 | 1,509 | 0 | 4 |
| 35 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2024 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #726 | 1,503 | 0 | 4 |