H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 14:15 UTC
Dominic Thiem vs Matthew Ebden H2H: 0-1
Matthew Ebden holds a 1–0 lead over Dominic Thiem in their ATP head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Matthew Ebden leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Matthew Ebden won the 2018 Shanghai Masters third round 6-4 6-7(8) 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.
AUT
Age 32
Right-Handed
185 cm / 6'1"
H2H
0
–
1
1 main draw meetings
AUS
Age 38
Right-Handed
188 cm / 6'2"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 10, 2018* | Shanghai Masters | Masters 1000 | R32 | Hard | Matthew Ebden | 6-4 6-7(8) 7-6(4) | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dominic Thiem | #1,174 | #3 | 9,125 | 2,241 | 337 | 207 | 61.9% | 1 | 1 | 0 | 5 | 10 | 17 |
| Matthew Ebden | #970 | #39 | 1,134 | 1,849 | 75 | 129 | 36.8% | 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 | Dominic Thiem | Matthew Ebden | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 2012 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #309 | 1,486 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 19 | 2013 | 4–2 | 66.7% | #139 | 1,580 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 20 | 2014 | 22–23 | 48.9% | #39 | 1,848 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 21 | 2015 | 36–26 | 58.1% | #20 | 1,889 | 0 | 3 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 22 | 2016 | 58–24 | 70.7% | #8 | 2,015 | 0 | 7 | 2010 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #196 | 1,526 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2017 | 47–27 | 63.5% | #5 | 1,958 | 0 | 8 | 2011 | 10–10 | 50.0% | #86 | 1,762 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2018 | 50–21 | 70.4% | #8 | 2,064 | 0 | 11 | 2012 | 15–23 | 39.5% | #105 | 1,644 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2019 | 48–17 | 73.8% | #4 | 2,145 | 0 | 16 | 2013 | 4–11 | 26.7% | #68 | 1,634 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 2020 | 24–7 | 77.4% | #3 | 2,200 | 1 | 17 | 2014 | 5–21 | 19.2% | #231 | 1,540 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | 2021 | 8–8 | 50.0% | #15 | 2,014 | 1 | 17 | 2015 | 1–6 | 14.3% | #105 | 1,631 | 0 | 0 |
| 28 | 2022 | 18–16 | 52.9% | #102 | 1,907 | 1 | 17 | 2016 | 0–4 | 0.0% | #698 | 1,571 | 0 | 0 |
| 29 | 2023 | 19–22 | 46.3% | #98 | 1,799 | 1 | 17 | 2017 | 9–7 | 56.2% | #76 | 1,738 | 0 | 0 |
| 30 | 2024 | 1–9 | 10.0% | #524 | 1,627 | 1 | 17 | 2018 | 19–22 | 46.3% | #46 | 1,791 | 0 | 0 |
| 31 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2019 | 5–16 | 23.8% | #244 | 1,654 | 0 | 0 |
| 33 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2021 | 6–5 | 54.5% | #237 | 1,591 | 0 | 0 |
| 34 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2022 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #740 | 1,527 | 0 | 0 |
| 37 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2025 | 0–1 | 0.0% | — | 1,519 | 0 | 0 |