H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 07:16 UTC
Guillermo Garcia-Lopez vs Eduardo Schwank H2H: 2-0
Guillermo Garcia-Lopez holds a 2–0 lead over Eduardo Schwank in their ATP head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Guillermo Garcia-Lopez leads 2–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Guillermo Garcia-Lopez won the 2011 Australian Open second round 6-4 7-6(8) 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.
ESP
Age 43
Right-Handed
185 cm / 6'1"
H2H
2
–
0
2 main draw meetings
ARG
Age 40
Right-Handed
183 cm / 6'0"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 20, 2011* | Australian Open | Grand Slam | R64 | Hard | Guillermo Garcia-Lopez | 6-4 7-6(8) 6-1 | Eduardo Schwank | Match data |
| Oct 12, 2010* | Shanghai Masters | Masters 1000 | R64 | Hard | Guillermo Garcia-Lopez | 6-7(8) 6-2 6-4 | Eduardo Schwank | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Guillermo Garcia-Lopez | #1,009 | #23 | 1,465 | 1,938 | 299 | 353 | 45.9% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 5 |
| Eduardo Schwank | #1,858 | #48 | 1,380 | 1,742 | 37 | 61 | 37.8% | 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 | Guillermo Garcia-Lopez | Eduardo Schwank | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 20 | 2003 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #244 | 1,497 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 21 | 2004 | 5–7 | 41.7% | #129 | 1,578 | 0 | 0 | 2007 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #175 | 1,529 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2005 | 19–26 | 42.2% | #91 | 1,589 | 0 | 0 | 2008 | 15–15 | 50.0% | #58 | 1,706 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2006 | 15–20 | 42.9% | #68 | 1,595 | 0 | 0 | 2009 | 3–14 | 17.6% | #118 | 1,572 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2007 | 13–22 | 37.1% | #90 | 1,526 | 0 | 0 | 2010 | 12–21 | 36.4% | #74 | 1,593 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2008 | 22–22 | 50.0% | #62 | 1,646 | 0 | 0 | 2011 | 3–6 | 33.3% | #143 | 1,588 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 2009 | 28–27 | 50.9% | #41 | 1,757 | 0 | 1 | 2012 | 4–4 | 50.0% | #216 | 1,672 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | 2010 | 31–23 | 57.4% | #33 | 1,874 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 28 | 2011 | 20–29 | 40.8% | #65 | 1,712 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 29 | 2012 | 20–25 | 44.4% | #76 | 1,719 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 30 | 2013 | 20–21 | 48.8% | #62 | 1,774 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 31 | 2014 | 25–26 | 49.0% | #36 | 1,740 | 0 | 3 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 32 | 2015 | 32–25 | 56.1% | #27 | 1,853 | 0 | 5 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 33 | 2016 | 22–31 | 41.5% | #70 | 1,686 | 0 | 5 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 34 | 2017 | 5–15 | 25.0% | #70 | 1,747 | 0 | 5 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 35 | 2018 | 16–23 | 41.0% | #105 | 1,675 | 0 | 5 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 36 | 2019 | 6–10 | 37.5% | #144 | 1,694 | 0 | 5 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |