H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 19:16 UTC
Jeremy Chardy vs Nikola Cacic H2H: 1-0
Jeremy Chardy holds a 1–0 lead over Nikola Cacic in their ATP head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Jeremy Chardy leads 1–0 on clay. Most recently, Jeremy Chardy won the 2016 Umag fourth round 6-2 6-0.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
FRA
Age 39
Right-Handed
188 cm / 6'2"
H2H
1
–
0
1 main draw meetings
SRB
Age 35
Right-Handed
183 cm / 6'0"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 22, 2016* | Umag | ATP 250 | R16 | Clay | Jeremy Chardy | 6-2 6-0 | Nikola Cacic | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jeremy Chardy | #1,077 | #25 | 1,486 | 1,968 | 290 | 303 | 48.9% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| Nikola Cacic | #1,516 | #281 | 161 | 1,505 | 1 | 1 | 50.0% | 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 | Jeremy Chardy | Nikola Cacic | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 19 | 2006 | 2–2 | 50.0% | #261 | 1,547 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 20 | 2007 | 0–3 | 0.0% | #192 | 1,563 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 21 | 2008 | 10–9 | 52.6% | #75 | 1,680 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 22 | 2009 | 34–28 | 54.8% | #32 | 1,780 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 23 | 2010 | 24–28 | 46.2% | #45 | 1,827 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 24 | 2011 | 8–18 | 30.8% | #103 | 1,728 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 25 | 2012 | 24–20 | 54.5% | #32 | 1,822 | 0 | 1 | 2016 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #533 | 1,485 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 2013 | 22–25 | 46.8% | #34 | 1,797 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 27 | 2014 | 33–27 | 55.0% | #29 | 1,859 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 28 | 2015 | 27–27 | 50.0% | #31 | 1,896 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 29 | 2016 | 17–21 | 44.7% | #69 | 1,752 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 30 | 2017 | 17–21 | 44.7% | #78 | 1,784 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 31 | 2018 | 24–21 | 53.3% | #40 | 1,830 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 32 | 2019 | 28–27 | 50.9% | #51 | 1,918 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 33 | 2020 | 2–5 | 28.6% | #75 | 1,786 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 34 | 2021 | 17–17 | 50.0% | #107 | 1,774 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 36 | 2023 | 1–4 | 20.0% | #519 | 1,718 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |