H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC
Juan Carlos Ferrero vs Michael Chang H2H: 0-1
Michael Chang holds a 1–0 lead over Juan Carlos Ferrero in their ATP head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Michael Chang leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Michael Chang won the 2000 Indian Wells Masters second round 7-5 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.
ESP
Age 46
Right-Handed
183 cm / 6'0"
H2H
0
–
1
1 main draw meetings
USA
Age 54
Right-Handed
175 cm / 5'9"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 15, 2000* | Indian Wells Masters | Masters 1000 | R64 | Hard | Michael Chang | 7-5 6-4 | Juan Carlos Ferrero | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Juan Carlos Ferrero | #968 | #1 | 4,570 | 2,096 | 457 | 254 | 64.3% | 1 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 11 | 16 |
| Michael Chang | #1,039 | #2 | 4,065 | 2,110 | 648 | 303 | 68.1% | 1 | 7 | 0 | 0 | 26 | 34 |
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 | Juan Carlos Ferrero | Michael Chang | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 15 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1987 | 4–4 | 50.0% | #163 | 1,559 | 0 | 0 |
| 16 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1988 | 23–13 | 63.9% | #30 | 1,842 | 0 | 1 |
| 17 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1989 | 45–17 | 72.6% | #5 | 1,971 | 1 | 3 |
| 18 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1990 | 34–19 | 64.2% | #15 | 1,917 | 1 | 4 |
| 19 | 1999 | 16–8 | 66.7% | #42 | 1,686 | 0 | 1 | 1991 | 47–20 | 70.1% | #15 | 2,002 | 1 | 5 |
| 20 | 2000 | 38–25 | 60.3% | #12 | 1,802 | 0 | 1 | 1992 | 57–22 | 72.2% | #6 | 1,975 | 1 | 8 |
| 21 | 2001 | 56–20 | 73.7% | #5 | 1,878 | 0 | 5 | 1993 | 62–21 | 74.7% | #8 | 1,992 | 1 | 13 |
| 22 | 2002 | 47–24 | 66.2% | #4 | 1,918 | 0 | 7 | 1994 | 66–19 | 77.6% | #6 | 2,005 | 1 | 19 |
| 23 | 2003 | 63–18 | 77.8% | #3 | 2,005 | 1 | 11 | 1995 | 65–19 | 77.4% | #5 | 2,008 | 1 | 23 |
| 24 | 2004 | 19–15 | 55.9% | #31 | 1,751 | 1 | 11 | 1996 | 63–19 | 76.8% | #2 | 1,985 | 1 | 26 |
| 25 | 2005 | 45–26 | 63.4% | #17 | 1,841 | 1 | 11 | 1997 | 53–18 | 74.6% | #3 | 1,910 | 1 | 31 |
| 26 | 2006 | 28–23 | 54.9% | #23 | 1,740 | 1 | 11 | 1998 | 35–16 | 68.6% | #29 | 1,838 | 1 | 33 |
| 27 | 2007 | 34–23 | 59.6% | #24 | 1,833 | 1 | 11 | 1999 | 27–22 | 55.1% | #50 | 1,788 | 1 | 33 |
| 28 | 2008 | 21–15 | 58.3% | #55 | 1,845 | 1 | 11 | 2000 | 42–25 | 62.7% | #32 | 1,818 | 1 | 34 |
| 29 | 2009 | 33–20 | 62.3% | #23 | 1,924 | 1 | 12 | 2001 | 16–21 | 43.2% | #94 | 1,701 | 1 | 34 |
| 30 | 2010 | 33–14 | 70.2% | #29 | 1,887 | 1 | 15 | 2002 | 7–18 | 28.0% | #124 | 1,625 | 1 | 34 |
| 31 | 2011 | 20–11 | 64.5% | #50 | 1,924 | 1 | 16 | 2003 | 2–10 | 16.7% | #383 | 1,551 | 1 | 34 |
| 32 | 2012 | 4–12 | 25.0% | #213 | 1,794 | 1 | 16 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |