H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 13:16 UTC
Milos Raonic vs Thomaz Bellucci H2H: 2-0
Milos Raonic holds a 2–0 lead over Thomaz Bellucci in their ATP head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Milos Raonic leads 1–0 on clay and 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Milos Raonic won the 2016 Madrid Masters second round 7-6(4) 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.
CAN
Age 35
Right-Handed
196 cm / 6'5"
H2H
2
–
0
2 main draw meetings
BRA
Age 38
Left-Handed
188 cm / 6'2"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 3, 2016* | Madrid Masters | Masters 1000 | R64 | Clay | Milos Raonic | 7-6(4) 6-1 | Thomaz Bellucci | Match data |
| Oct 13, 2015* | Shanghai Masters | Masters 1000 | R64 | Hard | Milos Raonic | 7-6(5) 7-6(2) | Thomaz Bellucci | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Milos Raonic | #634 | #3 | 5,450 | 2,246 | 369 | 186 | 66.5% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 7 | 8 |
| Thomaz Bellucci | #1,303 | #21 | 1,732 | 1,937 | 179 | 201 | 47.1% | 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 | Milos Raonic | Thomaz Bellucci | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 18 | 2009 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #373 | 1,535 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 19 | 2010 | 3–4 | 42.9% | #156 | 1,651 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 20 | 2011 | 30–18 | 62.5% | #31 | 1,839 | 0 | 1 | 2008 | 3–11 | 21.4% | #85 | 1,554 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2012 | 42–20 | 67.7% | #13 | 1,987 | 0 | 3 | 2009 | 18–17 | 51.4% | #36 | 1,781 | 0 | 1 |
| 22 | 2013 | 41–21 | 66.1% | #11 | 2,034 | 0 | 5 | 2010 | 32–24 | 57.1% | #31 | 1,795 | 0 | 2 |
| 23 | 2014 | 47–20 | 70.1% | #8 | 2,087 | 0 | 6 | 2011 | 23–24 | 48.9% | #37 | 1,710 | 0 | 2 |
| 24 | 2015 | 32–15 | 68.1% | #14 | 2,047 | 0 | 7 | 2012 | 24–21 | 53.3% | #33 | 1,828 | 0 | 3 |
| 25 | 2016 | 52–19 | 73.2% | #3 | 2,143 | 0 | 8 | 2013 | 7–16 | 30.4% | #125 | 1,676 | 0 | 3 |
| 26 | 2017 | 29–14 | 67.4% | #24 | 2,053 | 0 | 8 | 2014 | 16–13 | 55.2% | #65 | 1,818 | 0 | 3 |
| 27 | 2018 | 31–18 | 63.3% | #18 | 1,952 | 0 | 8 | 2015 | 29–27 | 51.8% | #37 | 1,856 | 0 | 4 |
| 28 | 2019 | 23–13 | 63.9% | #31 | 1,919 | 0 | 8 | 2016 | 14–21 | 40.0% | #61 | 1,758 | 0 | 4 |
| 29 | 2020 | 23–10 | 69.7% | #14 | 1,996 | 0 | 8 | 2017 | 12–20 | 37.5% | #113 | 1,693 | 0 | 4 |
| 30 | 2021 | 6–4 | 60.0% | #70 | 1,964 | 0 | 8 | 2018 | 1–5 | 16.7% | #225 | 1,654 | 0 | 4 |
| 32 | 2023 | 4–4 | 50.0% | #317 | 1,909 | 0 | 8 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 33 | 2024 | 6–5 | 54.5% | #238 | 1,903 | 0 | 8 | 2021 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #449 | 1,610 | 0 | 4 |
| 35 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2023 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #1303 | 1,598 | 0 | 4 |