H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 07:16 UTC
Nicolas Jarry vs Jeremy Chardy H2H: 1-2
Jeremy Chardy holds a 2–1 lead over Nicolas Jarry in their ATP head-to-head. Across 3 main-draw meetings, Jeremy Chardy leads 2–0 on hard courts, while Nicolas Jarry leads 1–0 on clay. Most recently, Jeremy Chardy won the 2019 Moscow third round 6-4 6-2.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
Chile
Age 30
Right-Handed
198 cm / 6'6"
H2H
1
–
2
3 main draw meetings
FRA
Age 39
Right-Handed
188 cm / 6'2"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 17, 2019* | Moscow | ATP 250 | R32 | Hard | Jeremy Chardy | 6-4 6-2 | Nicolas Jarry | Match data |
| Jul 20, 2019* | Bastad | ATP 250 | QF | Clay | Nicolas Jarry | 6-1 6-4 | Jeremy Chardy | Match data |
| Mar 22, 2019* | Miami Masters | Masters 1000 | R128 | Hard | Jeremy Chardy | 6-7(1) 6-2 7-6(5) | Nicolas Jarry | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nicolas Jarry | #211 | #16 | 2,295 | 1,942 | 110 | 117 | 48.5% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 3 |
| Jeremy Chardy | #1,077 | #25 | 1,486 | 1,968 | 290 | 303 | 48.9% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
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 | Nicolas Jarry | Jeremy Chardy | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 19 | 2015 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #372 | 1,469 | 0 | 0 | 2006 | 2–2 | 50.0% | #261 | 1,547 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2016 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #330 | 1,461 | 0 | 0 | 2007 | 0–3 | 0.0% | #192 | 1,563 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2017 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #111 | 1,529 | 0 | 0 | 2008 | 10–9 | 52.6% | #75 | 1,680 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2018 | 25–21 | 54.3% | #43 | 1,765 | 0 | 0 | 2009 | 34–28 | 54.8% | #32 | 1,780 | 0 | 1 |
| 23 | 2019 | 17–19 | 47.2% | #77 | 1,691 | 0 | 1 | 2010 | 24–28 | 46.2% | #45 | 1,827 | 0 | 1 |
| 24 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2011 | 8–18 | 30.8% | #103 | 1,728 | 0 | 1 |
| 25 | 2021 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #146 | 1,671 | 0 | 1 | 2012 | 24–20 | 54.5% | #32 | 1,822 | 0 | 1 |
| 26 | 2022 | 3–8 | 27.3% | #152 | 1,697 | 0 | 1 | 2013 | 22–25 | 46.8% | #34 | 1,797 | 0 | 1 |
| 27 | 2023 | 36–19 | 65.5% | #19 | 1,907 | 0 | 3 | 2014 | 33–27 | 55.0% | #29 | 1,859 | 0 | 1 |
| 28 | 2024 | 16–22 | 42.1% | #35 | 1,737 | 0 | 3 | 2015 | 27–27 | 50.0% | #31 | 1,896 | 0 | 1 |
| 29 | 2025 | 11–19 | 36.7% | #122 | 1,696 | 0 | 3 | 2016 | 17–21 | 44.7% | #69 | 1,752 | 0 | 1 |
| 30 | 2026 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #211 | 1,603 | 0 | 3 | 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 |