H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 19:16 UTC
Nicolas Jarry vs Mischa Zverev H2H: 1-1
Nicolas Jarry and Mischa Zverev are tied 1–1 in their ATP head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Mischa Zverev leads 1–0 on grass, while Nicolas Jarry leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Nicolas Jarry won the 2018 Shanghai Masters second round 6-4 3-6 7-6(5).
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
–
1
2 main draw meetings
GER
Age 38
Left-Handed
191 cm / 6'3"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 9, 2018* | Shanghai Masters | Masters 1000 | R64 | Hard | Nicolas Jarry | 6-4 3-6 7-6(5) | Mischa Zverev | Match data |
| Jun 27, 2018* | Eastbourne | ATP 250 | R32 | Grass | Mischa Zverev | 3-6 6-1 6-4 | 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 |
| Mischa Zverev | #1,373 | #25 | 1,664 | 2,007 | 134 | 199 | 40.2% | 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 | Mischa Zverev | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 18 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2006 | 3–3 | 50.0% | #151 | 1,528 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 2015 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #372 | 1,469 | 0 | 0 | 2007 | 6–8 | 42.9% | #88 | 1,606 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2016 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #330 | 1,461 | 0 | 0 | 2008 | 18–23 | 43.9% | #80 | 1,703 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2017 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #111 | 1,529 | 0 | 0 | 2009 | 15–24 | 38.5% | #78 | 1,630 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2018 | 25–21 | 54.3% | #43 | 1,765 | 0 | 0 | 2010 | 14–18 | 43.8% | #82 | 1,689 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2019 | 17–19 | 47.2% | #77 | 1,691 | 0 | 1 | 2011 | 2–18 | 10.0% | #211 | 1,498 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2012 | 0–3 | 0.0% | #159 | 1,608 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2021 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #146 | 1,671 | 0 | 1 | 2013 | 4–5 | 44.4% | #176 | 1,639 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 2022 | 3–8 | 27.3% | #152 | 1,697 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 27 | 2023 | 36–19 | 65.5% | #19 | 1,907 | 0 | 3 | 2015 | 7–8 | 46.7% | #171 | 1,839 | 0 | 0 |
| 28 | 2024 | 16–22 | 42.1% | #35 | 1,737 | 0 | 3 | 2016 | 12–14 | 46.2% | #51 | 1,917 | 0 | 0 |
| 29 | 2025 | 11–19 | 36.7% | #122 | 1,696 | 0 | 3 | 2017 | 30–31 | 49.2% | #33 | 1,850 | 0 | 0 |
| 30 | 2026 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #211 | 1,603 | 0 | 3 | 2018 | 19–29 | 39.6% | #69 | 1,686 | 0 | 1 |
| 31 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2019 | 3–12 | 20.0% | #281 | 1,571 | 0 | 1 |
| 32 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2020 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #264 | 1,568 | 0 | 1 |
| 33 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2021 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #346 | 1,521 | 0 | 1 |