H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 01:16 UTC
Roger Federer vs Tim Henman H2H: 7-6
Roger Federer holds a 7–6 lead over Tim Henman in their ATP head-to-head. Across 13 main-draw meetings, Roger Federer leads 6–2 on hard courts, while Tim Henman leads 3–0 on carpet. Most recently, Roger Federer won the 2006 Tokyo final 6-3 6-3.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
SUI
Age 44
Right-Handed
185 cm / 6'1"
H2H
7
–
6
13 main draw meetings
GBR
Age 51
Right-Handed
185 cm / 6'1"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 8, 2006* | Tokyo | ATP 250 | F | Hard | Roger Federer | 6-3 6-3 | Tim Henman | Match data |
| Sep 1, 2006* | US Open | Grand Slam | R64 | Hard | Roger Federer | 6-3 6-4 7-5 | Tim Henman | Match data |
| Jun 30, 2006* | Wimbledon | Grand Slam | R64 | Grass | Roger Federer | 6-4 6-0 6-2 | Tim Henman | Match data |
| Mar 27, 2005* | Miami Masters | Masters 1000 | QF | Hard | Roger Federer | 6-4 6-2 | Tim Henman | Match data |
| Sep 12, 2004* | US Open | Grand Slam | SF | Hard | Roger Federer | 6-3 6-4 6-4 | Tim Henman | Match data |
| Mar 15, 2004* | Indian Wells Masters | Masters 1000 | F | Hard | Roger Federer | 6-3 6-3 | Tim Henman | Match data |
| Feb 21, 2004* | Rotterdam | ATP 250 | QF | Hard | Tim Henman | 6-3 7-6(9) | Roger Federer | Match data |
| Nov 2, 2003* | Paris Masters | Masters 1000 | QF | Carpet | Tim Henman | 7-6(5) 6-1 | Roger Federer | Match data |
| Mar 23, 2002* | Miami Masters | Masters 1000 | R16 | Hard | Roger Federer | 6-2 (ret.) | Tim Henman | Match data |
| Oct 28, 2001* | Basel | ATP 250 | F | Carpet | Tim Henman | 6-3 6-4 6-2 | Roger Federer | Match data |
| Jul 6, 2001* | Wimbledon | Grand Slam | QF | Grass | Tim Henman | 7-5 7-6(6) 2-6 7-6(6) | Roger Federer | Match data |
| Oct 14, 2000* | Vienna | ATP 250 | SF | Hard | Tim Henman | 2-6 7-6(4) 6-3 | Roger Federer | Match data |
| Oct 9, 1999* | Basel | ATP 250 | QF | Carpet | Tim Henman | 6-3 7-5 | Roger Federer | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Roger Federer | #97 | #1 | 12,315 | 2,430 | 1,206 | 267 | 81.9% | 20 | 28 | 6 | 22 | 27 | 103 |
| Tim Henman | #615 | #4 | 2,826 | 2,027 | 468 | 260 | 64.3% | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 10 | 11 |
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 | Roger Federer | Tim Henman | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 16 | 1998 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #301 | 1,530 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 17 | 1999 | 12–14 | 46.2% | #64 | 1,663 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 18 | 2000 | 30–27 | 52.6% | #29 | 1,771 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 19 | 2001 | 46–20 | 69.7% | #13 | 1,874 | 0 | 1 | 1994 | 3–5 | 37.5% | #167 | 1,513 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2002 | 55–22 | 71.4% | #6 | 1,944 | 0 | 4 | 1995 | 7–7 | 50.0% | #95 | 1,584 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2003 | 74–16 | 82.2% | #2 | 2,104 | 1 | 11 | 1996 | 37–24 | 60.7% | #29 | 1,821 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2004 | 70–5 | 93.3% | #1 | 2,301 | 4 | 22 | 1997 | 47–23 | 67.1% | #17 | 1,895 | 0 | 2 |
| 23 | 2005 | 80–4 | 95.2% | #1 | 2,348 | 6 | 33 | 1998 | 55–29 | 65.5% | #7 | 1,960 | 0 | 4 |
| 24 | 2006 | 90–5 | 94.7% | #1 | 2,401 | 9 | 45 | 1999 | 41–25 | 62.1% | #12 | 1,785 | 0 | 4 |
| 25 | 2007 | 67–9 | 88.2% | #1 | 2,330 | 12 | 53 | 2000 | 55–23 | 70.5% | #10 | 1,953 | 0 | 6 |
| 26 | 2008 | 63–15 | 80.8% | #2 | 2,198 | 13 | 57 | 2001 | 49–20 | 71.0% | #9 | 1,924 | 0 | 8 |
| 27 | 2009 | 59–12 | 83.1% | #1 | 2,259 | 15 | 61 | 2002 | 45–18 | 71.4% | #8 | 1,867 | 0 | 9 |
| 28 | 2010 | 66–13 | 83.5% | #2 | 2,311 | 16 | 66 | 2003 | 30–16 | 65.2% | #15 | 1,970 | 0 | 11 |
| 29 | 2011 | 61–12 | 83.6% | #3 | 2,340 | 16 | 70 | 2004 | 41–20 | 67.2% | #6 | 1,926 | 0 | 11 |
| 30 | 2012 | 67–11 | 85.9% | #2 | 2,347 | 17 | 76 | 2005 | 23–18 | 56.1% | #36 | 1,746 | 0 | 11 |
| 31 | 2013 | 45–17 | 72.6% | #6 | 2,189 | 17 | 77 | 2006 | 31–20 | 60.8% | #39 | 1,868 | 0 | 11 |
| 32 | 2014 | 68–12 | 85.0% | #2 | 2,343 | 17 | 82 | 2007 | 4–12 | 25.0% | #292 | 1,684 | 0 | 11 |
| 33 | 2015 | 61–11 | 84.7% | #3 | 2,398 | 17 | 88 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 34 | 2016 | 21–7 | 75.0% | #16 | 2,283 | 17 | 88 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 35 | 2017 | 53–5 | 91.4% | #2 | 2,385 | 19 | 95 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 36 | 2018 | 49–10 | 83.1% | #3 | 2,261 | 20 | 99 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 37 | 2019 | 53–11 | 82.8% | #3 | 2,240 | 20 | 103 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 38 | 2020 | 5–1 | 83.3% | #5 | 2,240 | 20 | 103 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 39 | 2021 | 9–5 | 64.3% | #16 | 2,128 | 20 | 103 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |