H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC
Agnieszka Radwanska vs Stefanie Voegele H2H: 1-0
Agnieszka Radwanska holds a 1–0 lead over Stefanie Voegele in their WTA head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Agnieszka Radwanska leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Agnieszka Radwanska won the 2013 Beijing second round 4-6 6-4 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.
POL
Age 37
Right-Handed
173 cm / 5'8"
H2H
1
–
0
1 main draw meetings
SUI
Age 36
Right-Handed
170 cm / 5'7"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 2, 2013* | Beijing | WTA 1000 | R64 | Hard | Agnieszka Radwanska | 4-6 6-4 6-4 | Stefanie Voegele | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Agnieszka Radwanska | #74 | #2 | 8,530 | 2,081 | 506 | 237 | 68.1% | 0 | 5 | 1 | 8 | 6 | 20 |
| Stefanie Voegele | #1,075 | #42 | 1,255 | 1,712 | 100 | 175 | 36.4% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
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 | Agnieszka Radwanska | Stefanie Voegele | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 17 | 2006 | 11–8 | 57.9% | #61 | 1,673 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 18 | 2007 | 27–19 | 58.7% | #26 | 1,808 | 0 | 1 | 2008 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #124 | 1,486 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 2008 | 51–19 | 72.9% | #10 | 1,926 | 0 | 4 | 2009 | 10–9 | 52.6% | #75 | 1,559 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2009 | 44–23 | 65.7% | #10 | 1,910 | 0 | 4 | 2010 | 9–22 | 29.0% | #135 | 1,504 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2010 | 32–18 | 64.0% | #14 | 1,860 | 0 | 4 | 2011 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #138 | 1,517 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2011 | 46–18 | 71.9% | #8 | 1,979 | 0 | 7 | 2012 | 2–7 | 22.2% | #92 | 1,496 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2012 | 59–19 | 75.6% | #4 | 1,994 | 0 | 10 | 2013 | 21–20 | 51.2% | #50 | 1,665 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2013 | 56–20 | 73.7% | #5 | 1,957 | 0 | 13 | 2014 | 14–23 | 37.8% | #79 | 1,550 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2014 | 43–22 | 66.2% | #6 | 1,872 | 0 | 14 | 2015 | 7–17 | 29.2% | #119 | 1,513 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 2015 | 50–22 | 69.4% | #5 | 1,957 | 0 | 17 | 2016 | 10–15 | 40.0% | #114 | 1,517 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | 2016 | 51–18 | 73.9% | #3 | 1,942 | 0 | 20 | 2017 | 5–4 | 55.6% | #169 | 1,650 | 0 | 0 |
| 28 | 2017 | 25–18 | 58.1% | #28 | 1,812 | 0 | 20 | 2018 | 9–17 | 34.6% | #83 | 1,591 | 0 | 0 |
| 29 | 2018 | 11–13 | 45.8% | #74 | 1,727 | 0 | 20 | 2019 | 6–16 | 27.3% | #119 | 1,582 | 0 | 0 |
| 30 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2020 | 1–5 | 16.7% | #116 | 1,597 | 0 | 0 |
| 31 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2021 | 4–12 | 25.0% | #147 | 1,536 | 0 | 0 |
| 32 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2022 | 1–5 | 16.7% | #260 | 1,499 | 0 | 0 |