H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC
Alison Van Uytvanck vs Stefanie Voegele H2H: 1-0
Alison Van Uytvanck holds a 1–0 lead over Stefanie Voegele in their WTA head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Alison Van Uytvanck leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Alison Van Uytvanck won the 2014 Luxembourg third round 5-7 6-2 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.
BEL
Age 32
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 16, 2014* | Luxembourg | WTA 250 | R32 | Hard | Alison Van Uytvanck | 5-7 6-2 6-2 | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Alison Van Uytvanck | #229 | #37 | 1,355 | 1,765 | 119 | 147 | 44.7% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 5 |
| 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 | Alison Van Uytvanck | Stefanie Voegele | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 17 | 2011 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #287 | 1,510 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 18 | 2012 | 2–1 | 66.7% | #199 | 1,554 | 0 | 0 | 2008 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #124 | 1,486 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 2013 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #112 | 1,524 | 0 | 0 | 2009 | 10–9 | 52.6% | #75 | 1,559 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2014 | 10–17 | 37.0% | #106 | 1,528 | 0 | 0 | 2010 | 9–22 | 29.0% | #135 | 1,504 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2015 | 19–18 | 51.4% | #44 | 1,649 | 0 | 0 | 2011 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #138 | 1,517 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2016 | 4–13 | 23.5% | #121 | 1,517 | 0 | 0 | 2012 | 2–7 | 22.2% | #92 | 1,496 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2017 | 8–7 | 53.3% | #76 | 1,619 | 0 | 1 | 2013 | 21–20 | 51.2% | #50 | 1,665 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2018 | 18–21 | 46.2% | #49 | 1,650 | 0 | 2 | 2014 | 14–23 | 37.8% | #79 | 1,550 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2019 | 24–19 | 55.8% | #47 | 1,713 | 0 | 4 | 2015 | 7–17 | 29.2% | #119 | 1,513 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 2020 | 7–11 | 38.9% | #64 | 1,663 | 0 | 4 | 2016 | 10–15 | 40.0% | #114 | 1,517 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | 2021 | 13–14 | 48.1% | #58 | 1,752 | 0 | 5 | 2017 | 5–4 | 55.6% | #169 | 1,650 | 0 | 0 |
| 28 | 2022 | 9–13 | 40.9% | #72 | 1,679 | 0 | 5 | 2018 | 9–17 | 34.6% | #83 | 1,591 | 0 | 0 |
| 29 | 2023 | 3–4 | 42.9% | #344 | 1,682 | 0 | 5 | 2019 | 6–16 | 27.3% | #119 | 1,582 | 0 | 0 |
| 30 | 2024 | 0–4 | 0.0% | #229 | 1,607 | 0 | 5 | 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 |