H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 10:32 UTC
Amanda Anisimova vs Beatriz Haddad Maia H2H: 3-1
Amanda Anisimova holds a 3–1 lead over Beatriz Haddad Maia in their WTA head-to-head. Across 4 main-draw meetings, Amanda Anisimova leads 2–1 on hard courts and 1–0 on clay. Most recently, Amanda Anisimova won the 2025 US Open fourth round 6-0 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.
USA
Age 24
Right-Handed
180 cm / 5'11"
H2H
3
–
1
4 main draw meetings
BRA
Age 30
Left-Handed
185 cm / 6'1"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 2, 2025 | US Open | Grand Slam | R16 | Hard | Amanda Anisimova | 6-0 6-3 | Beatriz Haddad Maia | Match data |
| Jan 12, 2023* | Adelaide 2 | WTA 500 | R16 | Hard | Beatriz Haddad Maia | 6-4 7-5 | Amanda Anisimova | Match data |
| Feb 22, 2022* | Doha | WTA 1000 | R64 | Hard | Amanda Anisimova | 7-5 6-4 | Beatriz Haddad Maia | Match data |
| Apr 13, 2019* | Bogota | WTA 250 | SF | Clay | Amanda Anisimova | 4-6 7-6(2) 6-2 | Beatriz Haddad Maia | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Amanda Anisimova | #9 | #4 | 6,680 | 2,123 | 172 | 103 | 62.5% | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 4 |
| Beatriz Haddad Maia | #153 | #10 | 3,194 | 1,944 | 147 | 135 | 52.1% | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 3 | 4 |
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 | Amanda Anisimova | Beatriz Haddad Maia | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 15 | 2017 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #191 | 1,482 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 16 | 2018 | 11–6 | 64.7% | #96 | 1,679 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 17 | 2019 | 23–12 | 65.7% | #24 | 1,770 | 0 | 1 | 2013 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #299 | 1,501 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 2020 | 11–10 | 52.4% | #30 | 1,768 | 0 | 1 | 2014 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #239 | 1,475 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 2021 | 14–15 | 48.3% | #78 | 1,774 | 0 | 1 | 2015 | 3–2 | 60.0% | #246 | 1,508 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2022 | 33–14 | 70.2% | #23 | 1,902 | 0 | 2 | 2016 | 0–3 | 0.0% | #174 | 1,460 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2023 | 2–7 | 22.2% | #369 | 1,777 | 0 | 2 | 2017 | 14–12 | 53.8% | #71 | 1,659 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2024 | 17–12 | 58.6% | #36 | 1,867 | 0 | 2 | 2018 | 5–9 | 35.7% | #183 | 1,581 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2025 | 45–16 | 73.8% | #4 | 2,112 | 0 | 4 | 2019 | 7–5 | 58.3% | #121 | 1,673 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2026 | 16–9 | 64.0% | #9 | 1,999 | 0 | 4 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 25 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2021 | 2–2 | 50.0% | #83 | 1,635 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2022 | 34–21 | 61.8% | #15 | 1,847 | 0 | 2 |
| 27 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2023 | 32–21 | 60.4% | #11 | 1,893 | 0 | 3 |
| 28 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2024 | 33–24 | 57.9% | #17 | 1,895 | 0 | 4 |
| 29 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2025 | 16–22 | 42.1% | #58 | 1,769 | 0 | 4 |
| 30 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2026 | 0–11 | 0.0% | #153 | 1,537 | 0 | 4 |