H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 14:15 UTC
Ana Ivanovic vs Michelle Larcher De Brito H2H: 0-1
Michelle Larcher De Brito holds a 1–0 lead over Ana Ivanovic in their WTA head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Michelle Larcher De Brito leads 1–0 on grass. Most recently, Michelle Larcher De Brito won the 2015 Birmingham third round 6-4 3-6 7-6(6).
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
SRB
Age 38
Right-Handed
184 cm / 6'0"
H2H
0
–
1
1 main draw meetings
POR
Age 33
Right-Handed
165 cm / 5'5"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 18, 2015* | Birmingham | WTA 500 | R32 | Grass | Michelle Larcher De Brito | 6-4 3-6 7-6(6) | Ana Ivanovic | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ana Ivanovic | #63 | #1 | 6,912 | 2,095 | 419 | 213 | 66.3% | 1 | 3 | 2 | 7 | 2 | 15 |
| Michelle Larcher De Brito | #1,216 | #76 | 821 | 1,630 | 30 | 42 | 41.7% | 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 | Ana Ivanovic | Michelle Larcher De Brito | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 14 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2007 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #296 | 1,519 | 0 | 0 |
| 15 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2008 | 8–6 | 57.1% | #130 | 1,617 | 0 | 0 |
| 16 | 2004 | 3–4 | 42.9% | #101 | 1,544 | 0 | 0 | 2009 | 5–7 | 41.7% | #113 | 1,602 | 0 | 0 |
| 17 | 2005 | 32–14 | 69.6% | #16 | 1,847 | 0 | 1 | 2010 | 5–8 | 38.5% | #210 | 1,570 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 2006 | 36–18 | 66.7% | #14 | 1,900 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 19 | 2007 | 49–17 | 74.2% | #4 | 2,034 | 0 | 5 | 2012 | 3–6 | 33.3% | #130 | 1,529 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2008 | 38–16 | 70.4% | #5 | 1,975 | 1 | 8 | 2013 | 3–7 | 30.0% | #117 | 1,509 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2009 | 22–14 | 61.1% | #21 | 1,825 | 1 | 8 | 2014 | 2–5 | 28.6% | #123 | 1,499 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2010 | 33–18 | 64.7% | #17 | 1,938 | 1 | 10 | 2015 | 2–1 | 66.7% | #226 | 1,531 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2011 | 32–20 | 61.5% | #22 | 1,877 | 1 | 11 | 2016 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #231 | 1,520 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2012 | 33–18 | 64.7% | #13 | 1,872 | 1 | 11 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 25 | 2013 | 38–23 | 62.3% | #16 | 1,855 | 1 | 11 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 26 | 2014 | 59–18 | 76.6% | #5 | 2,019 | 1 | 15 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 27 | 2015 | 29–19 | 60.4% | #16 | 1,857 | 1 | 15 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 28 | 2016 | 15–14 | 51.7% | #63 | 1,702 | 1 | 15 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |