H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 02:15 UTC
Ashleigh Barty vs Kiki Bertens H2H: 3-1
Ashleigh Barty holds a 3–1 lead over Kiki Bertens in their WTA head-to-head. Across 4 main-draw meetings, Ashleigh Barty leads 3–1 on hard courts. Most recently, Kiki Bertens won the 2019 WTA Finals round-robin match 3-6 6-3 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.
AUS
Age 30
Right-Handed
166 cm / 5'5"
H2H
3
–
1
4 main draw meetings
NED
Age 34
Right-Handed
182 cm / 6'0"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 29, 2019 | WTA Finals | WTA Finals | RR | Hard | Kiki Bertens | 3-6 6-3 6-4 | Ashleigh Barty | Match data |
| Oct 5, 2019 | Beijing | WTA 1000 | SF | Hard | Ashleigh Barty | 6-3 3-6 7-6(7) | Kiki Bertens | Match data |
| Mar 22, 2019* | Miami | WTA 1000 | R16 | Hard | Ashleigh Barty | 4-6 6-3 6-2 | Kiki Bertens | Match data |
| Aug 11, 2018* | Montreal | WTA 1000 | QF | Hard | Ashleigh Barty | 6-3 6-1 | Kiki Bertens | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ashleigh Barty | #1 | #1 | 10,185 | 2,199 | 191 | 70 | 73.2% | 3 | 3 | 2 | 4 | 3 | 15 |
| Kiki Bertens | #25 | #4 | 5,430 | 2,015 | 214 | 168 | 56.0% | 0 | 2 | 0 | 3 | 6 | 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 | Ashleigh Barty | Kiki Bertens | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 16 | 2012 | 0–4 | 0.0% | #175 | 1,469 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 17 | 2013 | 4–5 | 44.4% | #190 | 1,519 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 18 | 2014 | 1–6 | 14.3% | #223 | 1,508 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 19 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2011 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #182 | 1,493 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2016 | 2–1 | 66.7% | #272 | 1,593 | 0 | 0 | 2012 | 11–12 | 47.8% | #63 | 1,581 | 0 | 1 |
| 21 | 2017 | 30–14 | 68.2% | #17 | 1,888 | 0 | 1 | 2013 | 14–19 | 42.4% | #87 | 1,552 | 0 | 1 |
| 22 | 2018 | 40–18 | 69.0% | #15 | 1,964 | 0 | 3 | 2014 | 11–14 | 44.0% | #68 | 1,580 | 0 | 1 |
| 23 | 2019 | 48–12 | 80.0% | #1 | 2,070 | 1 | 7 | 2015 | 7–17 | 29.2% | #104 | 1,520 | 0 | 1 |
| 24 | 2020 | 12–3 | 80.0% | #1 | 2,082 | 1 | 8 | 2016 | 27–19 | 58.7% | #22 | 1,723 | 0 | 2 |
| 25 | 2021 | 43–7 | 86.0% | #1 | 2,142 | 2 | 13 | 2017 | 30–26 | 53.6% | #31 | 1,684 | 0 | 5 |
| 26 | 2022 | 11–0 | 100.0% | #1 | 2,199 | 3 | 15 | 2018 | 46–22 | 67.6% | #9 | 1,912 | 0 | 8 |
| 27 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2019 | 54–25 | 68.4% | #9 | 1,897 | 0 | 10 |
| 28 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2020 | 13–6 | 68.4% | #9 | 1,883 | 0 | 11 |
| 29 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2021 | 1–7 | 12.5% | #25 | 1,749 | 0 | 11 |