H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 04:32 UTC
Belinda Bencic vs Ana Ivanovic H2H: 1-1
Belinda Bencic and Ana Ivanovic are tied 1–1 in their WTA head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, they are tied 1–1 on hard courts. Most recently, Belinda Bencic won the 2015 Toronto quarterfinal 6-4 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.
SUI
Age 29
Right-Handed
175 cm / 5'9"
H2H
1
–
1
2 main draw meetings
SRB
Age 38
Right-Handed
184 cm / 6'0"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 15, 2015* | Toronto | WTA 1000 | QF | Hard | Belinda Bencic | 6-4 6-2 | Ana Ivanovic | Match data |
| Oct 1, 2014* | Beijing | WTA 1000 | R64 | Hard | Ana Ivanovic | 6-2 6-1 | Belinda Bencic | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Belinda Bencic | #14 | #4 | 4,745 | 2,032 | 298 | 187 | 61.4% | 0 | 2 | 0 | 7 | 0 | 9 |
| Ana Ivanovic | #63 | #1 | 6,912 | 2,095 | 419 | 213 | 66.3% | 1 | 3 | 2 | 7 | 2 | 15 |
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 | Belinda Bencic | Ana Ivanovic | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 15 | 2012 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #612 | 1,498 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 16 | 2013 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #184 | 1,512 | 0 | 0 | 2004 | 3–4 | 42.9% | #101 | 1,544 | 0 | 0 |
| 17 | 2014 | 18–17 | 51.4% | #32 | 1,697 | 0 | 0 | 2005 | 32–14 | 69.6% | #16 | 1,847 | 0 | 1 |
| 18 | 2015 | 40–21 | 65.6% | #14 | 1,886 | 0 | 2 | 2006 | 36–18 | 66.7% | #14 | 1,900 | 0 | 2 |
| 19 | 2016 | 17–20 | 45.9% | #43 | 1,687 | 0 | 2 | 2007 | 49–17 | 74.2% | #4 | 2,034 | 0 | 5 |
| 20 | 2017 | 3–8 | 27.3% | #98 | 1,686 | 0 | 2 | 2008 | 38–16 | 70.4% | #5 | 1,975 | 1 | 8 |
| 21 | 2018 | 12–13 | 48.0% | #54 | 1,723 | 0 | 2 | 2009 | 22–14 | 61.1% | #21 | 1,825 | 1 | 8 |
| 22 | 2019 | 48–21 | 69.6% | #8 | 1,923 | 0 | 4 | 2010 | 33–18 | 64.7% | #17 | 1,938 | 1 | 10 |
| 23 | 2020 | 7–7 | 50.0% | #12 | 1,850 | 0 | 4 | 2011 | 32–20 | 61.5% | #22 | 1,877 | 1 | 11 |
| 24 | 2021 | 28–19 | 59.6% | #23 | 1,848 | 0 | 4 | 2012 | 33–18 | 64.7% | #13 | 1,872 | 1 | 11 |
| 25 | 2022 | 38–19 | 66.7% | #12 | 1,884 | 0 | 5 | 2013 | 38–23 | 62.3% | #16 | 1,855 | 1 | 11 |
| 26 | 2023 | 31–13 | 70.5% | #17 | 1,921 | 0 | 7 | 2014 | 59–18 | 76.6% | #5 | 2,019 | 1 | 15 |
| 27 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2015 | 29–19 | 60.4% | #16 | 1,857 | 1 | 15 |
| 28 | 2025 | 36–16 | 69.2% | #11 | 2,004 | 0 | 9 | 2016 | 15–14 | 51.7% | #63 | 1,702 | 1 | 15 |
| 29 | 2026 | 18–9 | 66.7% | #14 | 1,998 | 0 | 9 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |