H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC
Belinda Bencic vs Ons Jabeur H2H: 2-3
Ons Jabeur holds a 3–2 lead over Belinda Bencic in their WTA head-to-head. Across 5 main-draw meetings, they are tied 2–2 on clay, while Ons Jabeur leads 1–0 on grass. Most recently, Ons Jabeur won the 2023 Charleston final 7-6(6) 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.
SUI
Age 29
Right-Handed
175 cm / 5'9"
H2H
2
–
3
5 main draw meetings
TUN
Age 31
Right-Handed
167 cm / 5'6"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 9, 2023* | Charleston | WTA 500 | F | Clay | Ons Jabeur | 7-6(6) 6-4 | Belinda Bencic | Match data |
| Jun 19, 2022 | Berlin | WTA 500 | F | Grass | Ons Jabeur | 6-3 2-1 | Belinda Bencic | Match data |
| May 4, 2022* | Madrid | WTA 1000 | R16 | Clay | Ons Jabeur | 6-2 3-6 6-2 | Belinda Bencic | Match data |
| Apr 10, 2022* | Charleston | WTA 500 | F | Clay | Belinda Bencic | 6-1 5-7 6-4 | Ons Jabeur | Match data |
| May 5, 2021* | Madrid | WTA 1000 | R16 | Clay | Belinda Bencic | 7-6(2) 4-3 (ret.) | Ons Jabeur | 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 |
| Ons Jabeur | #439 | #2 | 5,210 | 2,105 | 222 | 151 | 59.5% | 0 | 1 | 0 | 3 | 1 | 5 |
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 | Ons Jabeur | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 17 | 2014 | 18–17 | 51.4% | #32 | 1,697 | 0 | 0 | 2012 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #260 | 1,491 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 2015 | 40–21 | 65.6% | #14 | 1,886 | 0 | 2 | 2013 | 3–3 | 50.0% | #137 | 1,508 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 2016 | 17–20 | 45.9% | #43 | 1,687 | 0 | 2 | 2014 | 2–7 | 22.2% | #143 | 1,470 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2017 | 3–8 | 27.3% | #98 | 1,686 | 0 | 2 | 2015 | 1–5 | 16.7% | #220 | 1,457 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2018 | 12–13 | 48.0% | #54 | 1,723 | 0 | 2 | 2016 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #196 | 1,464 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2019 | 48–21 | 69.6% | #8 | 1,923 | 0 | 4 | 2017 | 9–11 | 45.0% | #88 | 1,594 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2020 | 7–7 | 50.0% | #12 | 1,850 | 0 | 4 | 2018 | 9–12 | 42.9% | #60 | 1,734 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2021 | 28–19 | 59.6% | #23 | 1,848 | 0 | 4 | 2019 | 15–19 | 44.1% | #76 | 1,708 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2022 | 38–19 | 66.7% | #12 | 1,884 | 0 | 5 | 2020 | 21–11 | 65.6% | #31 | 1,858 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 2023 | 31–13 | 70.5% | #17 | 1,921 | 0 | 7 | 2021 | 48–18 | 72.7% | #10 | 1,982 | 0 | 1 |
| 27 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2022 | 47–17 | 73.4% | #2 | 2,007 | 0 | 3 |
| 28 | 2025 | 36–16 | 69.2% | #11 | 2,004 | 0 | 9 | 2023 | 36–18 | 66.7% | #6 | 1,952 | 0 | 5 |
| 29 | 2026 | 18–9 | 66.7% | #14 | 1,998 | 0 | 9 | 2024 | 16–15 | 51.6% | #42 | 1,856 | 0 | 5 |
| 30 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2025 | 14–12 | 53.8% | #75 | 1,820 | 0 | 5 |