H2H data updated: 2026-07-20 10:32 UTC
Belinda Bencic vs Sabine Lisicki H2H: 1-1
Belinda Bencic and Sabine Lisicki are tied 1–1 in their WTA head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Sabine Lisicki leads 1–0 on grass, while Belinda Bencic leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Belinda Bencic won the 2015 Toronto fourth round 6-1 1-6 7-6(3).
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
SUI
Age 29
Right-Handed
175 cm / 5'9"
H2H
1
–
1
2 main draw meetings
GER
Age 36
Right-Handed
178 cm / 5'10"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 14, 2015* | Toronto | WTA 1000 | R16 | Hard | Belinda Bencic | 6-1 1-6 7-6(3) | Sabine Lisicki | Match data |
| Jun 18, 2015* | Birmingham | WTA 500 | R32 | Grass | Sabine Lisicki | 6-1 7-6(4) | 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 |
| Sabine Lisicki | #502 | #12 | 3,251 | 1,940 | 206 | 172 | 54.5% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 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 | Belinda Bencic | Sabine Lisicki | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 2006 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #444 | 1,489 | 0 | 0 |
| 17 | 2014 | 18–17 | 51.4% | #32 | 1,697 | 0 | 0 | 2007 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #198 | 1,475 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 2015 | 40–21 | 65.6% | #14 | 1,886 | 0 | 2 | 2008 | 16–18 | 47.1% | #57 | 1,606 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 2016 | 17–20 | 45.9% | #43 | 1,687 | 0 | 2 | 2009 | 29–17 | 63.0% | #22 | 1,792 | 0 | 1 |
| 20 | 2017 | 3–8 | 27.3% | #98 | 1,686 | 0 | 2 | 2010 | 4–9 | 30.8% | #175 | 1,658 | 0 | 1 |
| 21 | 2018 | 12–13 | 48.0% | #54 | 1,723 | 0 | 2 | 2011 | 35–13 | 72.9% | #15 | 1,872 | 0 | 3 |
| 22 | 2019 | 48–21 | 69.6% | #8 | 1,923 | 0 | 4 | 2012 | 15–18 | 45.5% | #37 | 1,707 | 0 | 3 |
| 23 | 2020 | 7–7 | 50.0% | #12 | 1,850 | 0 | 4 | 2013 | 34–19 | 64.2% | #15 | 1,824 | 0 | 3 |
| 24 | 2021 | 28–19 | 59.6% | #23 | 1,848 | 0 | 4 | 2014 | 27–21 | 56.2% | #26 | 1,798 | 0 | 4 |
| 25 | 2022 | 38–19 | 66.7% | #12 | 1,884 | 0 | 5 | 2015 | 22–19 | 53.7% | #32 | 1,791 | 0 | 4 |
| 26 | 2023 | 31–13 | 70.5% | #17 | 1,921 | 0 | 7 | 2016 | 14–19 | 42.4% | #93 | 1,647 | 0 | 4 |
| 27 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2017 | 3–4 | 42.9% | #220 | 1,636 | 0 | 4 |
| 28 | 2025 | 36–16 | 69.2% | #11 | 2,004 | 0 | 9 | 2018 | 5–4 | 55.6% | #199 | 1,549 | 0 | 4 |
| 29 | 2026 | 18–9 | 66.7% | #14 | 1,998 | 0 | 9 | 2019 | 0–4 | 0.0% | #562 | 1,479 | 0 | 4 |
| 32 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2022 | 2–2 | 50.0% | #342 | 1,575 | 0 | 4 |
| 33 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2023 | 0–3 | 0.0% | #311 | 1,569 | 0 | 4 |