H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC
Camila Giorgi vs Qiang Wang H2H: 3-0
Camila Giorgi holds a 3–0 lead over Qiang Wang in their WTA head-to-head. Across 3 main-draw meetings, Camila Giorgi leads 2–0 on hard courts and 1–0 on clay. Most recently, Camila Giorgi won the 2019 New York semifinal 4-6 6-4 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.
ITA
Age 34
Right-Handed
168 cm / 5'6"
H2H
3
–
0
3 main draw meetings
CHN
Right-Handed
172 cm / 5'8"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 24, 2019* | New York | WTA 250 | SF | Hard | Camila Giorgi | 4-6 6-4 7-6(6) | Qiang Wang | Match data |
| May 4, 2017* | Prague | WTA 250 | R16 | Clay | Camila Giorgi | 4-6 6-3 6-2 | Qiang Wang | Match data |
| Jan 6, 2017* | Shenzhen | WTA 250 | QF | Hard | Camila Giorgi | 6-0 6-2 | Qiang Wang | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Camila Giorgi | #116 | #26 | 1,978 | 1,875 | 204 | 184 | 52.6% | 0 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 4 |
| Qiang Wang | #421 | #12 | 2,946 | 1,925 | 128 | 125 | 50.6% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 |
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.
| Camila Giorgi | Qiang Wang | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles |
| 2011 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #151 | 1,486 | 0 | 0 | 2012 | 0–3 | 0.0% | #185 | 1,458 | 0 | 0 |
| 2012 | 6–10 | 37.5% | #75 | 1,524 | 0 | 0 | 2013 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #226 | 1,474 | 0 | 0 |
| 2013 | 8–11 | 42.1% | #98 | 1,579 | 0 | 0 | 2014 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #102 | 1,467 | 0 | 0 |
| 2014 | 27–19 | 58.7% | #34 | 1,710 | 0 | 0 | 2015 | 4–14 | 22.2% | #110 | 1,448 | 0 | 0 |
| 2015 | 26–21 | 55.3% | #35 | 1,730 | 0 | 1 | 2016 | 9–11 | 45.0% | #72 | 1,568 | 0 | 0 |
| 2016 | 14–19 | 42.4% | #82 | 1,638 | 0 | 1 | 2017 | 24–19 | 55.8% | #45 | 1,724 | 0 | 0 |
| 2017 | 15–12 | 55.6% | #78 | 1,778 | 0 | 1 | 2018 | 37–21 | 63.8% | #21 | 1,900 | 0 | 2 |
| 2018 | 28–15 | 65.1% | #26 | 1,865 | 0 | 2 | 2019 | 23–18 | 56.1% | #30 | 1,797 | 0 | 2 |
| 2019 | 12–15 | 44.4% | #100 | 1,725 | 0 | 2 | 2020 | 7–6 | 53.8% | #34 | 1,770 | 0 | 2 |
| 2020 | 10–9 | 52.6% | #76 | 1,726 | 0 | 2 | 2021 | 9–13 | 40.9% | #104 | 1,713 | 0 | 2 |
| 2021 | 21–16 | 56.8% | #33 | 1,799 | 0 | 3 | 2022 | 13–13 | 50.0% | #91 | 1,716 | 0 | 2 |
| 2022 | 14–16 | 46.7% | #66 | 1,763 | 0 | 3 | 2024 | 0–4 | 0.0% | #376 | 1,624 | 0 | 2 |
| 2023 | 20–15 | 57.1% | #53 | 1,788 | 0 | 4 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 2024 | 3–5 | 37.5% | #116 | 1,760 | 0 | 4 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |