H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC
Carla Suárez Navarro vs Marina Erakovic H2H: 2-1
Carla Suárez Navarro holds a 2–1 lead over Marina Erakovic in their WTA head-to-head. Across 3 main-draw meetings, Carla Suárez Navarro leads 1–0 on clay and 1–0 on grass. Most recently, Carla Suárez Navarro won the 2016 Wimbledon third round 6-2 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.
ESP
Age 37
Right-Handed
162 cm / 5'4"
H2H
2
–
1
3 main draw meetings
NZL
Age 38
Right-Handed
174 cm / 5'9"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 3, 2016* | Wimbledon | Grand Slam | R32 | Grass | Carla Suárez Navarro | 6-2 6-2 | Marina Erakovic | Match data |
| Aug 14, 2013* | Cincinnati | WTA 1000 | R64 | Hard | Marina Erakovic | 6-3 6-4 | Carla Suárez Navarro | Match data |
| May 2, 2013* | Oeiras | WTA 250 | R32 | Clay | Carla Suárez Navarro | 6-3 6-0 | Marina Erakovic | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Carla Suárez Navarro | #342 | #6 | 4,015 | 2,022 | 339 | 247 | 57.8% | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 |
| Marina Erakovic | #827 | #39 | 1,392 | 1,701 | 105 | 131 | 44.5% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
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 | Carla Suárez Navarro | Marina Erakovic | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 17 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2005 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #213 | 1,498 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 2008 | 13–11 | 54.2% | #49 | 1,567 | 0 | 0 | 2007 | 1–5 | 16.7% | #153 | 1,457 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2009 | 29–25 | 53.7% | #33 | 1,648 | 0 | 0 | 2008 | 16–16 | 50.0% | #66 | 1,531 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2010 | 21–14 | 60.0% | #57 | 1,696 | 0 | 0 | 2009 | 4–7 | 36.4% | #227 | 1,522 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2011 | 15–12 | 55.6% | #56 | 1,682 | 0 | 0 | 2010 | 2–7 | 22.2% | #333 | 1,485 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2012 | 23–24 | 48.9% | #34 | 1,676 | 0 | 0 | 2011 | 11–8 | 57.9% | #61 | 1,630 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2013 | 41–26 | 61.2% | #17 | 1,812 | 0 | 0 | 2012 | 19–20 | 48.7% | #66 | 1,600 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2014 | 50–25 | 66.7% | #17 | 1,835 | 0 | 1 | 2013 | 20–16 | 55.6% | #46 | 1,673 | 0 | 1 |
| 26 | 2015 | 41–25 | 62.1% | #13 | 1,787 | 0 | 1 | 2014 | 12–20 | 37.5% | #76 | 1,609 | 0 | 1 |
| 27 | 2016 | 35–19 | 64.8% | #12 | 1,812 | 0 | 2 | 2015 | 7–14 | 33.3% | #135 | 1,543 | 0 | 1 |
| 28 | 2017 | 26–23 | 53.1% | #40 | 1,749 | 0 | 2 | 2016 | 11–8 | 57.9% | #106 | 1,625 | 0 | 1 |
| 29 | 2018 | 27–19 | 58.7% | #23 | 1,826 | 0 | 2 | 2017 | 1–9 | 10.0% | #197 | 1,551 | 0 | 1 |
| 30 | 2019 | 16–18 | 47.1% | #54 | 1,742 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 31 | 2020 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #84 | 1,717 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 32 | 2021 | 0–3 | 0.0% | #342 | 1,688 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |