H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC
Carla Suárez Navarro vs Na Li H2H: 0-2
Na Li holds a 2–0 lead over Carla Suárez Navarro in their WTA head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Na Li leads 1–0 on clay and 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Na Li won the 2014 Miami fourth round 6-0 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
0
–
2
2 main draw meetings
CHN
Age 44
Right-Handed
172 cm / 5'8"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 21, 2014* | Miami | WTA 1000 | R16 | Hard | Na Li | 6-0 6-2 | Carla Suárez Navarro | Match data |
| May 13, 2009* | Madrid | WTA 1000 | R64 | Clay | Na Li | 5-7 6-1 7-5 | Carla Suárez Navarro | 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 |
| Na Li | #9 | #2 | 7,585 | 2,124 | 334 | 155 | 68.3% | 2 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 4 | 9 |
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 | Na Li | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 18 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2000 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #136 | 1,499 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 2008 | 13–11 | 54.2% | #49 | 1,567 | 0 | 0 | 2001 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #302 | 1,483 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2009 | 29–25 | 53.7% | #33 | 1,648 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 21 | 2010 | 21–14 | 60.0% | #57 | 1,696 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 22 | 2011 | 15–12 | 55.6% | #56 | 1,682 | 0 | 0 | 2004 | 6–1 | 85.7% | #78 | 1,601 | 0 | 1 |
| 23 | 2012 | 23–24 | 48.9% | #34 | 1,676 | 0 | 0 | 2005 | 23–14 | 62.2% | #56 | 1,711 | 0 | 1 |
| 24 | 2013 | 41–26 | 61.2% | #17 | 1,812 | 0 | 0 | 2006 | 36–22 | 62.1% | #21 | 1,801 | 0 | 1 |
| 25 | 2014 | 50–25 | 66.7% | #17 | 1,835 | 0 | 1 | 2007 | 22–12 | 64.7% | #29 | 1,814 | 0 | 1 |
| 26 | 2015 | 41–25 | 62.1% | #13 | 1,787 | 0 | 1 | 2008 | 24–12 | 66.7% | #23 | 1,843 | 0 | 2 |
| 27 | 2016 | 35–19 | 64.8% | #12 | 1,812 | 0 | 2 | 2009 | 35–17 | 67.3% | #15 | 1,914 | 0 | 2 |
| 28 | 2017 | 26–23 | 53.1% | #40 | 1,749 | 0 | 2 | 2010 | 36–20 | 64.3% | #11 | 1,844 | 0 | 3 |
| 29 | 2018 | 27–19 | 58.7% | #23 | 1,826 | 0 | 2 | 2011 | 33–17 | 66.0% | #5 | 1,868 | 1 | 5 |
| 30 | 2019 | 16–18 | 47.1% | #54 | 1,742 | 0 | 2 | 2012 | 43–16 | 72.9% | #7 | 2,016 | 1 | 6 |
| 31 | 2020 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #84 | 1,717 | 0 | 2 | 2013 | 46–14 | 76.7% | #3 | 2,077 | 1 | 7 |
| 32 | 2021 | 0–3 | 0.0% | #342 | 1,688 | 0 | 2 | 2014 | 29–7 | 80.6% | #9 | 2,031 | 2 | 9 |