H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 14:15 UTC
Ekaterina Makarova vs Ana Ivanovic H2H: 1-2
Ana Ivanovic holds a 2–1 lead over Ekaterina Makarova in their WTA head-to-head. Across 3 main-draw meetings, they are tied 1–1 on hard courts, while Ana Ivanovic leads 1–0 on clay. Most recently, Ana Ivanovic won the 2015 Roland Garros fourth round 7-5 3-6 6-1.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
RUS
Age 38
Left-Handed
180 cm / 5'11"
H2H
1
–
2
3 main draw meetings
SRB
Age 38
Right-Handed
184 cm / 6'0"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 2, 2015* | Roland Garros | Grand Slam | R16 | Clay | Ana Ivanovic | 7-5 3-6 6-1 | Ekaterina Makarova | Match data |
| Jan 19, 2011* | Australian Open | Grand Slam | R128 | Hard | Ekaterina Makarova | 3-6 6-4 10-8 | Ana Ivanovic | Match data |
| Sep 1, 2010* | US Open | Grand Slam | R128 | Hard | Ana Ivanovic | 6-3 6-2 | Ekaterina Makarova | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ekaterina Makarova | #1,000 | #8 | 3,620 | 1,940 | 248 | 222 | 52.8% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 3 |
| Ana Ivanovic | #63 | #1 | 6,912 | 2,095 | 419 | 213 | 66.3% | 1 | 3 | 2 | 7 | 2 | 15 |
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 | Ekaterina Makarova | Ana Ivanovic | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 16 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2004 | 3–4 | 42.9% | #101 | 1,544 | 0 | 0 |
| 17 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2005 | 32–14 | 69.6% | #16 | 1,847 | 0 | 1 |
| 18 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2006 | 36–18 | 66.7% | #14 | 1,900 | 0 | 2 |
| 19 | 2007 | 2–2 | 50.0% | #110 | 1,536 | 0 | 0 | 2007 | 49–17 | 74.2% | #4 | 2,034 | 0 | 5 |
| 20 | 2008 | 17–20 | 45.9% | #46 | 1,626 | 0 | 0 | 2008 | 38–16 | 70.4% | #5 | 1,975 | 1 | 8 |
| 21 | 2009 | 19–22 | 46.3% | #60 | 1,634 | 0 | 0 | 2009 | 22–14 | 61.1% | #21 | 1,825 | 1 | 8 |
| 22 | 2010 | 14–20 | 41.2% | #49 | 1,662 | 0 | 1 | 2010 | 33–18 | 64.7% | #17 | 1,938 | 1 | 10 |
| 23 | 2011 | 15–23 | 39.5% | #53 | 1,604 | 0 | 1 | 2011 | 32–20 | 61.5% | #22 | 1,877 | 1 | 11 |
| 24 | 2012 | 26–19 | 57.8% | #20 | 1,757 | 0 | 1 | 2012 | 33–18 | 64.7% | #13 | 1,872 | 1 | 11 |
| 25 | 2013 | 24–18 | 57.1% | #24 | 1,838 | 0 | 1 | 2013 | 38–23 | 62.3% | #16 | 1,855 | 1 | 11 |
| 26 | 2014 | 39–21 | 65.0% | #11 | 1,837 | 0 | 2 | 2014 | 59–18 | 76.6% | #5 | 2,019 | 1 | 15 |
| 27 | 2015 | 26–16 | 61.9% | #23 | 1,784 | 0 | 2 | 2015 | 29–19 | 60.4% | #16 | 1,857 | 1 | 15 |
| 28 | 2016 | 23–18 | 56.1% | #30 | 1,782 | 0 | 2 | 2016 | 15–14 | 51.7% | #63 | 1,702 | 1 | 15 |
| 29 | 2017 | 27–21 | 56.2% | #33 | 1,836 | 0 | 3 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 30 | 2018 | 16–19 | 45.7% | #57 | 1,750 | 0 | 3 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 31 | 2019 | 0–3 | 0.0% | #997 | 1,700 | 0 | 3 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |