H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 02:15 UTC
Ekaterina Makarova vs Daniela Hantuchova H2H: 1-2
Daniela Hantuchova 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 Daniela Hantuchova leads 1–0 on carpet. Most recently, Ekaterina Makarova won the 2014 Cincinnati second 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.
RUS
Age 38
Left-Handed
180 cm / 5'11"
H2H
1
–
2
3 main draw meetings
SVK
Age 43
Right-Handed
181 cm / 5'11"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 13, 2014* | Cincinnati | WTA 1000 | R64 | Hard | Ekaterina Makarova | 6-2 6-2 | Daniela Hantuchova | Match data |
| Sep 26, 2012* | Tokyo | WTA 1000 | R64 | Hard | Daniela Hantuchova | 6-4 4-6 6-3 | Ekaterina Makarova | Match data |
| Feb 12, 2009* | Paris | WTA 500 | R32 | Carpet | Daniela Hantuchova | 6-2 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 |
| Daniela Hantuchova | #317 | #5 | 2,897 | 1,968 | 457 | 361 | 55.9% | 0 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 4 | 7 |
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 | Daniela Hantuchova | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 16 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1999 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #197 | 1,494 | 0 | 0 |
| 17 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2000 | 6–7 | 46.2% | #108 | 1,551 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2001 | 19–16 | 54.3% | #38 | 1,710 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 2007 | 2–2 | 50.0% | #110 | 1,536 | 0 | 0 | 2002 | 48–24 | 66.7% | #8 | 1,919 | 0 | 1 |
| 20 | 2008 | 17–20 | 45.9% | #46 | 1,626 | 0 | 0 | 2003 | 26–23 | 53.1% | #19 | 1,753 | 0 | 1 |
| 21 | 2009 | 19–22 | 46.3% | #60 | 1,634 | 0 | 0 | 2004 | 24–24 | 50.0% | #31 | 1,714 | 0 | 1 |
| 22 | 2010 | 14–20 | 41.2% | #49 | 1,662 | 0 | 1 | 2005 | 38–25 | 60.3% | #19 | 1,877 | 0 | 1 |
| 23 | 2011 | 15–23 | 39.5% | #53 | 1,604 | 0 | 1 | 2006 | 35–25 | 58.3% | #17 | 1,860 | 0 | 1 |
| 24 | 2012 | 26–19 | 57.8% | #20 | 1,757 | 0 | 1 | 2007 | 52–26 | 66.7% | #9 | 1,930 | 0 | 3 |
| 25 | 2013 | 24–18 | 57.1% | #24 | 1,838 | 0 | 1 | 2008 | 21–19 | 52.5% | #21 | 1,756 | 0 | 3 |
| 26 | 2014 | 39–21 | 65.0% | #11 | 1,837 | 0 | 2 | 2009 | 37–24 | 60.7% | #24 | 1,807 | 0 | 3 |
| 27 | 2015 | 26–16 | 61.9% | #23 | 1,784 | 0 | 2 | 2010 | 32–24 | 57.1% | #30 | 1,780 | 0 | 3 |
| 28 | 2016 | 23–18 | 56.1% | #30 | 1,782 | 0 | 2 | 2011 | 41–25 | 62.1% | #24 | 1,790 | 0 | 4 |
| 29 | 2017 | 27–21 | 56.2% | #33 | 1,836 | 0 | 3 | 2012 | 22–22 | 50.0% | #32 | 1,686 | 0 | 5 |
| 30 | 2018 | 16–19 | 45.7% | #57 | 1,750 | 0 | 3 | 2013 | 23–24 | 48.9% | #33 | 1,683 | 0 | 6 |
| 31 | 2019 | 0–3 | 0.0% | #997 | 1,700 | 0 | 3 | 2014 | 16–24 | 40.0% | #62 | 1,577 | 0 | 6 |
| 32 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2015 | 15–19 | 44.1% | #83 | 1,574 | 0 | 7 |
| 33 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2016 | 1–8 | 11.1% | #228 | 1,514 | 0 | 7 |
| 34 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2017 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #317 | 1,524 | 0 | 7 |