H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 16:32 UTC
Elina Svitolina vs Lesia Tsurenko H2H: 1-1
Elina Svitolina and Lesia Tsurenko are tied 1–1 in their WTA head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Lesia Tsurenko leads 1–0 on clay, while Elina Svitolina leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Lesia Tsurenko won the 2023 Rome first round 6-4 6-3.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
UKR
Age 31
Right-Handed
174 cm / 5'9"
H2H
1
–
1
2 main draw meetings
UKR
Age 37
Right-Handed
174 cm / 5'9"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 11, 2023* | Rome | WTA 1000 | R128 | Clay | Lesia Tsurenko | 6-4 6-3 | Elina Svitolina | Match data |
| Aug 17, 2017* | Cincinnati | WTA 1000 | R32 | Hard | Elina Svitolina | 6-1 6-4 | Lesia Tsurenko | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Elina Svitolina | #10 | #3 | 6,085 | 2,143 | 429 | 227 | 65.4% | 0 | 6 | 1 | 4 | 9 | 20 |
| Lesia Tsurenko | #370 | #23 | 2,030 | 1,889 | 180 | 200 | 47.4% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 4 |
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 | Elina Svitolina | Lesia Tsurenko | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 17 | 2012 | 0–3 | 0.0% | #131 | 1,465 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 18 | 2013 | 13–19 | 40.6% | #45 | 1,561 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 19 | 2014 | 36–24 | 60.0% | #28 | 1,805 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 20 | 2015 | 40–24 | 62.5% | #19 | 1,788 | 0 | 3 | 2009 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #284 | 1,483 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2016 | 35–21 | 62.5% | #14 | 1,828 | 0 | 4 | 2010 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #155 | 1,468 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2017 | 50–15 | 76.9% | #6 | 1,942 | 0 | 9 | 2011 | 3–7 | 30.0% | #113 | 1,467 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2018 | 44–15 | 74.6% | #4 | 1,983 | 0 | 13 | 2012 | 7–12 | 36.8% | #116 | 1,485 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2019 | 40–22 | 64.5% | #6 | 1,963 | 0 | 13 | 2013 | 11–18 | 37.9% | #68 | 1,507 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2020 | 19–8 | 70.4% | #5 | 1,928 | 0 | 15 | 2014 | 4–8 | 33.3% | #92 | 1,511 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 2021 | 34–19 | 64.2% | #15 | 1,900 | 0 | 16 | 2015 | 22–17 | 56.4% | #33 | 1,738 | 0 | 1 |
| 27 | 2022 | 5–8 | 38.5% | #240 | 1,765 | 0 | 16 | 2016 | 19–19 | 50.0% | #57 | 1,728 | 0 | 2 |
| 28 | 2023 | 18–9 | 66.7% | #25 | 1,886 | 0 | 17 | 2017 | 22–24 | 47.8% | #42 | 1,699 | 0 | 3 |
| 29 | 2024 | 27–16 | 62.8% | #23 | 1,906 | 0 | 17 | 2018 | 26–18 | 59.1% | #27 | 1,814 | 0 | 4 |
| 30 | 2025 | 33–14 | 70.2% | #14 | 1,980 | 0 | 18 | 2019 | 14–14 | 50.0% | #73 | 1,734 | 0 | 4 |
| 31 | 2026 | 35–10 | 77.8% | #10 | 2,085 | 0 | 20 | 2020 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #146 | 1,746 | 0 | 4 |
| 32 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2021 | 6–10 | 37.5% | #118 | 1,738 | 0 | 4 |
| 33 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2022 | 10–11 | 47.6% | #137 | 1,745 | 0 | 4 |
| 34 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2023 | 24–15 | 61.5% | #31 | 1,866 | 0 | 4 |
| 35 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2024 | 10–20 | 33.3% | #115 | 1,693 | 0 | 4 |