H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 22:32 UTC
Elina Svitolina vs Marina Erakovic H2H: 0-1
Marina Erakovic holds a 1–0 lead over Elina Svitolina in their WTA head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Marina Erakovic leads 1–0 on grass. Most recently, Marina Erakovic won the 2013 Birmingham second round 6-0 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.
UKR
Age 31
Right-Handed
174 cm / 5'9"
H2H
0
–
1
1 main draw meetings
NZL
Age 38
Right-Handed
174 cm / 5'9"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 12, 2013* | Birmingham | WTA 250 | R64 | Grass | Marina Erakovic | 6-0 6-1 | Elina Svitolina | 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 |
| 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 | Elina Svitolina | Marina Erakovic | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 2005 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #213 | 1,498 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 2013 | 13–19 | 40.6% | #45 | 1,561 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 19 | 2014 | 36–24 | 60.0% | #28 | 1,805 | 0 | 2 | 2007 | 1–5 | 16.7% | #153 | 1,457 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2015 | 40–24 | 62.5% | #19 | 1,788 | 0 | 3 | 2008 | 16–16 | 50.0% | #66 | 1,531 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2016 | 35–21 | 62.5% | #14 | 1,828 | 0 | 4 | 2009 | 4–7 | 36.4% | #227 | 1,522 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2017 | 50–15 | 76.9% | #6 | 1,942 | 0 | 9 | 2010 | 2–7 | 22.2% | #333 | 1,485 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2018 | 44–15 | 74.6% | #4 | 1,983 | 0 | 13 | 2011 | 11–8 | 57.9% | #61 | 1,630 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2019 | 40–22 | 64.5% | #6 | 1,963 | 0 | 13 | 2012 | 19–20 | 48.7% | #66 | 1,600 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2020 | 19–8 | 70.4% | #5 | 1,928 | 0 | 15 | 2013 | 20–16 | 55.6% | #46 | 1,673 | 0 | 1 |
| 26 | 2021 | 34–19 | 64.2% | #15 | 1,900 | 0 | 16 | 2014 | 12–20 | 37.5% | #76 | 1,609 | 0 | 1 |
| 27 | 2022 | 5–8 | 38.5% | #240 | 1,765 | 0 | 16 | 2015 | 7–14 | 33.3% | #135 | 1,543 | 0 | 1 |
| 28 | 2023 | 18–9 | 66.7% | #25 | 1,886 | 0 | 17 | 2016 | 11–8 | 57.9% | #106 | 1,625 | 0 | 1 |
| 29 | 2024 | 27–16 | 62.8% | #23 | 1,906 | 0 | 17 | 2017 | 1–9 | 10.0% | #197 | 1,551 | 0 | 1 |
| 30 | 2025 | 33–14 | 70.2% | #14 | 1,980 | 0 | 18 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 31 | 2026 | 35–10 | 77.8% | #10 | 2,085 | 0 | 20 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |