H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 14:15 UTC
Elise Mertens vs Rebecca Peterson H2H: 3-1
Elise Mertens holds a 3–1 lead over Rebecca Peterson in their WTA head-to-head. Across 4 main-draw meetings, Elise Mertens leads 3–0 on hard courts, while Rebecca Peterson leads 1–0 on clay. Most recently, Rebecca Peterson won the 2022 Istanbul third round 7-5 4-1 RET.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
BEL
Age 30
Right-Handed
179 cm / 5'10"
H2H
3
–
1
4 main draw meetings
SWE
Age 30
Right-Handed
173 cm / 5'8"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 21, 2022* | Istanbul | WTA 250 | R32 | Clay | Rebecca Peterson | 7-5 4-1 (ret.) | Elise Mertens | Match data |
| Sep 1, 2021* | US Open | Grand Slam | R128 | Hard | Elise Mertens | 3-6 7-6(5) 7-6(5) | Rebecca Peterson | Match data |
| Aug 23, 2020* | Cincinnati | WTA 1000 | R64 | Hard | Elise Mertens | 6-0 6-2 | Rebecca Peterson | Match data |
| Aug 16, 2018* | Cincinnati | WTA 1000 | R32 | Hard | Elise Mertens | 3-6 6-2 7-6(1) | Rebecca Peterson | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Elise Mertens | #24 | #12 | 3,685 | 2,013 | 311 | 199 | 61.0% | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 8 | 10 |
| Rebecca Peterson | #573 | #43 | 1,332 | 1,863 | 79 | 93 | 45.9% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 |
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 | Elise Mertens | Rebecca Peterson | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 16 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2012 | 0–1 | 0.0% | — | 1,488 | 0 | 0 |
| 17 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2013 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #263 | 1,485 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2014 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #230 | 1,489 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2015 | 3–4 | 42.9% | #131 | 1,505 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2016 | 3–3 | 50.0% | #125 | 1,546 | 0 | 0 | 2016 | 3–6 | 33.3% | #146 | 1,506 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2017 | 30–22 | 57.7% | #35 | 1,737 | 0 | 1 | 2017 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #174 | 1,550 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2018 | 43–19 | 69.4% | #12 | 1,821 | 0 | 4 | 2018 | 10–11 | 47.6% | #63 | 1,692 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2019 | 33–24 | 57.9% | #17 | 1,836 | 0 | 5 | 2019 | 25–17 | 59.5% | #44 | 1,863 | 0 | 2 |
| 24 | 2020 | 32–13 | 71.1% | #20 | 1,934 | 0 | 5 | 2020 | 3–10 | 23.1% | #55 | 1,696 | 0 | 2 |
| 25 | 2021 | 33–18 | 64.7% | #21 | 1,856 | 0 | 6 | 2021 | 17–17 | 50.0% | #88 | 1,698 | 0 | 2 |
| 26 | 2022 | 28–21 | 57.1% | #29 | 1,795 | 0 | 7 | 2022 | 7–14 | 33.3% | #119 | 1,659 | 0 | 2 |
| 27 | 2023 | 26–21 | 55.3% | #29 | 1,819 | 0 | 8 | 2023 | 8–7 | 53.3% | #127 | 1,647 | 0 | 2 |
| 28 | 2024 | 27–25 | 51.9% | #34 | 1,788 | 0 | 8 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 29 | 2025 | 36–20 | 64.3% | #20 | 1,866 | 0 | 10 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 30 | 2026 | 20–13 | 60.6% | #24 | 1,908 | 0 | 10 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |