H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 16:30 UTC
Eugenie Bouchard vs Na Li H2H: 0-2
Na Li holds a 2–0 lead over Eugenie Bouchard in their WTA head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Na Li leads 2–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Na Li won the 2014 Australian Open semifinal 6-2 6-4.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
CAN
Age 32
Right-Handed
178 cm / 5'10"
H2H
0
–
2
2 main draw meetings
CHN
Age 44
Right-Handed
172 cm / 5'8"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 26, 2014* | Australian Open | Grand Slam | SF | Hard | Na Li | 6-2 6-4 | Eugenie Bouchard | Match data |
| Aug 9, 2012* | Montreal | WTA 1000 | R32 | Hard | Na Li | 6-4 6-4 | Eugenie Bouchard | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Eugenie Bouchard | #1,002 | #5 | 4,793 | 1,926 | 156 | 144 | 52.0% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| Na Li | #9 | #2 | 7,585 | 2,124 | 334 | 155 | 68.3% | 2 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 4 | 9 |
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 | Eugenie Bouchard | Na Li | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 17 | 2011 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #305 | 1,492 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 18 | 2012 | 5–4 | 55.6% | #147 | 1,547 | 0 | 0 | 2000 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #136 | 1,499 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 2013 | 25–17 | 59.5% | #32 | 1,752 | 0 | 0 | 2001 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #302 | 1,483 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2014 | 39–23 | 62.9% | #7 | 1,834 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 21 | 2015 | 12–17 | 41.4% | #49 | 1,678 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 22 | 2016 | 28–22 | 56.0% | #46 | 1,699 | 0 | 1 | 2004 | 6–1 | 85.7% | #78 | 1,601 | 0 | 1 |
| 23 | 2017 | 10–19 | 34.5% | #81 | 1,604 | 0 | 1 | 2005 | 23–14 | 62.2% | #56 | 1,711 | 0 | 1 |
| 24 | 2018 | 11–13 | 45.8% | #87 | 1,670 | 0 | 1 | 2006 | 36–22 | 62.1% | #21 | 1,801 | 0 | 1 |
| 25 | 2019 | 4–10 | 28.6% | #215 | 1,616 | 0 | 1 | 2007 | 22–12 | 64.7% | #29 | 1,814 | 0 | 1 |
| 26 | 2020 | 10–4 | 71.4% | #141 | 1,712 | 0 | 1 | 2008 | 24–12 | 66.7% | #23 | 1,843 | 0 | 2 |
| 27 | 2021 | 4–3 | 57.1% | #253 | 1,703 | 0 | 1 | 2009 | 35–17 | 67.3% | #15 | 1,914 | 0 | 2 |
| 28 | 2022 | 3–5 | 37.5% | #326 | 1,630 | 0 | 1 | 2010 | 36–20 | 64.3% | #11 | 1,844 | 0 | 3 |
| 29 | 2023 | 3–3 | 50.0% | #287 | 1,635 | 0 | 1 | 2011 | 33–17 | 66.0% | #5 | 1,868 | 1 | 5 |
| 30 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2012 | 43–16 | 72.9% | #7 | 2,016 | 1 | 6 |
| 31 | 2025 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #1002 | 1,609 | 0 | 1 | 2013 | 46–14 | 76.7% | #3 | 2,077 | 1 | 7 |
| 32 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2014 | 29–7 | 80.6% | #9 | 2,031 | 2 | 9 |