H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 04:32 UTC
Jasmine Paolini vs Anastasija Sevastova H2H: 3-0
Jasmine Paolini holds a 3–0 lead over Anastasija Sevastova in their WTA head-to-head. Across 3 main-draw meetings, Jasmine Paolini leads 1–0 on clay and 1–0 on grass. Most recently, Jasmine Paolini won the 2025 Beijing second round 6-1 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.
ITA
Age 30
Right-Handed
163 cm / 5'4"
H2H
3
–
0
3 main draw meetings
LAT
Age 36
Right-Handed
169 cm / 5'7"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 26, 2025 | Beijing | WTA 1000 | R64 | Hard | Jasmine Paolini | 6-1 6-3 | Anastasija Sevastova | Match data |
| Jun 30, 2025 | Wimbledon | Grand Slam | R128 | Grass | Jasmine Paolini | 2-6 6-3 6-2 | Anastasija Sevastova | Match data |
| Aug 14, 2021 | Cincinnati | WTA 1000 | Q1 | Hard | Jasmine Paolini | 6-1 2-1 | Anastasija Sevastova | Match data |
| Sep 16, 2020* | Rome | WTA 1000 | R64 | Clay | Jasmine Paolini | 6-2 6-3 | Anastasija Sevastova | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jasmine Paolini | #15 | #4 | 5,865 | 2,058 | 172 | 135 | 56.0% | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 3 |
| Anastasija Sevastova | #293 | #11 | 3,366 | 1,946 | 207 | 175 | 54.2% | 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 | Jasmine Paolini | Anastasija Sevastova | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 17 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2007 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #261 | 1,510 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2009 | 5–9 | 35.7% | #79 | 1,532 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2010 | 22–15 | 59.5% | #45 | 1,718 | 0 | 1 |
| 21 | 2017 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #140 | 1,453 | 0 | 0 | 2011 | 12–18 | 40.0% | #98 | 1,628 | 0 | 1 |
| 22 | 2018 | 3–5 | 37.5% | #192 | 1,496 | 0 | 0 | 2012 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #184 | 1,610 | 0 | 1 |
| 23 | 2019 | 6–9 | 40.0% | #96 | 1,585 | 0 | 0 | 2013 | 2–2 | 50.0% | #148 | 1,622 | 0 | 1 |
| 24 | 2020 | 4–8 | 33.3% | #96 | 1,549 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 25 | 2021 | 20–18 | 52.6% | #53 | 1,773 | 0 | 1 | 2015 | 5–3 | 62.5% | #113 | 1,654 | 0 | 1 |
| 26 | 2022 | 22–20 | 52.4% | #62 | 1,749 | 0 | 1 | 2016 | 22–19 | 53.7% | #34 | 1,715 | 0 | 1 |
| 27 | 2023 | 25–23 | 52.1% | #30 | 1,857 | 0 | 1 | 2017 | 37–24 | 60.7% | #16 | 1,820 | 0 | 2 |
| 28 | 2024 | 38–18 | 67.9% | #4 | 1,982 | 0 | 2 | 2018 | 42–21 | 66.7% | #11 | 1,909 | 0 | 3 |
| 29 | 2025 | 40–20 | 66.7% | #8 | 2,005 | 0 | 3 | 2019 | 27–21 | 56.2% | #27 | 1,759 | 0 | 4 |
| 30 | 2026 | 14–12 | 53.8% | #15 | 1,892 | 0 | 3 | 2020 | 1–9 | 10.0% | #54 | 1,649 | 0 | 4 |
| 31 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2021 | 17–17 | 50.0% | #70 | 1,739 | 0 | 4 |
| 32 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2022 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #680 | 1,722 | 0 | 4 |
| 34 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2024 | 4–2 | 66.7% | #481 | 1,728 | 0 | 4 |
| 35 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2025 | 9–11 | 45.0% | #188 | 1,730 | 0 | 4 |