H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 22:32 UTC
Jasmine Paolini vs Madison Keys H2H: 2-1
Jasmine Paolini holds a 2–1 lead over Madison Keys in their WTA head-to-head. Across 3 main-draw meetings, they are tied 1–1 on hard courts, while Jasmine Paolini leads 1–0 on grass. Most recently, Jasmine Paolini won the 2024 Wimbledon fourth round 6-3 6-7(6) 5-5 RET.
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
2
–
1
3 main draw meetings
USA
Age 31
Right-Handed
178 cm / 5'10"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 9, 2024* | Wimbledon | Grand Slam | R16 | Grass | Jasmine Paolini | 6-3 6-7(6) 5-5 (ret.) | Madison Keys | Match data |
| Aug 10, 2023* | Montreal | WTA 1000 | R32 | Hard | Jasmine Paolini | (w/o) | Madison Keys | Match data |
| Feb 21, 2023* | Dubai | WTA 1000 | R64 | Hard | Madison Keys | 6-1 6-1 | Jasmine Paolini | 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 |
| Madison Keys | #23 | #5 | 4,999 | 2,136 | 363 | 211 | 63.2% | 1 | 1 | 0 | 6 | 3 | 11 |
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 | Madison Keys | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 14 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2009 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #616 | 1,512 | 0 | 0 |
| 16 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2011 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #273 | 1,516 | 0 | 0 |
| 17 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2012 | 1–4 | 20.0% | #137 | 1,514 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2013 | 24–17 | 58.5% | #38 | 1,726 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2014 | 27–21 | 56.2% | #30 | 1,742 | 0 | 1 |
| 20 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2015 | 31–19 | 62.0% | #18 | 1,802 | 0 | 1 |
| 21 | 2017 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #140 | 1,453 | 0 | 0 | 2016 | 41–16 | 71.9% | #8 | 1,915 | 0 | 2 |
| 22 | 2018 | 3–5 | 37.5% | #192 | 1,496 | 0 | 0 | 2017 | 17–10 | 63.0% | #19 | 1,892 | 0 | 3 |
| 23 | 2019 | 6–9 | 40.0% | #96 | 1,585 | 0 | 0 | 2018 | 28–15 | 65.1% | #17 | 1,899 | 0 | 3 |
| 24 | 2020 | 4–8 | 33.3% | #96 | 1,549 | 0 | 0 | 2019 | 27–13 | 67.5% | #13 | 1,910 | 0 | 5 |
| 25 | 2021 | 20–18 | 52.6% | #53 | 1,773 | 0 | 1 | 2020 | 8–5 | 61.5% | #16 | 1,866 | 0 | 5 |
| 26 | 2022 | 22–20 | 52.4% | #62 | 1,749 | 0 | 1 | 2021 | 11–15 | 42.3% | #56 | 1,731 | 0 | 5 |
| 27 | 2023 | 25–23 | 52.1% | #30 | 1,857 | 0 | 1 | 2022 | 30–19 | 61.2% | #11 | 1,863 | 0 | 6 |
| 28 | 2024 | 38–18 | 67.9% | #4 | 1,982 | 0 | 2 | 2023 | 29–17 | 63.0% | #12 | 1,879 | 0 | 7 |
| 29 | 2025 | 40–20 | 66.7% | #8 | 2,005 | 0 | 3 | 2024 | 25–12 | 67.6% | #21 | 1,950 | 0 | 8 |
| 30 | 2026 | 14–12 | 53.8% | #15 | 1,892 | 0 | 3 | 2025 | 37–15 | 71.2% | #7 | 1,964 | 1 | 10 |
| 31 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2026 | 25–10 | 71.4% | #23 | 2,020 | 1 | 11 |