H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 04:32 UTC
Johanna Larsson vs Madison Brengle H2H: 1-1
Johanna Larsson and Madison Brengle are tied 1–1 in their WTA head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, they are tied 1–1 on hard courts. Most recently, Madison Brengle won the 2016 Australian Open second round 7-5 4-6 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.
SWE
Age 37
Right-Handed
174 cm / 5'9"
H2H
1
–
1
2 main draw meetings
USA
Age 36
Right-Handed
168 cm / 5'6"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 21, 2016* | Australian Open | Grand Slam | R64 | Hard | Madison Brengle | 7-5 4-6 6-1 | Johanna Larsson | Match data |
| Oct 17, 2015* | Linz | WTA 500 | QF | Hard | Johanna Larsson | 7-5 7-6(6) | Madison Brengle | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Johanna Larsson | #236 | #45 | 1,230 | 1,745 | 153 | 177 | 46.4% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 |
| Madison Brengle | #210 | #35 | 1,324 | 1,740 | 94 | 151 | 38.4% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
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 | Johanna Larsson | Madison Brengle | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 17 | 2006 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #389 | 1,502 | 0 | 0 | 2007 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #229 | 1,502 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2008 | 0–3 | 0.0% | #220 | 1,457 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 2008 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #177 | 1,509 | 0 | 0 | 2009 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #165 | 1,456 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2009 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #172 | 1,492 | 0 | 0 | 2010 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #188 | 1,447 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2010 | 9–9 | 50.0% | #69 | 1,571 | 0 | 0 | 2011 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #197 | 1,459 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2011 | 19–18 | 51.4% | #59 | 1,669 | 0 | 0 | 2012 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #191 | 1,444 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2012 | 14–19 | 42.4% | #73 | 1,627 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 24 | 2013 | 13–16 | 44.8% | #84 | 1,625 | 0 | 0 | 2014 | 4–4 | 50.0% | #95 | 1,503 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2014 | 7–15 | 31.8% | #70 | 1,597 | 0 | 0 | 2015 | 25–26 | 49.0% | #40 | 1,627 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 2015 | 25–19 | 56.8% | #56 | 1,670 | 0 | 1 | 2016 | 16–22 | 42.1% | #73 | 1,602 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | 2016 | 29–24 | 54.7% | #50 | 1,716 | 0 | 1 | 2017 | 10–18 | 35.7% | #83 | 1,656 | 0 | 0 |
| 28 | 2017 | 15–21 | 41.7% | #80 | 1,626 | 0 | 1 | 2018 | 3–11 | 21.4% | #88 | 1,606 | 0 | 0 |
| 29 | 2018 | 17–18 | 48.6% | #75 | 1,600 | 0 | 2 | 2019 | 7–11 | 38.9% | #95 | 1,601 | 0 | 0 |
| 30 | 2019 | 3–13 | 18.8% | #217 | 1,557 | 0 | 2 | 2020 | 2–4 | 33.3% | #82 | 1,641 | 0 | 0 |
| 31 | 2020 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #236 | 1,543 | 0 | 2 | 2021 | 6–14 | 30.0% | #59 | 1,645 | 0 | 0 |
| 32 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2022 | 12–16 | 42.9% | #57 | 1,637 | 0 | 0 |
| 33 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2023 | 6–14 | 30.0% | #151 | 1,586 | 0 | 0 |