H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 02:15 UTC
Kateryna Volodko vs Shahar Peer H2H: 0-3
Shahar Peer holds a 3–0 lead over Kateryna Volodko in their WTA head-to-head. Across 3 main-draw meetings, Shahar Peer leads 2–0 on clay and 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Shahar Peer won the 2015 Bucharest third round 2-6 6-4 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.
UKR
Age 39
Right-Handed
175 cm / 5'9"
H2H
0
–
3
3 main draw meetings
ISR
Age 39
Right-Handed
170 cm / 5'7"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 16, 2015* | Bucharest | WTA 250 | R32 | Clay | Shahar Peer | 2-6 6-4 6-4 | Kateryna Volodko | Match data |
| Mar 10, 2009* | Indian Wells | WTA 1000 | R128 | Hard | Shahar Peer | 6-2 6-1 | Kateryna Volodko | Match data |
| May 19, 2005* | Istanbul | WTA 500 | R32 | Clay | Shahar Peer | 6-2 6-2 | Kateryna Volodko | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kateryna Volodko | #584 | #29 | 1,740 | 1,801 | 137 | 187 | 42.3% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 |
| Shahar Peer | #1,185 | #11 | 3,410 | 1,966 | 268 | 204 | 56.8% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 4 | 5 |
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 | Kateryna Volodko | Shahar Peer | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 16 | 2003 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #384 | 1,493 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 17 | 2004 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #316 | 1,470 | 0 | 0 | 2004 | 3–3 | 50.0% | #176 | 1,509 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 2005 | 7–7 | 50.0% | #121 | 1,536 | 0 | 0 | 2005 | 22–20 | 52.4% | #45 | 1,636 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 2006 | 5–10 | 33.3% | #100 | 1,530 | 0 | 0 | 2006 | 38–20 | 65.5% | #20 | 1,826 | 0 | 3 |
| 20 | 2007 | 13–19 | 40.6% | #44 | 1,630 | 0 | 0 | 2007 | 39–21 | 65.0% | #17 | 1,830 | 0 | 3 |
| 21 | 2008 | 15–18 | 45.5% | #62 | 1,646 | 0 | 1 | 2008 | 24–20 | 54.5% | #38 | 1,707 | 0 | 3 |
| 22 | 2009 | 23–20 | 53.5% | #31 | 1,769 | 0 | 1 | 2009 | 36–21 | 63.2% | #30 | 1,787 | 0 | 5 |
| 23 | 2010 | 8–15 | 34.8% | #99 | 1,665 | 0 | 1 | 2010 | 47–21 | 69.1% | #13 | 1,885 | 0 | 5 |
| 24 | 2011 | 14–10 | 58.3% | #85 | 1,719 | 0 | 1 | 2011 | 23–21 | 52.3% | #37 | 1,706 | 0 | 5 |
| 25 | 2012 | 7–11 | 38.9% | #136 | 1,659 | 0 | 1 | 2012 | 15–22 | 40.5% | #74 | 1,584 | 0 | 5 |
| 26 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2013 | 10–14 | 41.7% | #77 | 1,558 | 0 | 5 |
| 27 | 2014 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #201 | 1,619 | 0 | 1 | 2014 | 10–18 | 35.7% | #117 | 1,539 | 0 | 5 |
| 28 | 2015 | 8–14 | 36.4% | #89 | 1,606 | 0 | 1 | 2015 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #177 | 1,526 | 0 | 5 |
| 29 | 2016 | 14–17 | 45.2% | #69 | 1,673 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 30 | 2017 | 13–14 | 48.1% | #92 | 1,653 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 31 | 2018 | 3–11 | 21.4% | #132 | 1,568 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 32 | 2019 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #1168 | 1,537 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 33 | 2020 | 5–8 | 38.5% | #285 | 1,510 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 34 | 2021 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #207 | 1,530 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 36 | 2023 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #276 | 1,550 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 37 | 2024 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #584 | 1,541 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |