H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 04:30 UTC
Kiki Bertens vs Eugenie Bouchard H2H: 0-1
Eugenie Bouchard holds a 1–0 lead over Kiki Bertens in their WTA head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Eugenie Bouchard leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Eugenie Bouchard won the 2015 Australian Open second round 6-0 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.
NED
Age 34
Right-Handed
182 cm / 6'0"
H2H
0
–
1
1 main draw meetings
CAN
Age 32
Right-Handed
178 cm / 5'10"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 22, 2015* | Australian Open | Grand Slam | R64 | Hard | Eugenie Bouchard | 6-0 6-3 | Kiki Bertens | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kiki Bertens | #25 | #4 | 5,430 | 2,015 | 214 | 168 | 56.0% | 0 | 2 | 0 | 3 | 6 | 11 |
| Eugenie Bouchard | #1,002 | #5 | 4,793 | 1,926 | 156 | 144 | 52.0% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
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 | Kiki Bertens | Eugenie Bouchard | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 |
| 19 | 2011 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #182 | 1,493 | 0 | 0 | 2013 | 25–17 | 59.5% | #32 | 1,752 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2012 | 11–12 | 47.8% | #63 | 1,581 | 0 | 1 | 2014 | 39–23 | 62.9% | #7 | 1,834 | 0 | 1 |
| 21 | 2013 | 14–19 | 42.4% | #87 | 1,552 | 0 | 1 | 2015 | 12–17 | 41.4% | #49 | 1,678 | 0 | 1 |
| 22 | 2014 | 11–14 | 44.0% | #68 | 1,580 | 0 | 1 | 2016 | 28–22 | 56.0% | #46 | 1,699 | 0 | 1 |
| 23 | 2015 | 7–17 | 29.2% | #104 | 1,520 | 0 | 1 | 2017 | 10–19 | 34.5% | #81 | 1,604 | 0 | 1 |
| 24 | 2016 | 27–19 | 58.7% | #22 | 1,723 | 0 | 2 | 2018 | 11–13 | 45.8% | #87 | 1,670 | 0 | 1 |
| 25 | 2017 | 30–26 | 53.6% | #31 | 1,684 | 0 | 5 | 2019 | 4–10 | 28.6% | #215 | 1,616 | 0 | 1 |
| 26 | 2018 | 46–22 | 67.6% | #9 | 1,912 | 0 | 8 | 2020 | 10–4 | 71.4% | #141 | 1,712 | 0 | 1 |
| 27 | 2019 | 54–25 | 68.4% | #9 | 1,897 | 0 | 10 | 2021 | 4–3 | 57.1% | #253 | 1,703 | 0 | 1 |
| 28 | 2020 | 13–6 | 68.4% | #9 | 1,883 | 0 | 11 | 2022 | 3–5 | 37.5% | #326 | 1,630 | 0 | 1 |
| 29 | 2021 | 1–7 | 12.5% | #25 | 1,749 | 0 | 11 | 2023 | 3–3 | 50.0% | #287 | 1,635 | 0 | 1 |
| 31 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2025 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #1002 | 1,609 | 0 | 1 |