H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 22:32 UTC
Laura Siegemund vs Madison Brengle H2H: 0-2
Madison Brengle holds a 2–0 lead over Laura Siegemund in their WTA head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Madison Brengle leads 1–0 on grass and 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Madison Brengle won the 2023 Indian Wells first round 7-6(5) 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.
GER
Age 38
Right-Handed
168 cm / 5'6"
H2H
0
–
2
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 10, 2023* | Indian Wells | WTA 1000 | R128 | Hard | Madison Brengle | 7-6(5) 6-4 | Laura Siegemund | Match data |
| Jun 9, 2016* | S-Hertogenbosch | WTA 250 | R32 | Grass | Madison Brengle | 6-3 3-6 6-2 | Laura Siegemund | Match data |
| Apr 30, 2016 | Madrid | WTA 1000 | Q2 | Clay | Laura Siegemund | 6-4 6-1 | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Laura Siegemund | #87 | #27 | 1,630 | 1,828 | 143 | 152 | 48.5% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 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 | Laura Siegemund | Madison Brengle | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 17 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2007 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #229 | 1,502 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2008 | 0–3 | 0.0% | #220 | 1,457 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2009 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #165 | 1,456 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2010 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #188 | 1,447 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2011 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #197 | 1,459 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2010 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #220 | 1,483 | 0 | 0 | 2012 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #191 | 1,444 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2014 | 4–4 | 50.0% | #95 | 1,503 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2015 | 25–26 | 49.0% | #40 | 1,627 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 2014 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #136 | 1,495 | 0 | 0 | 2016 | 16–22 | 42.1% | #73 | 1,602 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | 2015 | 5–7 | 41.7% | #98 | 1,529 | 0 | 0 | 2017 | 10–18 | 35.7% | #83 | 1,656 | 0 | 0 |
| 28 | 2016 | 27–17 | 61.4% | #31 | 1,735 | 0 | 1 | 2018 | 3–11 | 21.4% | #88 | 1,606 | 0 | 0 |
| 29 | 2017 | 14–12 | 53.8% | #69 | 1,792 | 0 | 2 | 2019 | 7–11 | 38.9% | #95 | 1,601 | 0 | 0 |
| 30 | 2018 | 8–11 | 42.1% | #113 | 1,691 | 0 | 2 | 2020 | 2–4 | 33.3% | #82 | 1,641 | 0 | 0 |
| 31 | 2019 | 15–20 | 42.9% | #75 | 1,666 | 0 | 2 | 2021 | 6–14 | 30.0% | #59 | 1,645 | 0 | 0 |
| 32 | 2020 | 11–9 | 55.0% | #51 | 1,762 | 0 | 2 | 2022 | 12–16 | 42.9% | #57 | 1,637 | 0 | 0 |
| 33 | 2021 | 8–13 | 38.1% | #125 | 1,727 | 0 | 2 | 2023 | 6–14 | 30.0% | #151 | 1,586 | 0 | 0 |
| 34 | 2022 | 3–7 | 30.0% | #177 | 1,652 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 35 | 2023 | 13–11 | 54.2% | #86 | 1,784 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 36 | 2024 | 17–16 | 51.5% | #80 | 1,738 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 37 | 2025 | 13–14 | 48.1% | #46 | 1,803 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 38 | 2026 | 8–12 | 40.0% | #87 | 1,748 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |