H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 10:32 UTC
Madison Brengle vs Carol Zhao H2H: 1-0
Madison Brengle holds a 1–0 lead over Carol Zhao in their WTA head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Madison Brengle leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Madison Brengle won the 2015 Toronto second round 6-1 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.
USA
Age 36
Right-Handed
168 cm / 5'6"
H2H
1
–
0
1 main draw meetings
CAN
Age 31
Right-Handed
168 cm / 5'6"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 12, 2015* | Toronto | WTA 1000 | R64 | Hard | Madison Brengle | 6-1 6-1 | Carol Zhao | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Madison Brengle | #210 | #35 | 1,324 | 1,740 | 94 | 151 | 38.4% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Carol Zhao | #432 | #131 | 458 | 1,515 | 5 | 22 | 18.5% | 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 | Madison Brengle | Carol Zhao | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 2013 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #461 | 1,493 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 2009 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #165 | 1,456 | 0 | 0 | 2014 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #293 | 1,513 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2010 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #188 | 1,447 | 0 | 0 | 2015 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #343 | 1,489 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2011 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #197 | 1,459 | 0 | 0 | 2016 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #498 | 1,461 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2012 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #191 | 1,444 | 0 | 0 | 2017 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #149 | 1,450 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2018 | 0–3 | 0.0% | #299 | 1,445 | 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 | 2016 | 16–22 | 42.1% | #73 | 1,602 | 0 | 0 | 2021 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #290 | 1,405 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | 2017 | 10–18 | 35.7% | #83 | 1,656 | 0 | 0 | 2022 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #176 | 1,392 | 0 | 0 |
| 28 | 2018 | 3–11 | 21.4% | #88 | 1,606 | 0 | 0 | 2023 | 2–5 | 28.6% | #219 | 1,430 | 0 | 0 |
| 29 | 2019 | 7–11 | 38.9% | #95 | 1,601 | 0 | 0 | 2024 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #246 | 1,417 | 0 | 0 |
| 30 | 2020 | 2–4 | 33.3% | #82 | 1,641 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 31 | 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 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |