H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 22:32 UTC
Madison Keys vs Jelena Jankovic H2H: 1-3
Jelena Jankovic holds a 3–1 lead over Madison Keys in their WTA head-to-head. Across 4 main-draw meetings, Jelena Jankovic leads 3–0 on hard courts, while Madison Keys leads 1–0 on grass. Most recently, Jelena Jankovic won the 2015 Cincinnati third round 7-6(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.
USA
Age 31
Right-Handed
178 cm / 5'10"
H2H
1
–
3
4 main draw meetings
SRB
Age 41
Right-Handed
177 cm / 5'10"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 20, 2015* | Cincinnati | WTA 1000 | R32 | Hard | Jelena Jankovic | 7-6(4) 6-4 | Madison Keys | Match data |
| Mar 12, 2015* | Indian Wells | WTA 1000 | R32 | Hard | Jelena Jankovic | 5-7 6-4 6-3 | Madison Keys | Match data |
| Jun 19, 2014* | Eastbourne | WTA 500 | R32 | Grass | Madison Keys | 6-3 6-3 | Jelena Jankovic | Match data |
| Aug 28, 2013* | US Open | Grand Slam | R128 | Hard | Jelena Jankovic | 6-3 6-4 | Madison Keys | 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 Keys | #23 | #5 | 4,999 | 2,136 | 363 | 211 | 63.2% | 1 | 1 | 0 | 6 | 3 | 11 |
| Jelena Jankovic | #970 | #1 | 9,200 | 2,132 | 547 | 332 | 62.2% | 0 | 6 | 0 | 3 | 6 | 15 |
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 Keys | Jelena Jankovic | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 14 | 2009 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #616 | 1,512 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 16 | 2011 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #273 | 1,516 | 0 | 0 | 2001 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #364 | 1,512 | 0 | 0 |
| 17 | 2012 | 1–4 | 20.0% | #137 | 1,514 | 0 | 0 | 2002 | 2–4 | 33.3% | #196 | 1,528 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 2013 | 24–17 | 58.5% | #38 | 1,726 | 0 | 0 | 2003 | 4–9 | 30.8% | #85 | 1,505 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 2014 | 27–21 | 56.2% | #30 | 1,742 | 0 | 1 | 2004 | 27–25 | 51.9% | #28 | 1,754 | 0 | 1 |
| 20 | 2015 | 31–19 | 62.0% | #18 | 1,802 | 0 | 1 | 2005 | 36–29 | 55.4% | #22 | 1,732 | 0 | 1 |
| 21 | 2016 | 41–16 | 71.9% | #8 | 1,915 | 0 | 2 | 2006 | 45–28 | 61.6% | #12 | 1,915 | 0 | 1 |
| 22 | 2017 | 17–10 | 63.0% | #19 | 1,892 | 0 | 3 | 2007 | 73–26 | 73.7% | #3 | 1,966 | 0 | 5 |
| 23 | 2018 | 28–15 | 65.1% | #17 | 1,899 | 0 | 3 | 2008 | 63–18 | 77.8% | #1 | 2,087 | 0 | 9 |
| 24 | 2019 | 27–13 | 67.5% | #13 | 1,910 | 0 | 5 | 2009 | 42–19 | 68.9% | #8 | 1,948 | 0 | 11 |
| 25 | 2020 | 8–5 | 61.5% | #16 | 1,866 | 0 | 5 | 2010 | 35–22 | 61.4% | #8 | 1,794 | 0 | 12 |
| 26 | 2021 | 11–15 | 42.3% | #56 | 1,731 | 0 | 5 | 2011 | 38–22 | 63.3% | #14 | 1,804 | 0 | 12 |
| 27 | 2022 | 30–19 | 61.2% | #11 | 1,863 | 0 | 6 | 2012 | 31–27 | 53.4% | #22 | 1,737 | 0 | 12 |
| 28 | 2023 | 29–17 | 63.0% | #12 | 1,879 | 0 | 7 | 2013 | 46–21 | 68.7% | #8 | 1,918 | 0 | 13 |
| 29 | 2024 | 25–12 | 67.6% | #21 | 1,950 | 0 | 8 | 2014 | 38–22 | 63.3% | #15 | 1,795 | 0 | 13 |
| 30 | 2025 | 37–15 | 71.2% | #7 | 1,964 | 1 | 10 | 2015 | 39–21 | 65.0% | #21 | 1,851 | 0 | 15 |
| 31 | 2026 | 25–10 | 71.4% | #23 | 2,020 | 1 | 11 | 2016 | 21–19 | 52.5% | #54 | 1,738 | 0 | 15 |
| 32 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2017 | 6–19 | 24.0% | #158 | 1,576 | 0 | 15 |