H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 08:25 UTC
Margarita Gasparyan vs Ana Ivanovic H2H: 0-1
Ana Ivanovic holds a 1–0 lead over Margarita Gasparyan in their WTA head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Ana Ivanovic leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Ana Ivanovic won the 2016 St. Petersburg fourth round 7-5 6-2.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
RUS
Age 31
Right-Handed
183 cm / 6'0"
H2H
0
–
1
1 main draw meetings
SRB
Age 38
Right-Handed
184 cm / 6'0"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 12, 2016* | St. Petersburg | WTA 500 | R16 | Hard | Ana Ivanovic | 7-5 6-2 | Margarita Gasparyan | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Margarita Gasparyan | #1,358 | #41 | 1,213 | 1,773 | 50 | 57 | 46.7% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 |
| Ana Ivanovic | #63 | #1 | 6,912 | 2,095 | 419 | 213 | 66.3% | 1 | 3 | 2 | 7 | 2 | 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 | Margarita Gasparyan | Ana Ivanovic | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 16 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2004 | 3–4 | 42.9% | #101 | 1,544 | 0 | 0 |
| 17 | 2012 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #214 | 1,494 | 0 | 0 | 2005 | 32–14 | 69.6% | #16 | 1,847 | 0 | 1 |
| 18 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2006 | 36–18 | 66.7% | #14 | 1,900 | 0 | 2 |
| 19 | 2014 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #220 | 1,481 | 0 | 0 | 2007 | 49–17 | 74.2% | #4 | 2,034 | 0 | 5 |
| 20 | 2015 | 10–6 | 62.5% | #61 | 1,617 | 0 | 1 | 2008 | 38–16 | 70.4% | #5 | 1,975 | 1 | 8 |
| 21 | 2016 | 8–12 | 40.0% | #117 | 1,602 | 0 | 1 | 2009 | 22–14 | 61.1% | #21 | 1,825 | 1 | 8 |
| 22 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2010 | 33–18 | 64.7% | #17 | 1,938 | 1 | 10 |
| 23 | 2018 | 11–5 | 68.8% | #92 | 1,755 | 0 | 2 | 2011 | 32–20 | 61.5% | #22 | 1,877 | 1 | 11 |
| 24 | 2019 | 14–19 | 42.4% | #104 | 1,685 | 0 | 2 | 2012 | 33–18 | 64.7% | #13 | 1,872 | 1 | 11 |
| 25 | 2020 | 2–5 | 28.6% | #125 | 1,606 | 0 | 2 | 2013 | 38–23 | 62.3% | #16 | 1,855 | 1 | 11 |
| 26 | 2021 | 5–5 | 50.0% | #164 | 1,606 | 0 | 2 | 2014 | 59–18 | 76.6% | #5 | 2,019 | 1 | 15 |
| 27 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2015 | 29–19 | 60.4% | #16 | 1,857 | 1 | 15 |
| 28 | 2023 | 0–2 | 0.0% | — | 1,528 | 0 | 2 | 2016 | 15–14 | 51.7% | #63 | 1,702 | 1 | 15 |
| 29 | 2024 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #1358 | 1,465 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |