H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC
Monica Niculescu vs Louisa Chirico H2H: 0-1
Louisa Chirico holds a 1–0 lead over Monica Niculescu in their WTA head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Louisa Chirico leads 1–0 on clay. Most recently, Louisa Chirico won the 2016 Madrid second round 7-5 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.
ROU
Age 38
Right-Handed
168 cm / 5'6"
H2H
0
–
1
1 main draw meetings
USA
Age 30
Right-Handed
175 cm / 5'9"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 1, 2016 | Beijing | WTA 1000 | Q2 | Hard | Louisa Chirico | 2-6 6-2 4-2 | Monica Niculescu | Match data |
| May 2, 2016 | Madrid | WTA 1000 | R64 | Clay | Louisa Chirico | 7-5 6-1 | Monica Niculescu | Match data |
Career Comparison
| Player | Current | Peak | Pts | Elo | W | L | Win % | GS | 1000 | Finals | 500 | 250 | Titles |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Monica Niculescu | #958 | #28 | 1,960 | 1,807 | 176 | 213 | 45.2% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 3 |
| Louisa Chirico | #382 | #58 | 1,020 | 1,668 | 19 | 45 | 29.7% | 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 | Monica Niculescu | Louisa Chirico | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 19 | 2007 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #152 | 1,490 | 0 | 0 | 2015 | 3–8 | 27.3% | #111 | 1,484 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2008 | 8–15 | 34.8% | #48 | 1,542 | 0 | 0 | 2016 | 11–14 | 44.0% | #68 | 1,661 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2009 | 10–22 | 31.2% | #103 | 1,522 | 0 | 0 | 2017 | 2–9 | 18.2% | #208 | 1,574 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2010 | 6–9 | 40.0% | #82 | 1,573 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 23 | 2011 | 21–15 | 58.3% | #30 | 1,755 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 24 | 2012 | 15–23 | 39.5% | #58 | 1,639 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 25 | 2013 | 22–21 | 51.2% | #59 | 1,637 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 26 | 2014 | 22–19 | 53.7% | #46 | 1,687 | 0 | 2 | 2022 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #163 | 1,581 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | 2015 | 20–21 | 48.8% | #39 | 1,677 | 0 | 2 | 2023 | 0–6 | 0.0% | #266 | 1,589 | 0 | 0 |
| 28 | 2016 | 25–17 | 59.5% | #38 | 1,782 | 0 | 3 | 2024 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #172 | 1,569 | 0 | 0 |
| 29 | 2017 | 10–19 | 34.5% | #77 | 1,618 | 0 | 3 | 2025 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #176 | 1,621 | 0 | 0 |
| 30 | 2018 | 9–15 | 37.5% | #99 | 1,588 | 0 | 3 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 31 | 2019 | 8–11 | 42.1% | #118 | 1,627 | 0 | 3 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 32 | 2020 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #144 | 1,579 | 0 | 3 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 33 | 2021 | 0–3 | 0.0% | #274 | 1,514 | 0 | 3 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |