H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 17:48 UTC
Monica Niculescu vs Mathilde Johansson H2H: 0-1
Mathilde Johansson holds a 1–0 lead over Monica Niculescu in their WTA head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Mathilde Johansson leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Mathilde Johansson won the 2012 Guangzhou third 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.
ROU
Age 38
Right-Handed
168 cm / 5'6"
H2H
0
–
1
1 main draw meetings
FRA
Age 41
Right-Handed
173 cm / 5'8"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 20, 2012* | Guangzhou | WTA 250 | R32 | Hard | Mathilde Johansson | 7-5 6-2 | Monica Niculescu | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Monica Niculescu | #958 | #28 | 1,960 | 1,807 | 176 | 213 | 45.2% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 3 |
| Mathilde Johansson | #235 | #59 | 992 | 1,619 | 44 | 75 | 37.0% | 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 | Mathilde Johansson | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 20 | 2008 | 8–15 | 34.8% | #48 | 1,542 | 0 | 0 | 2005 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #184 | 1,497 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2009 | 10–22 | 31.2% | #103 | 1,522 | 0 | 0 | 2006 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #140 | 1,491 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2010 | 6–9 | 40.0% | #82 | 1,573 | 0 | 0 | 2007 | 2–5 | 28.6% | #134 | 1,477 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2011 | 21–15 | 58.3% | #30 | 1,755 | 0 | 0 | 2008 | 3–7 | 30.0% | #85 | 1,475 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2012 | 15–23 | 39.5% | #58 | 1,639 | 0 | 0 | 2009 | 8–13 | 38.1% | #125 | 1,483 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2013 | 22–21 | 51.2% | #59 | 1,637 | 0 | 1 | 2010 | 0–3 | 0.0% | #102 | 1,461 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 2014 | 22–19 | 53.7% | #46 | 1,687 | 0 | 2 | 2011 | 10–11 | 47.6% | #77 | 1,539 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | 2015 | 20–21 | 48.8% | #39 | 1,677 | 0 | 2 | 2012 | 12–15 | 44.4% | #87 | 1,585 | 0 | 0 |
| 28 | 2016 | 25–17 | 59.5% | #38 | 1,782 | 0 | 3 | 2013 | 8–15 | 34.8% | #136 | 1,540 | 0 | 0 |
| 29 | 2017 | 10–19 | 34.5% | #77 | 1,618 | 0 | 3 | 2014 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #207 | 1,527 | 0 | 0 |
| 30 | 2018 | 9–15 | 37.5% | #99 | 1,588 | 0 | 3 | 2015 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #173 | 1,516 | 0 | 0 |
| 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 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |