H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 02:15 UTC
Na Li vs Sofia Arvidsson H2H: 3-0
Na Li holds a 3–0 lead over Sofia Arvidsson in their WTA head-to-head. Across 3 main-draw meetings, Na Li leads 3–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Na Li won the 2013 US Open second round 6-2 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.
CHN
Age 44
Right-Handed
172 cm / 5'8"
H2H
3
–
0
3 main draw meetings
SWE
Age 42
Right-Handed
176 cm / 5'9"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 29, 2013* | US Open | Grand Slam | R64 | Hard | Na Li | 6-2 6-2 | Sofia Arvidsson | Match data |
| Jan 19, 2011* | Australian Open | Grand Slam | R128 | Hard | Na Li | 6-1 7-5 | Sofia Arvidsson | Match data |
| Feb 16, 2008* | Antwerp | WTA 500 | QF | Hard | Na Li | 7-5 6-4 | Sofia Arvidsson | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Na Li | #9 | #2 | 7,585 | 2,124 | 334 | 155 | 68.3% | 2 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 4 | 9 |
| Sofia Arvidsson | #320 | #29 | 1,380 | 1,775 | 113 | 154 | 42.3% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 |
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 | Na Li | Sofia Arvidsson | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 17 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2001 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #437 | 1,489 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 2000 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #136 | 1,499 | 0 | 0 | 2002 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #144 | 1,475 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 2001 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #302 | 1,483 | 0 | 0 | 2003 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #104 | 1,482 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2004 | 1–6 | 14.3% | #213 | 1,434 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2005 | 13–8 | 61.9% | #67 | 1,598 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2004 | 6–1 | 85.7% | #78 | 1,601 | 0 | 1 | 2006 | 16–19 | 45.7% | #62 | 1,537 | 0 | 1 |
| 23 | 2005 | 23–14 | 62.2% | #56 | 1,711 | 0 | 1 | 2007 | 6–11 | 35.3% | #98 | 1,508 | 0 | 1 |
| 24 | 2006 | 36–22 | 62.1% | #21 | 1,801 | 0 | 1 | 2008 | 12–18 | 40.0% | #56 | 1,519 | 0 | 1 |
| 25 | 2007 | 22–12 | 64.7% | #29 | 1,814 | 0 | 1 | 2009 | 0–8 | 0.0% | #139 | 1,443 | 0 | 1 |
| 26 | 2008 | 24–12 | 66.7% | #23 | 1,843 | 0 | 2 | 2010 | 14–16 | 46.7% | #53 | 1,545 | 0 | 1 |
| 27 | 2009 | 35–17 | 67.3% | #15 | 1,914 | 0 | 2 | 2011 | 16–23 | 41.0% | #78 | 1,627 | 0 | 1 |
| 28 | 2010 | 36–20 | 64.3% | #11 | 1,844 | 0 | 3 | 2012 | 27–20 | 57.4% | #41 | 1,753 | 0 | 2 |
| 29 | 2011 | 33–17 | 66.0% | #5 | 1,868 | 1 | 5 | 2013 | 6–18 | 25.0% | #120 | 1,597 | 0 | 2 |
| 30 | 2012 | 43–16 | 72.9% | #7 | 2,016 | 1 | 6 | 2014 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #263 | 1,581 | 0 | 2 |
| 31 | 2013 | 46–14 | 76.7% | #3 | 2,077 | 1 | 7 | 2015 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #320 | 1,568 | 0 | 2 |
| 32 | 2014 | 29–7 | 80.6% | #9 | 2,031 | 2 | 9 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |