H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 04:32 UTC
Nao Hibino vs Lesia Tsurenko H2H: 1-1
Nao Hibino and Lesia Tsurenko are tied 1–1 in their WTA head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, they are tied 1–1 on hard courts. Most recently, Lesia Tsurenko won the 2018 Monterrey third round 6-7(2) 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.
JPN
Age 31
Right-Handed
163 cm / 5'4"
H2H
1
–
1
2 main draw meetings
UKR
Age 37
Right-Handed
174 cm / 5'9"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 5, 2018* | Monterrey | WTA 500 | R32 | Hard | Lesia Tsurenko | 6-7(2) 6-4 6-4 | Nao Hibino | Match data |
| Sep 30, 2016* | Tashkent | WTA 250 | QF | Hard | Nao Hibino | 7-6(6) 0-0 (ret.) | Lesia Tsurenko | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nao Hibino | #235 | #56 | 1,050 | 1,726 | 79 | 118 | 40.1% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 3 |
| Lesia Tsurenko | #370 | #23 | 2,030 | 1,889 | 180 | 200 | 47.4% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 4 |
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 | Nao Hibino | Lesia Tsurenko | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 20 | 2015 | 6–2 | 75.0% | #66 | 1,576 | 0 | 1 | 2009 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #284 | 1,483 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2016 | 18–21 | 46.2% | #94 | 1,632 | 0 | 1 | 2010 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #155 | 1,468 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2017 | 11–16 | 40.7% | #97 | 1,561 | 0 | 1 | 2011 | 3–7 | 30.0% | #113 | 1,467 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2018 | 4–9 | 30.8% | #114 | 1,590 | 0 | 1 | 2012 | 7–12 | 36.8% | #116 | 1,485 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2019 | 7–6 | 53.8% | #106 | 1,614 | 0 | 2 | 2013 | 11–18 | 37.9% | #68 | 1,507 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2020 | 9–6 | 60.0% | #73 | 1,644 | 0 | 2 | 2014 | 4–8 | 33.3% | #92 | 1,511 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 2021 | 5–16 | 23.8% | #129 | 1,538 | 0 | 2 | 2015 | 22–17 | 56.4% | #33 | 1,738 | 0 | 1 |
| 27 | 2022 | 4–6 | 40.0% | #138 | 1,581 | 0 | 2 | 2016 | 19–19 | 50.0% | #57 | 1,728 | 0 | 2 |
| 28 | 2023 | 9–12 | 42.9% | #94 | 1,658 | 0 | 3 | 2017 | 22–24 | 47.8% | #42 | 1,699 | 0 | 3 |
| 29 | 2024 | 4–16 | 20.0% | #145 | 1,603 | 0 | 3 | 2018 | 26–18 | 59.1% | #27 | 1,814 | 0 | 4 |
| 30 | 2025 | 2–7 | 22.2% | #174 | 1,514 | 0 | 3 | 2019 | 14–14 | 50.0% | #73 | 1,734 | 0 | 4 |
| 31 | 2026 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #235 | 1,533 | 0 | 3 | 2020 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #146 | 1,746 | 0 | 4 |
| 32 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2021 | 6–10 | 37.5% | #118 | 1,738 | 0 | 4 |
| 33 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2022 | 10–11 | 47.6% | #137 | 1,745 | 0 | 4 |
| 34 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2023 | 24–15 | 61.5% | #31 | 1,866 | 0 | 4 |
| 35 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2024 | 10–20 | 33.3% | #115 | 1,693 | 0 | 4 |