H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 04:32 UTC
Naomi Osaka vs Alison Riske-Amritraj H2H: 2-0
Naomi Osaka holds a 2–0 lead over Alison Riske-Amritraj in their WTA head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Naomi Osaka leads 2–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Naomi Osaka won the 2022 Miami fourth round 6-3 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 28
Right-Handed
180 cm / 5'11"
H2H
2
–
0
2 main draw meetings
USA
Age 36
Right-Handed
175 cm / 5'9"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 30, 2022* | Miami | WTA 1000 | R16 | Hard | Naomi Osaka | 6-3 6-4 | Alison Riske-Amritraj | Match data |
| Oct 3, 2019 | Beijing | WTA 1000 | R16 | Hard | Naomi Osaka | 6-4 6-0 | Alison Riske-Amritraj | Match data |
| Apr 30, 2016 | Madrid | WTA 1000 | Q2 | Clay | Alison Riske-Amritraj | 7-5 3-2 | Naomi Osaka | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Naomi Osaka | #13 | #1 | 7,985 | 2,140 | 240 | 130 | 64.9% | 4 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 8 |
| Alison Riske-Amritraj | #1,157 | #18 | 2,360 | 1,853 | 191 | 202 | 48.6% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 |
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 | Naomi Osaka | Alison Riske-Amritraj | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 16 | 2014 | 2–2 | 50.0% | #260 | 1,531 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 17 | 2015 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #144 | 1,509 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 18 | 2016 | 20–13 | 60.6% | #48 | 1,700 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 19 | 2017 | 19–22 | 46.3% | #68 | 1,697 | 0 | 0 | 2010 | 4–4 | 50.0% | #115 | 1,554 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2018 | 39–19 | 67.2% | #5 | 1,904 | 1 | 2 | 2011 | 3–8 | 27.3% | #136 | 1,529 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2019 | 40–13 | 75.5% | #3 | 2,030 | 2 | 5 | 2012 | 0–4 | 0.0% | #180 | 1,488 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2020 | 16–3 | 84.2% | #3 | 2,082 | 3 | 6 | 2013 | 11–6 | 64.7% | #57 | 1,642 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2021 | 18–7 | 72.0% | #13 | 2,002 | 4 | 7 | 2014 | 24–22 | 52.2% | #43 | 1,713 | 0 | 1 |
| 24 | 2022 | 15–11 | 57.7% | #42 | 1,894 | 4 | 7 | 2015 | 15–24 | 38.5% | #97 | 1,602 | 0 | 1 |
| 25 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2016 | 23–19 | 54.8% | #39 | 1,742 | 0 | 1 |
| 26 | 2024 | 21–16 | 56.8% | #57 | 1,883 | 4 | 7 | 2017 | 21–24 | 46.7% | #70 | 1,650 | 0 | 1 |
| 27 | 2025 | 31–14 | 68.9% | #16 | 1,968 | 4 | 8 | 2018 | 17–16 | 51.5% | #62 | 1,632 | 0 | 1 |
| 28 | 2026 | 19–8 | 70.4% | #13 | 2,044 | 4 | 8 | 2019 | 26–23 | 53.1% | #18 | 1,797 | 0 | 2 |
| 29 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2020 | 6–8 | 42.9% | #26 | 1,739 | 0 | 2 |
| 30 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2021 | 16–15 | 51.6% | #51 | 1,771 | 0 | 3 |
| 31 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2022 | 25–21 | 54.3% | #41 | 1,750 | 0 | 3 |
| 32 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2023 | 0–8 | 0.0% | #659 | 1,614 | 0 | 3 |