H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 16:32 UTC
Naomi Osaka vs Ashleigh Barty H2H: 2-1
Naomi Osaka holds a 2–1 lead over Ashleigh Barty in their WTA head-to-head. Across 3 main-draw meetings, Naomi Osaka leads 2–0 on hard courts, while Ashleigh Barty leads 1–0 on grass. Most recently, Naomi Osaka won the 2019 Beijing final 3-6 6-3 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.
JPN
Age 28
Right-Handed
180 cm / 5'11"
H2H
2
–
1
3 main draw meetings
AUS
Age 30
Right-Handed
166 cm / 5'5"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 6, 2019 | Beijing | WTA 1000 | F | Hard | Naomi Osaka | 3-6 6-3 6-2 | Ashleigh Barty | Match data |
| Jun 16, 2018* | Nottingham | WTA 250 | SF | Grass | Ashleigh Barty | 6-3 6-4 | Naomi Osaka | Match data |
| Jan 21, 2018* | Australian Open | Grand Slam | R32 | Hard | Naomi Osaka | 6-4 6-2 | Ashleigh Barty | 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 |
| Ashleigh Barty | #1 | #1 | 10,185 | 2,199 | 191 | 70 | 73.2% | 3 | 3 | 2 | 4 | 3 | 15 |
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 | Ashleigh Barty | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 2012 | 0–4 | 0.0% | #175 | 1,469 | 0 | 0 |
| 17 | 2015 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #144 | 1,509 | 0 | 0 | 2013 | 4–5 | 44.4% | #190 | 1,519 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 2016 | 20–13 | 60.6% | #48 | 1,700 | 0 | 0 | 2014 | 1–6 | 14.3% | #223 | 1,508 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 2017 | 19–22 | 46.3% | #68 | 1,697 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 20 | 2018 | 39–19 | 67.2% | #5 | 1,904 | 1 | 2 | 2016 | 2–1 | 66.7% | #272 | 1,593 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2019 | 40–13 | 75.5% | #3 | 2,030 | 2 | 5 | 2017 | 30–14 | 68.2% | #17 | 1,888 | 0 | 1 |
| 22 | 2020 | 16–3 | 84.2% | #3 | 2,082 | 3 | 6 | 2018 | 40–18 | 69.0% | #15 | 1,964 | 0 | 3 |
| 23 | 2021 | 18–7 | 72.0% | #13 | 2,002 | 4 | 7 | 2019 | 48–12 | 80.0% | #1 | 2,070 | 1 | 7 |
| 24 | 2022 | 15–11 | 57.7% | #42 | 1,894 | 4 | 7 | 2020 | 12–3 | 80.0% | #1 | 2,082 | 1 | 8 |
| 25 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2021 | 43–7 | 86.0% | #1 | 2,142 | 2 | 13 |
| 26 | 2024 | 21–16 | 56.8% | #57 | 1,883 | 4 | 7 | 2022 | 11–0 | 100.0% | #1 | 2,199 | 3 | 15 |
| 27 | 2025 | 31–14 | 68.9% | #16 | 1,968 | 4 | 8 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 28 | 2026 | 19–8 | 70.4% | #13 | 2,044 | 4 | 8 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |