H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 04:32 UTC
Naomi Osaka vs Camila Giorgi H2H: 2-0
Naomi Osaka holds a 2–0 lead over Camila Giorgi 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 2020 US Open second round 6-1 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
–
0
2 main draw meetings
ITA
Age 34
Right-Handed
168 cm / 5'6"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 3, 2020* | US Open | Grand Slam | R64 | Hard | Naomi Osaka | 6-1 6-2 | Camila Giorgi | Match data |
| Sep 22, 2018* | Tokyo | WTA 500 | SF | Hard | Naomi Osaka | 6-2 6-3 | Camila Giorgi | 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 |
| Camila Giorgi | #116 | #26 | 1,978 | 1,875 | 204 | 184 | 52.6% | 0 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 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 | Naomi Osaka | Camila Giorgi | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 2011 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #151 | 1,486 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2018 | 39–19 | 67.2% | #5 | 1,904 | 1 | 2 | 2012 | 6–10 | 37.5% | #75 | 1,524 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2019 | 40–13 | 75.5% | #3 | 2,030 | 2 | 5 | 2013 | 8–11 | 42.1% | #98 | 1,579 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2020 | 16–3 | 84.2% | #3 | 2,082 | 3 | 6 | 2014 | 27–19 | 58.7% | #34 | 1,710 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2021 | 18–7 | 72.0% | #13 | 2,002 | 4 | 7 | 2015 | 26–21 | 55.3% | #35 | 1,730 | 0 | 1 |
| 24 | 2022 | 15–11 | 57.7% | #42 | 1,894 | 4 | 7 | 2016 | 14–19 | 42.4% | #82 | 1,638 | 0 | 1 |
| 25 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2017 | 15–12 | 55.6% | #78 | 1,778 | 0 | 1 |
| 26 | 2024 | 21–16 | 56.8% | #57 | 1,883 | 4 | 7 | 2018 | 28–15 | 65.1% | #26 | 1,865 | 0 | 2 |
| 27 | 2025 | 31–14 | 68.9% | #16 | 1,968 | 4 | 8 | 2019 | 12–15 | 44.4% | #100 | 1,725 | 0 | 2 |
| 28 | 2026 | 19–8 | 70.4% | #13 | 2,044 | 4 | 8 | 2020 | 10–9 | 52.6% | #76 | 1,726 | 0 | 2 |
| 29 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2021 | 21–16 | 56.8% | #33 | 1,799 | 0 | 3 |
| 30 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2022 | 14–16 | 46.7% | #66 | 1,763 | 0 | 3 |
| 31 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2023 | 20–15 | 57.1% | #53 | 1,788 | 0 | 4 |
| 32 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2024 | 3–5 | 37.5% | #116 | 1,760 | 0 | 4 |