H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 04:32 UTC
Naomi Osaka vs Dominika Cibulkova H2H: 4-0
Naomi Osaka holds a 4–0 lead over Dominika Cibulkova in their WTA head-to-head. Across 4 main-draw meetings, Naomi Osaka leads 2–0 on clay and 2–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Naomi Osaka won the 2019 Rome third round 6-3 6-3.
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
4
–
0
4 main draw meetings
SVK
Age 37
Right-Handed
161 cm / 5'3"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 16, 2019* | Rome | WTA 1000 | R32 | Clay | Naomi Osaka | 6-3 6-3 | Dominika Cibulkova | Match data |
| May 6, 2019 | Madrid | WTA 1000 | R64 | Clay | Naomi Osaka | 6-2 7-6(6) | Dominika Cibulkova | Match data |
| Sep 21, 2018* | Tokyo | WTA 500 | R16 | Hard | Naomi Osaka | 6-2 6-1 | Dominika Cibulkova | Match data |
| Sep 23, 2016* | Toray Pan Pacific Open | WTA 500 | R16 | Hard | Naomi Osaka | 6-2 6-1 | Dominika Cibulkova | 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 |
| Dominika Cibulkova | #315 | #4 | 5,245 | 1,966 | 365 | 261 | 58.3% | 0 | 0 | 1 | 5 | 2 | 8 |
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 | Dominika Cibulkova | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 2006 | 2–2 | 50.0% | #153 | 1,506 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 2016 | 20–13 | 60.6% | #48 | 1,700 | 0 | 0 | 2007 | 17–17 | 50.0% | #51 | 1,605 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 2017 | 19–22 | 46.3% | #68 | 1,697 | 0 | 0 | 2008 | 34–25 | 57.6% | #19 | 1,840 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2018 | 39–19 | 67.2% | #5 | 1,904 | 1 | 2 | 2009 | 20–17 | 54.1% | #28 | 1,733 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2019 | 40–13 | 75.5% | #3 | 2,030 | 2 | 5 | 2010 | 30–24 | 55.6% | #31 | 1,753 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2020 | 16–3 | 84.2% | #3 | 2,082 | 3 | 6 | 2011 | 41–21 | 66.1% | #18 | 1,893 | 0 | 1 |
| 23 | 2021 | 18–7 | 72.0% | #13 | 2,002 | 4 | 7 | 2012 | 34–25 | 57.6% | #15 | 1,810 | 0 | 2 |
| 24 | 2022 | 15–11 | 57.7% | #42 | 1,894 | 4 | 7 | 2013 | 27–23 | 54.0% | #23 | 1,738 | 0 | 3 |
| 25 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2014 | 33–22 | 60.0% | #10 | 1,721 | 0 | 4 |
| 26 | 2024 | 21–16 | 56.8% | #57 | 1,883 | 4 | 7 | 2015 | 19–16 | 54.3% | #38 | 1,757 | 0 | 4 |
| 27 | 2025 | 31–14 | 68.9% | #16 | 1,968 | 4 | 8 | 2016 | 53–21 | 71.6% | #5 | 1,951 | 0 | 8 |
| 28 | 2026 | 19–8 | 70.4% | #13 | 2,044 | 4 | 8 | 2017 | 26–22 | 54.2% | #26 | 1,778 | 0 | 8 |
| 29 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2018 | 27–18 | 60.0% | #25 | 1,865 | 0 | 8 |
| 30 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2019 | 2–8 | 20.0% | #315 | 1,764 | 0 | 8 |