H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 16:32 UTC
Naomi Osaka vs Kaia Kanepi H2H: 0-2
Kaia Kanepi holds a 2–0 lead over Naomi Osaka in their WTA head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Kaia Kanepi leads 2–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Kaia Kanepi won the 2022 Toronto second round 7-6(4) 3-0 RET.
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
0
–
2
2 main draw meetings
EST
Age 41
Right-Handed
179 cm / 5'10"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 10, 2022* | Toronto | WTA 1000 | R64 | Hard | Kaia Kanepi | 7-6(4) 3-0 (ret.) | Naomi Osaka | Match data |
| Sep 3, 2017* | US Open | Grand Slam | R32 | Hard | Kaia Kanepi | 6-3 2-6 7-5 | 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 |
| Kaia Kanepi | #1,322 | #15 | 2,760 | 1,912 | 261 | 235 | 52.6% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 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 | Kaia Kanepi | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 2001 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #200 | 1,496 | 0 | 0 |
| 17 | 2015 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #144 | 1,509 | 0 | 0 | 2002 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #285 | 1,498 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 2016 | 20–13 | 60.6% | #48 | 1,700 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 19 | 2017 | 19–22 | 46.3% | #68 | 1,697 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 20 | 2018 | 39–19 | 67.2% | #5 | 1,904 | 1 | 2 | 2005 | 3–2 | 60.0% | #98 | 1,538 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2019 | 40–13 | 75.5% | #3 | 2,030 | 2 | 5 | 2006 | 14–16 | 46.7% | #78 | 1,610 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2020 | 16–3 | 84.2% | #3 | 2,082 | 3 | 6 | 2007 | 13–17 | 43.3% | #75 | 1,583 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2021 | 18–7 | 72.0% | #13 | 2,002 | 4 | 7 | 2008 | 28–20 | 58.3% | #27 | 1,747 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2022 | 15–11 | 57.7% | #42 | 1,894 | 4 | 7 | 2009 | 15–21 | 41.7% | #58 | 1,598 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2010 | 29–17 | 63.0% | #22 | 1,839 | 0 | 1 |
| 26 | 2024 | 21–16 | 56.8% | #57 | 1,883 | 4 | 7 | 2011 | 19–17 | 52.8% | #34 | 1,816 | 0 | 1 |
| 27 | 2025 | 31–14 | 68.9% | #16 | 1,968 | 4 | 8 | 2012 | 25–9 | 73.5% | #19 | 1,868 | 0 | 3 |
| 28 | 2026 | 19–8 | 70.4% | #13 | 2,044 | 4 | 8 | 2013 | 21–10 | 67.7% | #30 | 1,841 | 0 | 4 |
| 29 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2014 | 17–19 | 47.2% | #51 | 1,718 | 0 | 4 |
| 30 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2015 | 8–12 | 40.0% | #122 | 1,649 | 0 | 4 |
| 31 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2016 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #376 | 1,655 | 0 | 4 |
| 32 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2017 | 4–2 | 66.7% | #100 | 1,725 | 0 | 4 |
| 33 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2018 | 11–11 | 50.0% | #61 | 1,776 | 0 | 4 |
| 34 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2019 | 9–10 | 47.4% | #101 | 1,748 | 0 | 4 |
| 35 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2020 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #93 | 1,719 | 0 | 4 |
| 36 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2021 | 11–12 | 47.8% | #73 | 1,703 | 0 | 4 |
| 37 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2022 | 24–16 | 60.0% | #32 | 1,801 | 0 | 4 |
| 38 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2023 | 6–16 | 27.3% | #168 | 1,607 | 0 | 4 |