H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 16:32 UTC
Naomi Osaka vs Saisai Zheng H2H: 1-0
Naomi Osaka holds a 1–0 lead over Saisai Zheng in their WTA head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Naomi Osaka leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Naomi Osaka won the 2020 Australian Open second round 6-2 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
1
–
0
1 main draw meetings
CHN
Right-Handed
170 cm / 5'7"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 23, 2020* | Australian Open | Grand Slam | R64 | Hard | Naomi Osaka | 6-2 6-4 | Saisai Zheng | Match data |
| Apr 29, 2016 | Madrid | WTA 1000 | Q1 | Clay | Naomi Osaka | 6-4 7-6(3) | Saisai Zheng | 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 |
| Saisai Zheng | #692 | #34 | 1,585 | 1,776 | 83 | 130 | 39.0% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
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.
| Naomi Osaka | Saisai Zheng | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles |
| 2014 | 2–2 | 50.0% | #260 | 1,531 | 0 | 0 | 2011 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #276 | 1,473 | 0 | 0 |
| 2015 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #144 | 1,509 | 0 | 0 | 2012 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #138 | 1,484 | 0 | 0 |
| 2016 | 20–13 | 60.6% | #48 | 1,700 | 0 | 0 | 2013 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #145 | 1,468 | 0 | 0 |
| 2017 | 19–22 | 46.3% | #68 | 1,697 | 0 | 0 | 2014 | 6–6 | 50.0% | #100 | 1,552 | 0 | 0 |
| 2018 | 39–19 | 67.2% | #5 | 1,904 | 1 | 2 | 2015 | 9–22 | 29.0% | #72 | 1,496 | 0 | 0 |
| 2019 | 40–13 | 75.5% | #3 | 2,030 | 2 | 5 | 2016 | 12–23 | 34.3% | #85 | 1,529 | 0 | 0 |
| 2020 | 16–3 | 84.2% | #3 | 2,082 | 3 | 6 | 2017 | 5–10 | 33.3% | #93 | 1,613 | 0 | 0 |
| 2021 | 18–7 | 72.0% | #13 | 2,002 | 4 | 7 | 2018 | 10–11 | 47.6% | #38 | 1,669 | 0 | 0 |
| 2022 | 15–11 | 57.7% | #42 | 1,894 | 4 | 7 | 2019 | 21–23 | 47.7% | #42 | 1,749 | 0 | 1 |
| 2024 | 21–16 | 56.8% | #57 | 1,883 | 4 | 7 | 2020 | 6–4 | 60.0% | #41 | 1,767 | 0 | 1 |
| 2025 | 31–14 | 68.9% | #16 | 1,968 | 4 | 8 | 2021 | 10–16 | 38.5% | #79 | 1,687 | 0 | 1 |
| 2026 | 19–8 | 70.4% | #13 | 2,044 | 4 | 8 | 2024 | 1–5 | 16.7% | #692 | 1,550 | 0 | 1 |
| — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2025 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #692 | 1,493 | 0 | 1 |