H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 04:30 UTC
Ons Jabeur vs Qiang Wang H2H: 1-2
Qiang Wang holds a 2–1 lead over Ons Jabeur in their WTA head-to-head. Across 3 main-draw meetings, Qiang Wang leads 2–1 on hard courts. Most recently, Ons Jabeur won the 2020 Australian Open fourth round 7-6(4) 6-1.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
TUN
Age 31
Right-Handed
167 cm / 5'6"
H2H
1
–
2
3 main draw meetings
CHN
Right-Handed
172 cm / 5'8"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 28, 2020* | Australian Open | Grand Slam | R16 | Hard | Ons Jabeur | 7-6(4) 6-1 | Qiang Wang | Match data |
| Jan 8, 2020* | Shenzhen | WTA 250 | R32 | Hard | Qiang Wang | 6-0 6-3 | Ons Jabeur | Match data |
| Feb 22, 2017* | Dubai | WTA 1000 | R32 | Hard | Qiang Wang | 6-3 6-1 | Ons Jabeur | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ons Jabeur | #439 | #2 | 5,210 | 2,105 | 222 | 151 | 59.5% | 0 | 1 | 0 | 3 | 1 | 5 |
| Qiang Wang | #421 | #12 | 2,946 | 1,925 | 128 | 125 | 50.6% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 |
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.
| Ons Jabeur | Qiang Wang | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles |
| 2012 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #260 | 1,491 | 0 | 0 | 2012 | 0–3 | 0.0% | #185 | 1,458 | 0 | 0 |
| 2013 | 3–3 | 50.0% | #137 | 1,508 | 0 | 0 | 2013 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #226 | 1,474 | 0 | 0 |
| 2014 | 2–7 | 22.2% | #143 | 1,470 | 0 | 0 | 2014 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #102 | 1,467 | 0 | 0 |
| 2015 | 1–5 | 16.7% | #220 | 1,457 | 0 | 0 | 2015 | 4–14 | 22.2% | #110 | 1,448 | 0 | 0 |
| 2016 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #196 | 1,464 | 0 | 0 | 2016 | 9–11 | 45.0% | #72 | 1,568 | 0 | 0 |
| 2017 | 9–11 | 45.0% | #88 | 1,594 | 0 | 0 | 2017 | 24–19 | 55.8% | #45 | 1,724 | 0 | 0 |
| 2018 | 9–12 | 42.9% | #60 | 1,734 | 0 | 0 | 2018 | 37–21 | 63.8% | #21 | 1,900 | 0 | 2 |
| 2019 | 15–19 | 44.1% | #76 | 1,708 | 0 | 0 | 2019 | 23–18 | 56.1% | #30 | 1,797 | 0 | 2 |
| 2020 | 21–11 | 65.6% | #31 | 1,858 | 0 | 0 | 2020 | 7–6 | 53.8% | #34 | 1,770 | 0 | 2 |
| 2021 | 48–18 | 72.7% | #10 | 1,982 | 0 | 1 | 2021 | 9–13 | 40.9% | #104 | 1,713 | 0 | 2 |
| 2022 | 47–17 | 73.4% | #2 | 2,007 | 0 | 3 | 2022 | 13–13 | 50.0% | #91 | 1,716 | 0 | 2 |
| 2023 | 36–18 | 66.7% | #6 | 1,952 | 0 | 5 | 2024 | 0–4 | 0.0% | #376 | 1,624 | 0 | 2 |
| 2024 | 16–15 | 51.6% | #42 | 1,856 | 0 | 5 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 2025 | 14–12 | 53.8% | #75 | 1,820 | 0 | 5 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |