H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 10:32 UTC
Qinwen Zheng vs Anastasia Pavlyuchenkova H2H: 1-1
Qinwen Zheng and Anastasia Pavlyuchenkova are tied 1–1 in their WTA head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Qinwen Zheng leads 1–0 on clay, while Anastasia Pavlyuchenkova leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Qinwen Zheng won the 2025 Roland Garros first round 6-4 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.
CHN
Age 23
Right-Handed
178 cm / 5'10"
H2H
1
–
1
2 main draw meetings
RUS
Age 35
Right-Handed
177 cm / 5'10"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 25, 2025 | Roland Garros | Grand Slam | R128 | Clay | Qinwen Zheng | 6-4 6-3 | Anastasia Pavlyuchenkova | Match data |
| Aug 17, 2024* | Cincinnati | WTA 1000 | R16 | Hard | Anastasia Pavlyuchenkova | 7-5 6-1 | Qinwen 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Qinwen Zheng | #135 | #5 | 5,340 | 2,075 | 131 | 79 | 62.4% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 4 |
| Anastasia Pavlyuchenkova | #400 | #11 | 3,590 | 1,936 | 415 | 324 | 56.2% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 8 | 4 | 12 |
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 | Qinwen Zheng | Anastasia Pavlyuchenkova | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 14 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2006 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #377 | 1,497 | 0 | 0 |
| 15 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2007 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #286 | 1,494 | 0 | 0 |
| 16 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2008 | 10–8 | 55.6% | #45 | 1,592 | 0 | 0 |
| 17 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2009 | 24–20 | 54.5% | #40 | 1,701 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 2021 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #126 | 1,559 | 0 | 0 | 2010 | 39–21 | 65.0% | #21 | 1,822 | 0 | 2 |
| 19 | 2022 | 22–17 | 56.4% | #28 | 1,829 | 0 | 0 | 2011 | 37–21 | 63.8% | #16 | 1,830 | 0 | 3 |
| 20 | 2023 | 35–19 | 64.8% | #15 | 1,983 | 0 | 2 | 2012 | 21–23 | 47.7% | #36 | 1,716 | 0 | 3 |
| 21 | 2024 | 42–17 | 71.2% | #5 | 2,060 | 0 | 4 | 2013 | 33–22 | 60.0% | #26 | 1,799 | 0 | 5 |
| 22 | 2025 | 20–12 | 62.5% | #24 | 1,996 | 0 | 4 | 2014 | 26–20 | 56.5% | #24 | 1,763 | 0 | 7 |
| 23 | 2026 | 11–11 | 50.0% | #135 | 1,882 | 0 | 4 | 2015 | 34–21 | 61.8% | #28 | 1,867 | 0 | 8 |
| 24 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2016 | 23–23 | 50.0% | #27 | 1,744 | 0 | 8 |
| 25 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2017 | 41–23 | 64.1% | #15 | 1,832 | 0 | 11 |
| 26 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2018 | 20–20 | 50.0% | #42 | 1,805 | 0 | 12 |
| 27 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2019 | 22–21 | 51.2% | #31 | 1,796 | 0 | 12 |
| 28 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2020 | 9–8 | 52.9% | #38 | 1,800 | 0 | 12 |
| 29 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2021 | 24–18 | 57.1% | #11 | 1,826 | 0 | 12 |
| 30 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2022 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #367 | 1,786 | 0 | 12 |
| 31 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2023 | 14–12 | 53.8% | #58 | 1,812 | 0 | 12 |
| 32 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2024 | 25–20 | 55.6% | #30 | 1,839 | 0 | 12 |
| 33 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2025 | 11–12 | 47.8% | #47 | 1,808 | 0 | 12 |
| 34 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2026 | 0–6 | 0.0% | #400 | 1,725 | 0 | 12 |