H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 16:32 UTC
Qinwen Zheng vs Victoria Azarenka H2H: 1-2
Victoria Azarenka holds a 2–1 lead over Qinwen Zheng in their WTA head-to-head. Across 3 main-draw meetings, Victoria Azarenka leads 2–1 on hard courts. Most recently, Qinwen Zheng won the 2025 Indian Wells second round 6-3 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.
CHN
Age 23
Right-Handed
178 cm / 5'10"
H2H
1
–
2
3 main draw meetings
BLR
Age 36
Right-Handed
183 cm / 6'0"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 8, 2025 | Indian Wells | WTA 1000 | R64 | Hard | Qinwen Zheng | 6-3 6-4 | Victoria Azarenka | Match data |
| Mar 24, 2024* | Miami | WTA 1000 | R32 | Hard | Victoria Azarenka | 6-4 7-5 | Qinwen Zheng | Match data |
| Jan 6, 2023* | Adelaide 1 | WTA 500 | R16 | Hard | Victoria Azarenka | 6-2 7-5 | 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 |
| Victoria Azarenka | #449 | #1 | 10,955 | 2,203 | 575 | 266 | 68.4% | 2 | 10 | 0 | 6 | 3 | 21 |
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 | Victoria Azarenka | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 15 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2005 | 3–2 | 60.0% | #152 | 1,524 | 0 | 0 |
| 16 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2006 | 9–12 | 42.9% | #92 | 1,570 | 0 | 0 |
| 17 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2007 | 30–16 | 65.2% | #30 | 1,815 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 2021 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #126 | 1,559 | 0 | 0 | 2008 | 38–19 | 66.7% | #15 | 1,870 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 2022 | 22–17 | 56.4% | #28 | 1,829 | 0 | 0 | 2009 | 45–15 | 75.0% | #7 | 1,933 | 0 | 3 |
| 20 | 2023 | 35–19 | 64.8% | #15 | 1,983 | 0 | 2 | 2010 | 42–20 | 67.7% | #10 | 1,945 | 0 | 5 |
| 21 | 2024 | 42–17 | 71.2% | #5 | 2,060 | 0 | 4 | 2011 | 55–18 | 75.3% | #3 | 2,003 | 0 | 8 |
| 22 | 2025 | 20–12 | 62.5% | #24 | 1,996 | 0 | 4 | 2012 | 64–11 | 85.3% | #1 | 2,134 | 1 | 14 |
| 23 | 2026 | 11–11 | 50.0% | #135 | 1,882 | 0 | 4 | 2013 | 43–12 | 78.2% | #2 | 2,068 | 2 | 17 |
| 24 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2014 | 15–9 | 62.5% | #31 | 1,946 | 2 | 17 |
| 25 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2015 | 31–14 | 68.9% | #22 | 1,954 | 2 | 17 |
| 26 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2016 | 24–5 | 82.8% | #13 | 1,979 | 2 | 20 |
| 27 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2017 | 4–2 | 66.7% | #205 | 1,962 | 2 | 20 |
| 28 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2018 | 17–12 | 58.6% | #51 | 1,873 | 2 | 20 |
| 29 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2019 | 21–17 | 55.3% | #50 | 1,846 | 2 | 20 |
| 30 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2020 | 19–6 | 76.0% | #13 | 1,966 | 2 | 21 |
| 31 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2021 | 29–14 | 67.4% | #27 | 1,977 | 2 | 21 |
| 32 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2022 | 24–14 | 63.2% | #26 | 1,921 | 2 | 21 |
| 33 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2023 | 23–21 | 52.3% | #22 | 1,779 | 2 | 21 |
| 34 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2024 | 30–15 | 66.7% | #20 | 1,895 | 2 | 21 |
| 35 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2025 | 9–12 | 42.9% | #132 | 1,828 | 2 | 21 |