H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 16:30 UTC
Saisai Zheng vs Garbiñe Muguruza H2H: 0-3
Garbiñe Muguruza holds a 3–0 lead over Saisai Zheng in their WTA head-to-head. Across 3 main-draw meetings, Garbiñe Muguruza leads 2–0 on hard courts and 1–0 on clay. Most recently, Garbiñe Muguruza won the 2019 Rome 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
Right-Handed
170 cm / 5'7"
H2H
0
–
3
3 main draw meetings
ESP
Age 32
Right-Handed
182 cm / 6'0"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 15, 2019* | Rome | WTA 1000 | R64 | Clay | Garbiñe Muguruza | 6-3 6-4 | Saisai Zheng | Match data |
| Feb 20, 2019* | Dubai | WTA 1000 | R32 | Hard | Garbiñe Muguruza | 7-5 6-2 | Saisai Zheng | Match data |
| Jan 16, 2019* | Australian Open | Grand Slam | R128 | Hard | Garbiñe Muguruza | 6-2 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Saisai Zheng | #692 | #34 | 1,585 | 1,776 | 83 | 130 | 39.0% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| Garbiñe Muguruza | #1,129 | #1 | 6,766 | 2,067 | 306 | 178 | 63.2% | 2 | 3 | 1 | 3 | 1 | 10 |
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.
| Saisai Zheng | Garbiñe Muguruza | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles |
| 2011 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #276 | 1,473 | 0 | 0 | 2012 | 6–8 | 42.9% | #109 | 1,543 | 0 | 0 |
| 2012 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #138 | 1,484 | 0 | 0 | 2013 | 14–12 | 53.8% | #63 | 1,669 | 0 | 0 |
| 2013 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #145 | 1,468 | 0 | 0 | 2014 | 38–22 | 63.3% | #20 | 1,809 | 0 | 1 |
| 2014 | 6–6 | 50.0% | #100 | 1,552 | 0 | 0 | 2015 | 39–19 | 67.2% | #3 | 1,950 | 0 | 2 |
| 2015 | 9–22 | 29.0% | #72 | 1,496 | 0 | 0 | 2016 | 28–19 | 59.6% | #7 | 1,837 | 1 | 3 |
| 2016 | 12–23 | 34.3% | #85 | 1,529 | 0 | 0 | 2017 | 46–19 | 70.8% | #2 | 1,932 | 2 | 5 |
| 2017 | 5–10 | 33.3% | #93 | 1,613 | 0 | 0 | 2018 | 36–20 | 64.3% | #18 | 1,841 | 2 | 6 |
| 2018 | 10–11 | 47.6% | #38 | 1,669 | 0 | 0 | 2019 | 22–14 | 61.1% | #36 | 1,814 | 2 | 7 |
| 2019 | 21–23 | 47.7% | #42 | 1,749 | 0 | 1 | 2020 | 23–8 | 74.2% | #15 | 1,933 | 2 | 7 |
| 2020 | 6–4 | 60.0% | #41 | 1,767 | 0 | 1 | 2021 | 42–16 | 72.4% | #3 | 2,023 | 2 | 10 |
| 2021 | 10–16 | 38.5% | #79 | 1,687 | 0 | 1 | 2022 | 12–17 | 41.4% | #55 | 1,783 | 2 | 10 |
| 2024 | 1–5 | 16.7% | #692 | 1,550 | 0 | 1 | 2023 | 0–4 | 0.0% | #1081 | 1,729 | 2 | 10 |
| 2025 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #692 | 1,493 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |