H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 04:30 UTC
Saisai Zheng vs Mathilde Johansson H2H: 0-1
Mathilde Johansson holds a 1–0 lead over Saisai Zheng in their WTA head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Mathilde Johansson leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Mathilde Johansson won the 2012 Guangzhou fourth round 6-2 4-6 7-5.
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
–
1
1 main draw meetings
FRA
Age 41
Right-Handed
173 cm / 5'8"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 21, 2012* | Guangzhou | WTA 250 | R16 | Hard | Mathilde Johansson | 6-2 4-6 7-5 | 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 |
| Mathilde Johansson | #235 | #59 | 992 | 1,619 | 44 | 75 | 37.0% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
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 | Mathilde Johansson | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 2005 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #184 | 1,497 | 0 | 0 |
| 2012 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #138 | 1,484 | 0 | 0 | 2006 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #140 | 1,491 | 0 | 0 |
| 2013 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #145 | 1,468 | 0 | 0 | 2007 | 2–5 | 28.6% | #134 | 1,477 | 0 | 0 |
| 2014 | 6–6 | 50.0% | #100 | 1,552 | 0 | 0 | 2008 | 3–7 | 30.0% | #85 | 1,475 | 0 | 0 |
| 2015 | 9–22 | 29.0% | #72 | 1,496 | 0 | 0 | 2009 | 8–13 | 38.1% | #125 | 1,483 | 0 | 0 |
| 2016 | 12–23 | 34.3% | #85 | 1,529 | 0 | 0 | 2010 | 0–3 | 0.0% | #102 | 1,461 | 0 | 0 |
| 2017 | 5–10 | 33.3% | #93 | 1,613 | 0 | 0 | 2011 | 10–11 | 47.6% | #77 | 1,539 | 0 | 0 |
| 2018 | 10–11 | 47.6% | #38 | 1,669 | 0 | 0 | 2012 | 12–15 | 44.4% | #87 | 1,585 | 0 | 0 |
| 2019 | 21–23 | 47.7% | #42 | 1,749 | 0 | 1 | 2013 | 8–15 | 34.8% | #136 | 1,540 | 0 | 0 |
| 2020 | 6–4 | 60.0% | #41 | 1,767 | 0 | 1 | 2014 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #207 | 1,527 | 0 | 0 |
| 2021 | 10–16 | 38.5% | #79 | 1,687 | 0 | 1 | 2015 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #173 | 1,516 | 0 | 0 |
| 2024 | 1–5 | 16.7% | #692 | 1,550 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 2025 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #692 | 1,493 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |