H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 14:15 UTC
Shahar Peer vs Justine Henin H2H: 0-2
Justine Henin holds a 2–0 lead over Shahar Peer in their WTA head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Justine Henin leads 1–0 on clay and 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Justine Henin won the 2010 Stuttgart semifinal 6-3 6-2.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
ISR
Age 39
Right-Handed
170 cm / 5'7"
H2H
0
–
2
2 main draw meetings
BEL
Age 44
Right-Handed
167 cm / 5'6"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 1, 2010* | Stuttgart | WTA 500 | SF | Clay | Justine Henin | 6-3 6-2 | Shahar Peer | Match data |
| Sep 5, 2006* | US Open | Grand Slam | R16 | Hard | Justine Henin | 6-1 6-0 | Shahar Peer | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Shahar Peer | #1,185 | #11 | 3,410 | 1,966 | 268 | 204 | 56.8% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 4 | 5 |
| Justine Henin | #13 | #1 | 7,626 | 2,384 | 442 | 102 | 81.2% | 7 | 10 | 2 | 18 | 5 | 42 |
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 | Shahar Peer | Justine Henin | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 17 | 2004 | 3–3 | 50.0% | #176 | 1,509 | 0 | 0 | 1999 | 11–6 | 64.7% | #69 | 1,655 | 0 | 1 |
| 18 | 2005 | 22–20 | 52.4% | #45 | 1,636 | 0 | 0 | 2000 | 17–13 | 56.7% | #45 | 1,748 | 0 | 1 |
| 19 | 2006 | 38–20 | 65.5% | #20 | 1,826 | 0 | 3 | 2001 | 56–18 | 75.7% | #7 | 1,982 | 0 | 4 |
| 20 | 2007 | 39–21 | 65.0% | #17 | 1,830 | 0 | 3 | 2002 | 50–21 | 70.4% | #5 | 2,003 | 0 | 6 |
| 21 | 2008 | 24–20 | 54.5% | #38 | 1,707 | 0 | 3 | 2003 | 73–11 | 86.9% | #1 | 2,211 | 2 | 14 |
| 22 | 2009 | 36–21 | 63.2% | #30 | 1,787 | 0 | 5 | 2004 | 30–4 | 88.2% | #8 | 2,201 | 3 | 18 |
| 23 | 2010 | 47–21 | 69.1% | #13 | 1,885 | 0 | 5 | 2005 | 34–5 | 87.2% | #6 | 2,199 | 4 | 22 |
| 24 | 2011 | 23–21 | 52.3% | #37 | 1,706 | 0 | 5 | 2006 | 57–8 | 87.7% | #1 | 2,276 | 5 | 28 |
| 25 | 2012 | 15–22 | 40.5% | #74 | 1,584 | 0 | 5 | 2007 | 63–4 | 94.0% | #1 | 2,373 | 7 | 38 |
| 26 | 2013 | 10–14 | 41.7% | #77 | 1,558 | 0 | 5 | 2008 | 17–4 | 81.0% | #1 | 2,278 | 7 | 40 |
| 27 | 2014 | 10–18 | 35.7% | #117 | 1,539 | 0 | 5 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 28 | 2015 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #177 | 1,526 | 0 | 5 | 2010 | 32–7 | 82.1% | #12 | 2,199 | 7 | 42 |
| 29 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2011 | 2–1 | 66.7% | #13 | 2,173 | 7 | 42 |