H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 02:15 UTC
Shahar Peer vs Yuliana Fedak H2H: 3-0
Shahar Peer holds a 3–0 lead over Yuliana Fedak in their WTA head-to-head. Across 3 main-draw meetings, Shahar Peer leads 2–0 on hard courts and 1–0 on grass. Most recently, Shahar Peer won the 2008 Sydney third round 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
3
–
0
3 main draw meetings
UKR
Age 43
Right-Handed
166 cm / 5'5"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 10, 2008* | Sydney | WTA 500 | R32 | Hard | Shahar Peer | 6-3 6-2 | Yuliana Fedak | Match data |
| Jun 28, 2006* | Wimbledon | Grand Slam | R128 | Grass | Shahar Peer | 6-2 6-1 | Yuliana Fedak | Match data |
| Jul 21, 2005* | Cincinnati | WTA 500 | R32 | Hard | Shahar Peer | 6-2 6-3 | Yuliana Fedak | 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 |
| Yuliana Fedak | #904 | #63 | 498 | 1,584 | 27 | 68 | 28.4% | 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.
| Age | Shahar Peer | Yuliana Fedak | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 18 | 2005 | 22–20 | 52.4% | #45 | 1,636 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 19 | 2006 | 38–20 | 65.5% | #20 | 1,826 | 0 | 3 | 2002 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #195 | 1,472 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2007 | 39–21 | 65.0% | #17 | 1,830 | 0 | 3 | 2003 | 3–2 | 60.0% | #209 | 1,498 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2008 | 24–20 | 54.5% | #38 | 1,707 | 0 | 3 | 2004 | 4–6 | 40.0% | #82 | 1,527 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2009 | 36–21 | 63.2% | #30 | 1,787 | 0 | 5 | 2005 | 5–18 | 21.7% | #114 | 1,449 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2010 | 47–21 | 69.1% | #13 | 1,885 | 0 | 5 | 2006 | 7–13 | 35.0% | #80 | 1,460 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2011 | 23–21 | 52.3% | #37 | 1,706 | 0 | 5 | 2007 | 6–14 | 30.0% | #123 | 1,509 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2012 | 15–22 | 40.5% | #74 | 1,584 | 0 | 5 | 2008 | 2–9 | 18.2% | #154 | 1,471 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 2013 | 10–14 | 41.7% | #77 | 1,558 | 0 | 5 | 2009 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #167 | 1,449 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | 2014 | 10–18 | 35.7% | #117 | 1,539 | 0 | 5 | 2010 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #256 | 1,426 | 0 | 0 |
| 28 | 2015 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #177 | 1,526 | 0 | 5 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |