H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 14:15 UTC
Stefanie Voegele vs Anastasia Rodionova H2H: 0-1
Anastasia Rodionova holds a 1–0 lead over Stefanie Voegele in their WTA head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Anastasia Rodionova leads 1–0 on clay. Most recently, Anastasia Rodionova won the 2010 Estoril fourth round 6-4 2-6 6-3.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
SUI
Age 36
Right-Handed
170 cm / 5'7"
H2H
0
–
1
1 main draw meetings
AUS
Age 44
Right-Handed
167 cm / 5'6"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 7, 2010* | Estoril | WTA 250 | R16 | Clay | Anastasia Rodionova | 6-4 2-6 6-3 | Stefanie Voegele | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Stefanie Voegele | #1,075 | #42 | 1,255 | 1,712 | 100 | 175 | 36.4% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Anastasia Rodionova | #872 | #62 | 1,095 | 1,649 | 86 | 150 | 36.4% | 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 | Stefanie Voegele | Anastasia Rodionova | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 18 | 2008 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #124 | 1,486 | 0 | 0 | 2000 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #239 | 1,491 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 2009 | 10–9 | 52.6% | #75 | 1,559 | 0 | 0 | 2001 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #195 | 1,468 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2010 | 9–22 | 29.0% | #135 | 1,504 | 0 | 0 | 2002 | 5–3 | 62.5% | #118 | 1,521 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2011 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #138 | 1,517 | 0 | 0 | 2003 | 7–8 | 46.7% | #165 | 1,546 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2012 | 2–7 | 22.2% | #92 | 1,496 | 0 | 0 | 2004 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #212 | 1,530 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2013 | 21–20 | 51.2% | #50 | 1,665 | 0 | 0 | 2005 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #140 | 1,517 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2014 | 14–23 | 37.8% | #79 | 1,550 | 0 | 0 | 2006 | 10–15 | 40.0% | #94 | 1,526 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2015 | 7–17 | 29.2% | #119 | 1,513 | 0 | 0 | 2007 | 11–20 | 35.5% | #78 | 1,525 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 2016 | 10–15 | 40.0% | #114 | 1,517 | 0 | 0 | 2008 | 8–20 | 28.6% | #98 | 1,503 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | 2017 | 5–4 | 55.6% | #169 | 1,650 | 0 | 0 | 2009 | 5–9 | 35.7% | #95 | 1,522 | 0 | 0 |
| 28 | 2018 | 9–17 | 34.6% | #83 | 1,591 | 0 | 0 | 2010 | 17–20 | 45.9% | #64 | 1,606 | 0 | 0 |
| 29 | 2019 | 6–16 | 27.3% | #119 | 1,582 | 0 | 0 | 2011 | 8–21 | 27.6% | #108 | 1,573 | 0 | 0 |
| 30 | 2020 | 1–5 | 16.7% | #116 | 1,597 | 0 | 0 | 2012 | 6–13 | 31.6% | #139 | 1,539 | 0 | 0 |
| 31 | 2021 | 4–12 | 25.0% | #147 | 1,536 | 0 | 0 | 2013 | 2–7 | 22.2% | #162 | 1,502 | 0 | 0 |
| 32 | 2022 | 1–5 | 16.7% | #260 | 1,499 | 0 | 0 | 2014 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #185 | 1,514 | 0 | 0 |
| 33 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2015 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #235 | 1,509 | 0 | 0 |
| 34 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2016 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #797 | 1,476 | 0 | 0 |
| 35 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2017 | 2–1 | 66.7% | #390 | 1,485 | 0 | 0 |