H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 08:25 UTC
Stefanie Voegele vs Marina Erakovic H2H: 0-2
Marina Erakovic holds a 2–0 lead over Stefanie Voegele in their WTA head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Marina Erakovic leads 1–0 on clay and 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Marina Erakovic won the 2013 Memphis semifinal 6-2 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.
SUI
Age 36
Right-Handed
170 cm / 5'7"
H2H
0
–
2
2 main draw meetings
NZL
Age 38
Right-Handed
174 cm / 5'9"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 23, 2013* | Memphis | WTA 250 | SF | Hard | Marina Erakovic | 6-2 6-4 | Stefanie Voegele | Match data |
| Feb 16, 2012* | Bogota | WTA 250 | R32 | Clay | Marina Erakovic | 6-3 6-4 | 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 |
| Marina Erakovic | #827 | #39 | 1,392 | 1,701 | 105 | 131 | 44.5% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
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 | Marina Erakovic | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 17 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2005 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #213 | 1,498 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 2008 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #124 | 1,486 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 19 | 2009 | 10–9 | 52.6% | #75 | 1,559 | 0 | 0 | 2007 | 1–5 | 16.7% | #153 | 1,457 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2010 | 9–22 | 29.0% | #135 | 1,504 | 0 | 0 | 2008 | 16–16 | 50.0% | #66 | 1,531 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2011 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #138 | 1,517 | 0 | 0 | 2009 | 4–7 | 36.4% | #227 | 1,522 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2012 | 2–7 | 22.2% | #92 | 1,496 | 0 | 0 | 2010 | 2–7 | 22.2% | #333 | 1,485 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2013 | 21–20 | 51.2% | #50 | 1,665 | 0 | 0 | 2011 | 11–8 | 57.9% | #61 | 1,630 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2014 | 14–23 | 37.8% | #79 | 1,550 | 0 | 0 | 2012 | 19–20 | 48.7% | #66 | 1,600 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2015 | 7–17 | 29.2% | #119 | 1,513 | 0 | 0 | 2013 | 20–16 | 55.6% | #46 | 1,673 | 0 | 1 |
| 26 | 2016 | 10–15 | 40.0% | #114 | 1,517 | 0 | 0 | 2014 | 12–20 | 37.5% | #76 | 1,609 | 0 | 1 |
| 27 | 2017 | 5–4 | 55.6% | #169 | 1,650 | 0 | 0 | 2015 | 7–14 | 33.3% | #135 | 1,543 | 0 | 1 |
| 28 | 2018 | 9–17 | 34.6% | #83 | 1,591 | 0 | 0 | 2016 | 11–8 | 57.9% | #106 | 1,625 | 0 | 1 |
| 29 | 2019 | 6–16 | 27.3% | #119 | 1,582 | 0 | 0 | 2017 | 1–9 | 10.0% | #197 | 1,551 | 0 | 1 |
| 30 | 2020 | 1–5 | 16.7% | #116 | 1,597 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 31 | 2021 | 4–12 | 25.0% | #147 | 1,536 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 32 | 2022 | 1–5 | 16.7% | #260 | 1,499 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |