H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 02:15 UTC
Timea Babos vs Jelena Jankovic H2H: 0-1
Jelena Jankovic holds a 1–0 lead over Timea Babos in their WTA head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Jelena Jankovic leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Jelena Jankovic won the 2015 Dubai second round 6-3 4-6 6-1.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
HUN
Age 33
Right-Handed
179 cm / 5'10"
H2H
0
–
1
1 main draw meetings
SRB
Age 41
Right-Handed
177 cm / 5'10"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 18, 2015* | Dubai | WTA 1000 | R64 | Hard | Jelena Jankovic | 6-3 4-6 6-1 | Timea Babos | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Timea Babos | #453 | #25 | 1,675 | 1,768 | 123 | 177 | 41.0% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 |
| Jelena Jankovic | #970 | #1 | 9,200 | 2,132 | 547 | 332 | 62.2% | 0 | 6 | 0 | 3 | 6 | 15 |
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 | Timea Babos | Jelena Jankovic | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 16 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2001 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #364 | 1,512 | 0 | 0 |
| 17 | 2010 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #268 | 1,491 | 0 | 0 | 2002 | 2–4 | 33.3% | #196 | 1,528 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 2011 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #154 | 1,503 | 0 | 0 | 2003 | 4–9 | 30.8% | #85 | 1,505 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 2012 | 13–14 | 48.1% | #67 | 1,553 | 0 | 1 | 2004 | 27–25 | 51.9% | #28 | 1,754 | 0 | 1 |
| 20 | 2013 | 9–16 | 36.0% | #88 | 1,540 | 0 | 1 | 2005 | 36–29 | 55.4% | #22 | 1,732 | 0 | 1 |
| 21 | 2014 | 4–11 | 26.7% | #99 | 1,482 | 0 | 1 | 2006 | 45–28 | 61.6% | #12 | 1,915 | 0 | 1 |
| 22 | 2015 | 12–21 | 36.4% | #70 | 1,564 | 0 | 1 | 2007 | 73–26 | 73.7% | #3 | 1,966 | 0 | 5 |
| 23 | 2016 | 35–27 | 56.5% | #28 | 1,712 | 0 | 1 | 2008 | 63–18 | 77.8% | #1 | 2,087 | 0 | 9 |
| 24 | 2017 | 20–26 | 43.5% | #57 | 1,637 | 0 | 2 | 2009 | 42–19 | 68.9% | #8 | 1,948 | 0 | 11 |
| 25 | 2018 | 19–23 | 45.2% | #59 | 1,614 | 0 | 3 | 2010 | 35–22 | 61.4% | #8 | 1,794 | 0 | 12 |
| 26 | 2019 | 6–16 | 27.3% | #89 | 1,595 | 0 | 3 | 2011 | 38–22 | 63.3% | #14 | 1,804 | 0 | 12 |
| 27 | 2020 | 0–6 | 0.0% | #115 | 1,542 | 0 | 3 | 2012 | 31–27 | 53.4% | #22 | 1,737 | 0 | 12 |
| 28 | 2021 | 3–9 | 25.0% | #160 | 1,497 | 0 | 3 | 2013 | 46–21 | 68.7% | #8 | 1,918 | 0 | 13 |
| 29 | 2022 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #336 | 1,455 | 0 | 3 | 2014 | 38–22 | 63.3% | #15 | 1,795 | 0 | 13 |
| 30 | 2023 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #188 | 1,480 | 0 | 3 | 2015 | 39–21 | 65.0% | #21 | 1,851 | 0 | 15 |
| 31 | 2024 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #338 | 1,451 | 0 | 3 | 2016 | 21–19 | 52.5% | #54 | 1,738 | 0 | 15 |
| 32 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2017 | 6–19 | 24.0% | #158 | 1,576 | 0 | 15 |