H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 14:15 UTC
Yafan Wang vs Qiang Wang H2H: 0-1
Qiang Wang holds a 1–0 lead over Yafan Wang in their WTA head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Qiang Wang leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Qiang Wang won the 2019 Miami fourth round 7-5 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.
CHN
Right-Handed
170 cm / 5'7"
H2H
0
–
1
1 main draw meetings
CHN
Right-Handed
172 cm / 5'8"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 22, 2019* | Miami | WTA 1000 | R16 | Hard | Qiang Wang | 7-5 6-4 | Yafan Wang | Match data |
| Sep 23, 2016 | Wuhan | WTA 1000 | Q1 | Hard | Qiang Wang | 6-3 7-5 | Yafan Wang | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yafan Wang | #358 | #47 | 1,185 | 1,784 | 71 | 89 | 44.4% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| Qiang Wang | #421 | #12 | 2,946 | 1,925 | 128 | 125 | 50.6% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 |
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.
| Yafan Wang | Qiang Wang | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles |
| 2014 | 3–1 | 75.0% | #180 | 1,549 | 0 | 0 | 2012 | 0–3 | 0.0% | #185 | 1,458 | 0 | 0 |
| 2015 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #136 | 1,546 | 0 | 0 | 2013 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #226 | 1,474 | 0 | 0 |
| 2016 | 3–7 | 30.0% | #116 | 1,535 | 0 | 0 | 2014 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #102 | 1,467 | 0 | 0 |
| 2017 | 5–5 | 50.0% | #170 | 1,544 | 0 | 0 | 2015 | 4–14 | 22.2% | #110 | 1,448 | 0 | 0 |
| 2018 | 11–12 | 47.8% | #70 | 1,617 | 0 | 0 | 2016 | 9–11 | 45.0% | #72 | 1,568 | 0 | 0 |
| 2019 | 24–21 | 53.3% | #48 | 1,718 | 0 | 1 | 2017 | 24–19 | 55.8% | #45 | 1,724 | 0 | 0 |
| 2020 | 3–6 | 33.3% | #95 | 1,664 | 0 | 1 | 2018 | 37–21 | 63.8% | #21 | 1,900 | 0 | 2 |
| 2021 | 1–9 | 10.0% | #309 | 1,495 | 0 | 1 | 2019 | 23–18 | 56.1% | #30 | 1,797 | 0 | 2 |
| 2023 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #100 | 1,627 | 0 | 1 | 2020 | 7–6 | 53.8% | #34 | 1,770 | 0 | 2 |
| 2024 | 15–16 | 48.4% | #61 | 1,719 | 0 | 1 | 2021 | 9–13 | 40.9% | #104 | 1,713 | 0 | 2 |
| 2025 | 4–8 | 33.3% | #279 | 1,697 | 0 | 1 | 2022 | 13–13 | 50.0% | #91 | 1,716 | 0 | 2 |
| — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2024 | 0–4 | 0.0% | #376 | 1,624 | 0 | 2 |