H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 14:15 UTC
Yaroslava Shvedova vs Na Li H2H: 1-1
Yaroslava Shvedova and Na Li are tied 1–1 in their WTA head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Yaroslava Shvedova leads 1–0 on clay, while Na Li leads 1–0 on grass. Most recently, Yaroslava Shvedova won the 2012 Roland Garros fourth round 3-6 6-2 6-0.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
KAZ
Age 38
Right-Handed
180 cm / 5'11"
H2H
1
–
1
2 main draw meetings
CHN
Age 44
Right-Handed
172 cm / 5'8"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 4, 2012* | Roland Garros | Grand Slam | R16 | Clay | Yaroslava Shvedova | 3-6 6-2 6-0 | Na Li | Match data |
| Jun 14, 2007* | Birmingham | WTA 500 | R32 | Grass | Na Li | 4-6 6-2 6-0 | Yaroslava Shvedova | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yaroslava Shvedova | #1,136 | #25 | 1,860 | 1,751 | 141 | 175 | 44.6% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| Na Li | #9 | #2 | 7,585 | 2,124 | 334 | 155 | 68.3% | 2 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 4 | 9 |
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 | Yaroslava Shvedova | Na Li | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 17 | 2005 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #292 | 1,513 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 18 | 2006 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #138 | 1,508 | 0 | 0 | 2000 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #136 | 1,499 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 2007 | 10–14 | 41.7% | #84 | 1,492 | 0 | 1 | 2001 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #302 | 1,483 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2008 | 6–13 | 31.6% | #92 | 1,470 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 21 | 2009 | 18–17 | 51.4% | #51 | 1,601 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 22 | 2010 | 23–22 | 51.1% | #39 | 1,665 | 0 | 1 | 2004 | 6–1 | 85.7% | #78 | 1,601 | 0 | 1 |
| 23 | 2011 | 6–13 | 31.6% | #204 | 1,576 | 0 | 1 | 2005 | 23–14 | 62.2% | #56 | 1,711 | 0 | 1 |
| 24 | 2012 | 16–12 | 57.1% | #29 | 1,688 | 0 | 1 | 2006 | 36–22 | 62.1% | #21 | 1,801 | 0 | 1 |
| 25 | 2013 | 10–15 | 40.0% | #79 | 1,632 | 0 | 1 | 2007 | 22–12 | 64.7% | #29 | 1,814 | 0 | 1 |
| 26 | 2014 | 16–15 | 51.6% | #65 | 1,640 | 0 | 1 | 2008 | 24–12 | 66.7% | #23 | 1,843 | 0 | 2 |
| 27 | 2015 | 13–14 | 48.1% | #67 | 1,615 | 0 | 1 | 2009 | 35–17 | 67.3% | #15 | 1,914 | 0 | 2 |
| 28 | 2016 | 16–16 | 50.0% | #37 | 1,700 | 0 | 1 | 2010 | 36–20 | 64.3% | #11 | 1,844 | 0 | 3 |
| 29 | 2017 | 4–11 | 26.7% | #289 | 1,598 | 0 | 1 | 2011 | 33–17 | 66.0% | #5 | 1,868 | 1 | 5 |
| 30 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2012 | 43–16 | 72.9% | #7 | 2,016 | 1 | 6 |
| 31 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2013 | 46–14 | 76.7% | #3 | 2,077 | 1 | 7 |
| 32 | 2020 | 0–1 | 0.0% | — | 1,587 | 0 | 1 | 2014 | 29–7 | 80.6% | #9 | 2,031 | 2 | 9 |
| 33 | 2021 | 1–9 | 10.0% | #434 | 1,493 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |