H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC
Yaroslava Shvedova vs Shahar Peer H2H: 1-1
Yaroslava Shvedova and Shahar Peer are tied 1–1 in their WTA head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Yaroslava Shvedova leads 1–0 on clay, while Shahar Peer leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Shahar Peer won the 2010 San Diego 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.
KAZ
Age 38
Right-Handed
180 cm / 5'11"
H2H
1
–
1
2 main draw meetings
ISR
Age 39
Right-Handed
170 cm / 5'7"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 6, 2010* | San Diego | WTA 500 | R16 | Hard | Shahar Peer | 7-5 6-4 | Yaroslava Shvedova | Match data |
| Jul 24, 2009* | Bad Gastein | WTA 250 | R16 | Clay | Yaroslava Shvedova | 6-2 6-1 | Shahar Peer | 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 |
| Shahar Peer | #1,185 | #11 | 3,410 | 1,966 | 268 | 204 | 56.8% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 4 | 5 |
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 | Shahar Peer | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 2004 | 3–3 | 50.0% | #176 | 1,509 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 2006 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #138 | 1,508 | 0 | 0 | 2005 | 22–20 | 52.4% | #45 | 1,636 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 2007 | 10–14 | 41.7% | #84 | 1,492 | 0 | 1 | 2006 | 38–20 | 65.5% | #20 | 1,826 | 0 | 3 |
| 20 | 2008 | 6–13 | 31.6% | #92 | 1,470 | 0 | 1 | 2007 | 39–21 | 65.0% | #17 | 1,830 | 0 | 3 |
| 21 | 2009 | 18–17 | 51.4% | #51 | 1,601 | 0 | 1 | 2008 | 24–20 | 54.5% | #38 | 1,707 | 0 | 3 |
| 22 | 2010 | 23–22 | 51.1% | #39 | 1,665 | 0 | 1 | 2009 | 36–21 | 63.2% | #30 | 1,787 | 0 | 5 |
| 23 | 2011 | 6–13 | 31.6% | #204 | 1,576 | 0 | 1 | 2010 | 47–21 | 69.1% | #13 | 1,885 | 0 | 5 |
| 24 | 2012 | 16–12 | 57.1% | #29 | 1,688 | 0 | 1 | 2011 | 23–21 | 52.3% | #37 | 1,706 | 0 | 5 |
| 25 | 2013 | 10–15 | 40.0% | #79 | 1,632 | 0 | 1 | 2012 | 15–22 | 40.5% | #74 | 1,584 | 0 | 5 |
| 26 | 2014 | 16–15 | 51.6% | #65 | 1,640 | 0 | 1 | 2013 | 10–14 | 41.7% | #77 | 1,558 | 0 | 5 |
| 27 | 2015 | 13–14 | 48.1% | #67 | 1,615 | 0 | 1 | 2014 | 10–18 | 35.7% | #117 | 1,539 | 0 | 5 |
| 28 | 2016 | 16–16 | 50.0% | #37 | 1,700 | 0 | 1 | 2015 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #177 | 1,526 | 0 | 5 |
| 29 | 2017 | 4–11 | 26.7% | #289 | 1,598 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 32 | 2020 | 0–1 | 0.0% | — | 1,587 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 33 | 2021 | 1–9 | 10.0% | #434 | 1,493 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |