H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 16:32 UTC
Yulia Putintseva vs Nao Hibino
Compare the head-to-head record, career totals, season-by-season performance, and match log for Yulia Putintseva vs Nao Hibino.
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 31
Right-Handed
163 cm / 5'4"
H2H
0
–
0
0 main draw meetings
JPN
Age 31
Right-Handed
163 cm / 5'4"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| No head-to-head meetings found. | ||||||||
Career Comparison
| Player | Current | Peak | Pts | Elo | W | L | Win % | GS | 1000 | Finals | 500 | 250 | Titles |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yulia Putintseva | #82 | #20 | 2,138 | 1,991 | 261 | 255 | 50.6% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 4 |
| Nao Hibino | #235 | #56 | 1,050 | 1,726 | 79 | 118 | 40.1% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 3 |
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 | Yulia Putintseva | Nao Hibino | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 15 | 2010 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #728 | 1,489 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 17 | 2012 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #123 | 1,489 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 18 | 2013 | 5–12 | 29.4% | #109 | 1,509 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 19 | 2014 | 5–6 | 45.5% | #115 | 1,555 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 20 | 2015 | 10–17 | 37.0% | #77 | 1,523 | 0 | 0 | 2015 | 6–2 | 75.0% | #66 | 1,576 | 0 | 1 |
| 21 | 2016 | 26–22 | 54.2% | #33 | 1,655 | 0 | 0 | 2016 | 18–21 | 46.2% | #94 | 1,632 | 0 | 1 |
| 22 | 2017 | 20–27 | 42.6% | #52 | 1,605 | 0 | 0 | 2017 | 11–16 | 40.7% | #97 | 1,561 | 0 | 1 |
| 23 | 2018 | 17–19 | 47.2% | #44 | 1,656 | 0 | 0 | 2018 | 4–9 | 30.8% | #114 | 1,590 | 0 | 1 |
| 24 | 2019 | 28–23 | 54.9% | #34 | 1,757 | 0 | 2 | 2019 | 7–6 | 53.8% | #106 | 1,614 | 0 | 2 |
| 25 | 2020 | 15–10 | 60.0% | #28 | 1,836 | 0 | 2 | 2020 | 9–6 | 60.0% | #73 | 1,644 | 0 | 2 |
| 26 | 2021 | 31–21 | 59.6% | #42 | 1,816 | 0 | 3 | 2021 | 5–16 | 23.8% | #129 | 1,538 | 0 | 2 |
| 27 | 2022 | 20–18 | 52.6% | #51 | 1,740 | 0 | 3 | 2022 | 4–6 | 40.0% | #138 | 1,581 | 0 | 2 |
| 28 | 2023 | 22–22 | 50.0% | #66 | 1,744 | 0 | 3 | 2023 | 9–12 | 42.9% | #94 | 1,658 | 0 | 3 |
| 29 | 2024 | 34–17 | 66.7% | #29 | 1,934 | 0 | 4 | 2024 | 4–16 | 20.0% | #145 | 1,603 | 0 | 3 |
| 30 | 2025 | 15–26 | 36.6% | #71 | 1,740 | 0 | 4 | 2025 | 2–7 | 22.2% | #174 | 1,514 | 0 | 3 |
| 31 | 2026 | 12–12 | 50.0% | #82 | 1,783 | 0 | 4 | 2026 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #235 | 1,533 | 0 | 3 |