H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 16:30 UTC
Zarina Diyas vs Ling Zhang H2H: 0-1
Ling Zhang holds a 1–0 lead over Zarina Diyas in their WTA head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Ling Zhang leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Ling Zhang won the 2014 Guangzhou third round 6-4 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.
KAZ
Age 32
Right-Handed
172 cm / 5'8"
H2H
0
–
1
1 main draw meetings
HKG
Right-Handed
178 cm / 5'10"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 18, 2014* | Guangzhou | WTA 250 | R32 | Hard | Ling Zhang | 6-4 6-1 | Zarina Diyas | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Zarina Diyas | #437 | #31 | 1,495 | 1,751 | 99 | 127 | 43.8% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| Ling Zhang | #1,153 | #184 | 328 | 1,500 | 2 | 10 | 16.7% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
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.
| Zarina Diyas | Ling Zhang | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles |
| 2009 | 2–1 | 66.7% | #242 | 1,527 | 0 | 0 | 2009 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #326 | 1,483 | 0 | 0 |
| 2010 | 2–4 | 33.3% | #172 | 1,539 | 0 | 0 | 2014 | 2–4 | 33.3% | #206 | 1,471 | 0 | 0 |
| 2011 | 1–4 | 20.0% | #227 | 1,503 | 0 | 0 | 2015 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #280 | 1,460 | 0 | 0 |
| 2012 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #264 | 1,476 | 0 | 0 | 2016 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #662 | 1,442 | 0 | 0 |
| 2013 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #163 | 1,477 | 0 | 0 | 2017 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #332 | 1,441 | 0 | 0 |
| 2014 | 20–14 | 58.8% | #33 | 1,683 | 0 | 0 | 2018 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #437 | 1,444 | 0 | 0 |
| 2015 | 20–27 | 42.6% | #52 | 1,576 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 2016 | 8–12 | 40.0% | #150 | 1,558 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 2017 | 7–4 | 63.6% | #66 | 1,667 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 2018 | 13–19 | 40.6% | #89 | 1,718 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 2019 | 7–14 | 33.3% | #77 | 1,697 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 2020 | 5–6 | 45.5% | #80 | 1,655 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 2021 | 13–16 | 44.8% | #102 | 1,688 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 2022 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #1031 | 1,680 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 2024 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #382 | 1,632 | 0 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |