H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 02:15 UTC
Taro Daniel vs Juan Monaco H2H: 0-1
Juan Monaco holds a 1–0 lead over Taro Daniel in their ATP head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Juan Monaco leads 1–0 on grass. Most recently, Juan Monaco won the 2016 Wimbledon first round 7-5 4-6 6-3 6-2.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
Japan
Age 33
Right-Handed
191 cm / 6'3"
H2H
0
–
1
1 main draw meetings
ARG
Age 42
Right-Handed
185 cm / 6'1"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 29, 2016* | Wimbledon | Grand Slam | R128 | Grass | Juan Monaco | 7-5 4-6 6-3 6-2 | Taro Daniel | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Taro Daniel | #194 | #58 | 893 | 1,815 | 81 | 146 | 35.7% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| Juan Monaco | #226 | #10 | 2,775 | 2,046 | 319 | 256 | 55.5% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 7 | 8 |
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 | Taro Daniel | Juan Monaco | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 20 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2004 | 16–12 | 57.1% | #73 | 1,661 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2014 | 2–5 | 28.6% | #177 | 1,645 | 0 | 0 | 2005 | 18–25 | 41.9% | #85 | 1,587 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2015 | 1–5 | 16.7% | #96 | 1,705 | 0 | 0 | 2006 | 18–23 | 43.9% | #69 | 1,641 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2016 | 6–14 | 30.0% | #127 | 1,670 | 0 | 0 | 2007 | 41–19 | 68.3% | #23 | 1,864 | 0 | 3 |
| 24 | 2017 | 4–9 | 30.8% | #99 | 1,641 | 0 | 0 | 2008 | 27–20 | 57.4% | #46 | 1,768 | 0 | 3 |
| 25 | 2018 | 16–17 | 48.5% | #77 | 1,710 | 0 | 1 | 2009 | 34–24 | 58.6% | #30 | 1,850 | 0 | 3 |
| 26 | 2019 | 11–18 | 37.9% | #110 | 1,655 | 0 | 1 | 2010 | 28–18 | 60.9% | #26 | 1,838 | 0 | 3 |
| 27 | 2020 | 1–4 | 20.0% | #117 | 1,595 | 0 | 1 | 2011 | 26–24 | 52.0% | #26 | 1,932 | 0 | 3 |
| 28 | 2021 | 5–10 | 33.3% | #125 | 1,613 | 0 | 1 | 2012 | 36–17 | 67.9% | #12 | 1,944 | 0 | 7 |
| 29 | 2022 | 12–18 | 40.0% | #92 | 1,691 | 0 | 1 | 2013 | 18–21 | 46.2% | #42 | 1,809 | 0 | 7 |
| 30 | 2023 | 11–16 | 40.7% | #75 | 1,687 | 0 | 1 | 2014 | 20–18 | 52.6% | #62 | 1,856 | 0 | 7 |
| 31 | 2024 | 10–23 | 30.3% | #84 | 1,631 | 0 | 1 | 2015 | 21–19 | 52.5% | #53 | 1,811 | 0 | 7 |
| 32 | 2025 | 2–6 | 25.0% | #376 | 1,503 | 0 | 1 | 2016 | 16–13 | 55.2% | #65 | 1,864 | 0 | 8 |
| 33 | 2026 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #194 | 1,521 | 0 | 1 | 2017 | 0–3 | 0.0% | #226 | 1,805 | 0 | 8 |