H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 02:15 UTC

Alison Riske-Amritraj vs Coco Vandeweghe H2H: 3-3

Alison Riske-Amritraj and Coco Vandeweghe are tied 3–3 in their WTA head-to-head. Across 6 main-draw meetings, Alison Riske-Amritraj leads 3–1 on hard courts, while Coco Vandeweghe leads 2–0 on grass. Most recently, Alison Riske-Amritraj won the 2021 San Jose third round 6-3 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.

Alison Riske-Amritraj
USA Age 36 Right-Handed 175 cm / 5'9"
H2H
3 – 3
6 main draw meetings
Coco Vandeweghe
USA Age 34 Right-Handed 185 cm / 6'1"

H2H Match Log

DateTournamentCategoryRoundSurfaceWinnerScoreLoserMatch
Aug 5, 2021* San Jose WTA 500 R32 Hard Alison Riske-Amritraj #37 6-3 6-4 Coco Vandeweghe #162 Match data
Jun 16, 2018* S-Hertogenbosch WTA 250 QF Grass Coco Vandeweghe #16 7-6(6) 3-6 7-6(12) Alison Riske-Amritraj #63 Match data
Aug 30, 2017* US Open Grand Slam R128 Hard Coco Vandeweghe #22 2-6 6-3 6-4 Alison Riske-Amritraj #49 Match data
Jul 9, 2017* Wimbledon Grand Slam R32 Grass Coco Vandeweghe #25 6-2 6-4 Alison Riske-Amritraj #46 Match data
Feb 21, 2017* Dubai WTA 1000 R64 Hard Alison Riske-Amritraj #38 6-4 6-4 Coco Vandeweghe #21 Match data
Jul 23, 2016* Stanford WTA 500 QF Hard Alison Riske-Amritraj #78 6-3 0-1 (ret.) Coco Vandeweghe #35 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
Alison Riske-Amritraj #1,157 #18 2,360 1,853 191 202 48.6% 0 0 0 1 2 3
Coco Vandeweghe #815 #9 3,258 1,877 138 151 47.8% 0 0 0 0 2 2

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 Alison Riske-Amritraj Coco Vandeweghe
YrW-LWin %RankEloGSTitles YrW-LWin %RankEloGSTitles
14 — — — — — — — 2006 0–1 0.0% — 1,484 0 0
15 — — — — — — — 2007 0–1 0.0% #549 1,479 0 0
16 — — — — — — — 2008 0–3 0.0% #476 1,453 0 0
17 — — — — — — — 2009 1–2 33.3% #322 1,465 0 0
18 — — — — — — — 2010 6–6 50.0% #116 1,566 0 0
19 2010 4–4 50.0% #115 1,554 0 0 2011 8–13 38.1% #122 1,544 0 0
20 2011 3–8 27.3% #136 1,529 0 0 2012 6–7 46.2% #97 1,606 0 0
21 2012 0–4 0.0% #180 1,488 0 0 2013 5–11 31.2% #113 1,563 0 0
22 2013 11–6 64.7% #57 1,642 0 0 2014 22–14 61.1% #39 1,731 0 1
23 2014 24–22 52.2% #43 1,713 0 1 2015 20–21 48.8% #37 1,726 0 1
24 2015 15–24 38.5% #97 1,602 0 1 2016 22–17 56.4% #36 1,726 0 2
25 2016 23–19 54.8% #39 1,742 0 1 2017 29–18 61.7% #10 1,856 0 2
26 2017 21–24 46.7% #70 1,650 0 1 2018 9–16 36.0% #100 1,688 0 2
27 2018 17–16 51.5% #62 1,632 0 1 2019 1–3 25.0% #241 1,688 0 2
28 2019 26–23 53.1% #18 1,797 0 2 2020 0–2 0.0% #214 1,624 0 2
29 2020 6–8 42.9% #26 1,739 0 2 2021 4–9 30.8% #174 1,592 0 2
30 2021 16–15 51.6% #51 1,771 0 3 2022 4–5 44.4% #128 1,666 0 2
31 2022 25–21 54.3% #41 1,750 0 3 2023 1–2 33.3% #420 1,533 0 2
32 2023 0–8 0.0% #659 1,614 0 3 — — — — — — —