H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 14:15 UTC
Arantxa Parra Santonja vs Emilie Loit H2H: 0-2
Emilie Loit holds a 2–0 lead over Arantxa Parra Santonja in their WTA head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Emilie Loit leads 1–0 on clay and 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Emilie Loit won the 2007 Bogota third round 6-2 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.
ESP
Age 43
Right-Handed
176 cm / 5'9"
H2H
0
–
2
2 main draw meetings
FRA
Age 47
Left-Handed
167 cm / 5'6"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 22, 2007* | Bogota | WTA 500 | R32 | Clay | Emilie Loit | 6-2 6-1 | Arantxa Parra Santonja | Match data |
| Aug 13, 2005* | Stockholm | WTA 250 | QF | Hard | Emilie Loit | 6-2 7-5 | Arantxa Parra Santonja | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Arantxa Parra Santonja | #858 | #46 | 1,231 | 1,625 | 71 | 120 | 37.2% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Emilie Loit | #161 | #27 | 1,016 | 1,780 | 162 | 180 | 47.4% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 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 | Arantxa Parra Santonja | Emilie Loit | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 18 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1997 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #243 | 1,498 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1998 | 3–5 | 37.5% | #96 | 1,511 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2003 | 10–11 | 47.6% | #67 | 1,591 | 0 | 0 | 1999 | 3–15 | 16.7% | #101 | 1,424 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2004 | 17–26 | 39.5% | #70 | 1,594 | 0 | 0 | 2000 | 4–6 | 40.0% | #101 | 1,456 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2005 | 13–21 | 38.2% | #109 | 1,532 | 0 | 0 | 2001 | 12–15 | 44.4% | #95 | 1,548 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2006 | 1–9 | 10.0% | #175 | 1,429 | 0 | 0 | 2002 | 19–17 | 52.8% | #58 | 1,625 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2007 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #366 | 1,415 | 0 | 0 | 2003 | 23–24 | 48.9% | #41 | 1,673 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2008 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #299 | 1,422 | 0 | 0 | 2004 | 29–20 | 59.2% | #45 | 1,651 | 0 | 2 |
| 26 | 2009 | 2–8 | 20.0% | #93 | 1,409 | 0 | 0 | 2005 | 15–20 | 42.9% | #82 | 1,546 | 0 | 2 |
| 27 | 2010 | 17–18 | 48.6% | #65 | 1,570 | 0 | 0 | 2006 | 20–16 | 55.6% | #56 | 1,621 | 0 | 2 |
| 28 | 2011 | 9–19 | 32.1% | #117 | 1,552 | 0 | 0 | 2007 | 26–22 | 54.2% | #43 | 1,609 | 0 | 3 |
| 29 | 2012 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #229 | 1,530 | 0 | 0 | 2008 | 5–15 | 25.0% | #137 | 1,513 | 0 | 3 |
| 30 | 2013 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #242 | 1,530 | 0 | 0 | 2009 | 3–4 | 42.9% | #161 | 1,531 | 0 | 3 |