H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 04:32 UTC
Belinda Bencic vs Danka Kovinic H2H: 0-2
Danka Kovinic holds a 2–0 lead over Belinda Bencic in their WTA head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Danka Kovinic leads 2–0 on clay. Most recently, Danka Kovinic won the 2020 Rome third round 6-3 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.
SUI
Age 29
Right-Handed
175 cm / 5'9"
H2H
0
–
2
2 main draw meetings
MNE
Age 31
Right-Handed
169 cm / 5'7"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 17, 2020* | Rome | WTA 1000 | R32 | Clay | Danka Kovinic | 6-3 6-1 | Belinda Bencic | Match data |
| Apr 9, 2015* | Charleston | WTA 500 | R32 | Clay | Danka Kovinic | 4-6 6-3 6-2 | Belinda Bencic | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Belinda Bencic | #14 | #4 | 4,745 | 2,032 | 298 | 187 | 61.4% | 0 | 2 | 0 | 7 | 0 | 9 |
| Danka Kovinic | #1,327 | #46 | 1,312 | 1,755 | 85 | 121 | 41.3% | 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.
| Age | Belinda Bencic | Danka Kovinic | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 15 | 2012 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #612 | 1,498 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 16 | 2013 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #184 | 1,512 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 17 | 2014 | 18–17 | 51.4% | #32 | 1,697 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 18 | 2015 | 40–21 | 65.6% | #14 | 1,886 | 0 | 2 | 2013 | 2–2 | 50.0% | #168 | 1,511 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 2016 | 17–20 | 45.9% | #43 | 1,687 | 0 | 2 | 2014 | 6–12 | 33.3% | #109 | 1,460 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2017 | 3–8 | 27.3% | #98 | 1,686 | 0 | 2 | 2015 | 16–13 | 55.2% | #57 | 1,623 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2018 | 12–13 | 48.0% | #54 | 1,723 | 0 | 2 | 2016 | 18–22 | 45.0% | #71 | 1,575 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2019 | 48–21 | 69.6% | #8 | 1,923 | 0 | 4 | 2017 | 3–16 | 15.8% | #121 | 1,454 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2020 | 7–7 | 50.0% | #12 | 1,850 | 0 | 4 | 2018 | 3–5 | 37.5% | #154 | 1,518 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2021 | 28–19 | 59.6% | #23 | 1,848 | 0 | 4 | 2019 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #85 | 1,567 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2022 | 38–19 | 66.7% | #12 | 1,884 | 0 | 5 | 2020 | 5–7 | 41.7% | #77 | 1,632 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 2023 | 31–13 | 70.5% | #17 | 1,921 | 0 | 7 | 2021 | 12–17 | 41.4% | #96 | 1,583 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2022 | 9–11 | 45.0% | #60 | 1,687 | 0 | 0 |
| 28 | 2025 | 36–16 | 69.2% | #11 | 2,004 | 0 | 9 | 2023 | 9–12 | 42.9% | #150 | 1,617 | 0 | 0 |
| 29 | 2026 | 18–9 | 66.7% | #14 | 1,998 | 0 | 9 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 31 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2026 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #1327 | 1,543 | 0 | 0 |