H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 02:15 UTC
Coco Vandeweghe vs Kiki Bertens H2H: 1-2
Kiki Bertens holds a 2–1 lead over Coco Vandeweghe in their WTA head-to-head. Across 3 main-draw meetings, they are tied 1–1 on hard courts, while Kiki Bertens leads 1–0 on grass. Most recently, Kiki Bertens won the 2018 Cincinnati second round 6-2 6-0.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
USA
Age 34
Right-Handed
185 cm / 6'1"
H2H
1
–
2
3 main draw meetings
NED
Age 34
Right-Handed
182 cm / 6'0"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 15, 2018* | Cincinnati | WTA 1000 | R64 | Hard | Kiki Bertens | 6-2 6-0 | Coco Vandeweghe | Match data |
| Mar 11, 2016* | Indian Wells | WTA 1000 | R128 | Hard | Coco Vandeweghe | 6-4 6-4 | Kiki Bertens | Match data |
| Jun 13, 2015* | 's Hertogenbosch | WTA 250 | QF | Grass | Kiki Bertens | 6-4 6-1 | Coco Vandeweghe | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coco Vandeweghe | #815 | #9 | 3,258 | 1,877 | 138 | 151 | 47.8% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 |
| Kiki Bertens | #25 | #4 | 5,430 | 2,015 | 214 | 168 | 56.0% | 0 | 2 | 0 | 3 | 6 | 11 |
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 | Coco Vandeweghe | Kiki Bertens | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 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 | 2011 | 8–13 | 38.1% | #122 | 1,544 | 0 | 0 | 2011 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #182 | 1,493 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2012 | 6–7 | 46.2% | #97 | 1,606 | 0 | 0 | 2012 | 11–12 | 47.8% | #63 | 1,581 | 0 | 1 |
| 21 | 2013 | 5–11 | 31.2% | #113 | 1,563 | 0 | 0 | 2013 | 14–19 | 42.4% | #87 | 1,552 | 0 | 1 |
| 22 | 2014 | 22–14 | 61.1% | #39 | 1,731 | 0 | 1 | 2014 | 11–14 | 44.0% | #68 | 1,580 | 0 | 1 |
| 23 | 2015 | 20–21 | 48.8% | #37 | 1,726 | 0 | 1 | 2015 | 7–17 | 29.2% | #104 | 1,520 | 0 | 1 |
| 24 | 2016 | 22–17 | 56.4% | #36 | 1,726 | 0 | 2 | 2016 | 27–19 | 58.7% | #22 | 1,723 | 0 | 2 |
| 25 | 2017 | 29–18 | 61.7% | #10 | 1,856 | 0 | 2 | 2017 | 30–26 | 53.6% | #31 | 1,684 | 0 | 5 |
| 26 | 2018 | 9–16 | 36.0% | #100 | 1,688 | 0 | 2 | 2018 | 46–22 | 67.6% | #9 | 1,912 | 0 | 8 |
| 27 | 2019 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #241 | 1,688 | 0 | 2 | 2019 | 54–25 | 68.4% | #9 | 1,897 | 0 | 10 |
| 28 | 2020 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #214 | 1,624 | 0 | 2 | 2020 | 13–6 | 68.4% | #9 | 1,883 | 0 | 11 |
| 29 | 2021 | 4–9 | 30.8% | #174 | 1,592 | 0 | 2 | 2021 | 1–7 | 12.5% | #25 | 1,749 | 0 | 11 |
| 30 | 2022 | 4–5 | 44.4% | #128 | 1,666 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 31 | 2023 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #420 | 1,533 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |