H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC
Danka Kovinic vs Agnieszka Radwanska H2H: 0-1
Agnieszka Radwanska holds a 1–0 lead over Danka Kovinic in their WTA head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Agnieszka Radwanska leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Agnieszka Radwanska won the 2015 Tianjin final 6-1 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.
MNE
Age 31
Right-Handed
169 cm / 5'7"
H2H
0
–
1
1 main draw meetings
POL
Age 37
Right-Handed
173 cm / 5'8"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 18, 2015* | Tianjin | WTA 250 | F | Hard | Agnieszka Radwanska | 6-1 6-2 | Danka Kovinic | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Danka Kovinic | #1,327 | #46 | 1,312 | 1,755 | 85 | 121 | 41.3% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Agnieszka Radwanska | #74 | #2 | 8,530 | 2,081 | 506 | 237 | 68.1% | 0 | 5 | 1 | 8 | 6 | 20 |
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 | Danka Kovinic | Agnieszka Radwanska | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 17 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2006 | 11–8 | 57.9% | #61 | 1,673 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 2013 | 2–2 | 50.0% | #168 | 1,511 | 0 | 0 | 2007 | 27–19 | 58.7% | #26 | 1,808 | 0 | 1 |
| 19 | 2014 | 6–12 | 33.3% | #109 | 1,460 | 0 | 0 | 2008 | 51–19 | 72.9% | #10 | 1,926 | 0 | 4 |
| 20 | 2015 | 16–13 | 55.2% | #57 | 1,623 | 0 | 0 | 2009 | 44–23 | 65.7% | #10 | 1,910 | 0 | 4 |
| 21 | 2016 | 18–22 | 45.0% | #71 | 1,575 | 0 | 0 | 2010 | 32–18 | 64.0% | #14 | 1,860 | 0 | 4 |
| 22 | 2017 | 3–16 | 15.8% | #121 | 1,454 | 0 | 0 | 2011 | 46–18 | 71.9% | #8 | 1,979 | 0 | 7 |
| 23 | 2018 | 3–5 | 37.5% | #154 | 1,518 | 0 | 0 | 2012 | 59–19 | 75.6% | #4 | 1,994 | 0 | 10 |
| 24 | 2019 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #85 | 1,567 | 0 | 0 | 2013 | 56–20 | 73.7% | #5 | 1,957 | 0 | 13 |
| 25 | 2020 | 5–7 | 41.7% | #77 | 1,632 | 0 | 0 | 2014 | 43–22 | 66.2% | #6 | 1,872 | 0 | 14 |
| 26 | 2021 | 12–17 | 41.4% | #96 | 1,583 | 0 | 0 | 2015 | 50–22 | 69.4% | #5 | 1,957 | 0 | 17 |
| 27 | 2022 | 9–11 | 45.0% | #60 | 1,687 | 0 | 0 | 2016 | 51–18 | 73.9% | #3 | 1,942 | 0 | 20 |
| 28 | 2023 | 9–12 | 42.9% | #150 | 1,617 | 0 | 0 | 2017 | 25–18 | 58.1% | #28 | 1,812 | 0 | 20 |
| 29 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2018 | 11–13 | 45.8% | #74 | 1,727 | 0 | 20 |
| 31 | 2026 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #1327 | 1,543 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |