H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 04:30 UTC
Danka Kovinic vs Johanna Konta H2H: 1-1
Danka Kovinic and Johanna Konta are tied 1–1 in their WTA head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Danka Kovinic leads 1–0 on clay, while Johanna Konta leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Johanna Konta won the 2016 Miami second round 6-4 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
1
–
1
2 main draw meetings
GBR
Age 35
Right-Handed
180 cm / 5'11"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 23, 2016* | Miami | WTA 1000 | R64 | Hard | Johanna Konta | 6-4 6-2 | Danka Kovinic | Match data |
| Jul 11, 2013* | Budapest | WTA 250 | R32 | Clay | Danka Kovinic | 6-2 3-6 6-2 | Johanna Konta | 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 |
| Johanna Konta | #113 | #4 | 5,110 | 1,990 | 174 | 120 | 59.2% | 0 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 4 |
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 | Johanna Konta | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 18 | 2013 | 2–2 | 50.0% | #168 | 1,511 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 19 | 2014 | 6–12 | 33.3% | #109 | 1,460 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 20 | 2015 | 16–13 | 55.2% | #57 | 1,623 | 0 | 0 | 2011 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #308 | 1,494 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2016 | 18–22 | 45.0% | #71 | 1,575 | 0 | 0 | 2012 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #156 | 1,506 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2017 | 3–16 | 15.8% | #121 | 1,454 | 0 | 0 | 2013 | 3–5 | 37.5% | #114 | 1,505 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2018 | 3–5 | 37.5% | #154 | 1,518 | 0 | 0 | 2014 | 2–8 | 20.0% | #148 | 1,459 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2019 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #85 | 1,567 | 0 | 0 | 2015 | 13–8 | 61.9% | #48 | 1,694 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2020 | 5–7 | 41.7% | #77 | 1,632 | 0 | 0 | 2016 | 42–22 | 65.6% | #10 | 1,854 | 0 | 1 |
| 26 | 2021 | 12–17 | 41.4% | #96 | 1,583 | 0 | 0 | 2017 | 36–17 | 67.9% | #9 | 1,836 | 0 | 3 |
| 27 | 2022 | 9–11 | 45.0% | #60 | 1,687 | 0 | 0 | 2018 | 25–23 | 52.1% | #37 | 1,794 | 0 | 3 |
| 28 | 2023 | 9–12 | 42.9% | #150 | 1,617 | 0 | 0 | 2019 | 33–15 | 68.8% | #12 | 1,925 | 0 | 3 |
| 29 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2020 | 8–9 | 47.1% | #14 | 1,825 | 0 | 3 |
| 30 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2021 | 10–9 | 52.6% | #113 | 1,807 | 0 | 4 |
| 31 | 2026 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #1327 | 1,543 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |