H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 04:30 UTC
Danka Kovinic vs Nicole Gibbs H2H: 1-2
Nicole Gibbs holds a 2–1 lead over Danka Kovinic in their WTA head-to-head. Across 3 main-draw meetings, Nicole Gibbs leads 2–0 on hard courts, while Danka Kovinic leads 1–0 on clay. Most recently, Nicole Gibbs won the 2016 Monterrey third round 7-5 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
–
2
3 main draw meetings
USA
Age 33
Right-Handed
168 cm / 5'6"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 3, 2016* | Monterrey | WTA 500 | R32 | Hard | Nicole Gibbs | 7-5 6-2 | Danka Kovinic | Match data |
| Sep 19, 2014* | Seoul | WTA 250 | R16 | Hard | Nicole Gibbs | 1-6 6-4 7-6(5) | Danka Kovinic | Match data |
| Apr 10, 2014* | Bogota | WTA 250 | R32 | Clay | Danka Kovinic | 4-6 6-3 6-0 | Nicole Gibbs | 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 |
| Nicole Gibbs | #175 | #68 | 946 | 1,692 | 37 | 60 | 38.1% | 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 | Danka Kovinic | Nicole Gibbs | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 2012 | 2–4 | 33.3% | #222 | 1,504 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2015 | 16–13 | 55.2% | #57 | 1,623 | 0 | 0 | 2013 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #185 | 1,509 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2016 | 18–22 | 45.0% | #71 | 1,575 | 0 | 0 | 2014 | 5–6 | 45.5% | #96 | 1,549 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2017 | 3–16 | 15.8% | #121 | 1,454 | 0 | 0 | 2015 | 4–11 | 26.7% | #109 | 1,505 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2018 | 3–5 | 37.5% | #154 | 1,518 | 0 | 0 | 2016 | 13–15 | 46.4% | #89 | 1,590 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2019 | 2–3 | 40.0% | #85 | 1,567 | 0 | 0 | 2017 | 7–12 | 36.8% | #109 | 1,580 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 2020 | 5–7 | 41.7% | #77 | 1,632 | 0 | 0 | 2018 | 1–6 | 14.3% | #123 | 1,529 | 0 | 0 |
| 26 | 2021 | 12–17 | 41.4% | #96 | 1,583 | 0 | 0 | 2019 | 4–3 | 57.1% | #126 | 1,628 | 0 | 0 |
| 27 | 2022 | 9–11 | 45.0% | #60 | 1,687 | 0 | 0 | 2020 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #172 | 1,606 | 0 | 0 |
| 28 | 2023 | 9–12 | 42.9% | #150 | 1,617 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 31 | 2026 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #1327 | 1,543 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |