H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 02:15 UTC
Donna Vekic vs Coco Vandeweghe H2H: 2-2
Donna Vekic and Coco Vandeweghe are tied 2–2 in their WTA head-to-head. Across 4 main-draw meetings, Coco Vandeweghe leads 2–1 on hard courts, while Donna Vekic leads 1–0 on grass. Most recently, Donna Vekic won the 2022 Birmingham third round 6-4 6-4.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
CRO
Age 30
Right-Handed
179 cm / 5'10"
H2H
2
–
2
4 main draw meetings
USA
Age 34
Right-Handed
185 cm / 6'1"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 16, 2022* | Birmingham | WTA 250 | R32 | Grass | Donna Vekic | 6-4 6-4 | Coco Vandeweghe | Match data |
| Sep 25, 2018* | Wuhan | WTA 1000 | R64 | Hard | Donna Vekic | 6-4 3-6 2-1 (ret.) | Coco Vandeweghe | Match data |
| Oct 2, 2017 | Beijing | WTA 1000 | R64 | Hard | Coco Vandeweghe | 6-2 6-2 | Donna Vekic | Match data |
| Aug 27, 2014* | US Open | Grand Slam | R128 | Hard | Coco Vandeweghe | 2-6 6-3 6-1 | Donna Vekic | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Donna Vekic | #35 | #17 | 2,458 | 1,908 | 230 | 232 | 49.8% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 3 | 5 |
| Coco Vandeweghe | #815 | #9 | 3,258 | 1,877 | 138 | 151 | 47.8% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 |
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 | Donna Vekic | Coco Vandeweghe | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 2012 | 4–1 | 80.0% | #108 | 1,565 | 0 | 0 | 2008 | 0–3 | 0.0% | #476 | 1,453 | 0 | 0 |
| 17 | 2013 | 12–12 | 50.0% | #96 | 1,603 | 0 | 0 | 2009 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #322 | 1,465 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 2014 | 12–18 | 40.0% | #82 | 1,550 | 0 | 1 | 2010 | 6–6 | 50.0% | #116 | 1,566 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 2015 | 10–10 | 50.0% | #103 | 1,606 | 0 | 1 | 2011 | 8–13 | 38.1% | #122 | 1,544 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2016 | 4–16 | 20.0% | #101 | 1,563 | 0 | 1 | 2012 | 6–7 | 46.2% | #97 | 1,606 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2017 | 16–21 | 43.2% | #55 | 1,669 | 0 | 2 | 2013 | 5–11 | 31.2% | #113 | 1,563 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2018 | 27–23 | 54.0% | #34 | 1,761 | 0 | 2 | 2014 | 22–14 | 61.1% | #39 | 1,731 | 0 | 1 |
| 23 | 2019 | 35–24 | 59.3% | #19 | 1,767 | 0 | 2 | 2015 | 20–21 | 48.8% | #37 | 1,726 | 0 | 1 |
| 24 | 2020 | 8–11 | 42.1% | #32 | 1,693 | 0 | 2 | 2016 | 22–17 | 56.4% | #36 | 1,726 | 0 | 2 |
| 25 | 2021 | 14–14 | 50.0% | #68 | 1,745 | 0 | 3 | 2017 | 29–18 | 61.7% | #10 | 1,856 | 0 | 2 |
| 26 | 2022 | 12–13 | 48.0% | #67 | 1,799 | 0 | 3 | 2018 | 9–16 | 36.0% | #100 | 1,688 | 0 | 2 |
| 27 | 2023 | 26–20 | 56.5% | #23 | 1,776 | 0 | 4 | 2019 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #241 | 1,688 | 0 | 2 |
| 28 | 2024 | 26–19 | 57.8% | #19 | 1,862 | 0 | 4 | 2020 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #214 | 1,624 | 0 | 2 |
| 29 | 2025 | 14–21 | 40.0% | #69 | 1,734 | 0 | 4 | 2021 | 4–9 | 30.8% | #174 | 1,592 | 0 | 2 |
| 30 | 2026 | 10–9 | 52.6% | #35 | 1,795 | 0 | 5 | 2022 | 4–5 | 44.4% | #128 | 1,666 | 0 | 2 |
| 31 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2023 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #420 | 1,533 | 0 | 2 |