H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 22:32 UTC
Jelena Ostapenko vs Coco Vandeweghe H2H: 0-1
Coco Vandeweghe holds a 1–0 lead over Jelena Ostapenko in their WTA head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Coco Vandeweghe leads 1–0 on clay. Most recently, Coco Vandeweghe won the 2017 Stuttgart third round 7-6(3) 7-6(3).
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
LAT
Age 29
Right-Handed
177 cm / 5'10"
H2H
0
–
1
1 main draw meetings
USA
Age 34
Right-Handed
185 cm / 6'1"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 27, 2017* | Stuttgart | WTA 500 | R32 | Clay | Coco Vandeweghe | 7-6(3) 7-6(3) | Jelena Ostapenko | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jelena Ostapenko | #29 | #5 | 5,611 | 2,028 | 289 | 210 | 57.9% | 1 | 1 | 0 | 3 | 4 | 9 |
| 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 | Jelena Ostapenko | 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 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2008 | 0–3 | 0.0% | #476 | 1,453 | 0 | 0 |
| 17 | 2014 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #271 | 1,505 | 0 | 0 | 2009 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #322 | 1,465 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 2015 | 6–5 | 54.5% | #84 | 1,563 | 0 | 0 | 2010 | 6–6 | 50.0% | #116 | 1,566 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 2016 | 20–22 | 47.6% | #44 | 1,602 | 0 | 0 | 2011 | 8–13 | 38.1% | #122 | 1,544 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2017 | 41–20 | 67.2% | #7 | 1,887 | 1 | 2 | 2012 | 6–7 | 46.2% | #97 | 1,606 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2018 | 21–20 | 51.2% | #22 | 1,752 | 1 | 2 | 2013 | 5–11 | 31.2% | #113 | 1,563 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2019 | 25–25 | 50.0% | #45 | 1,795 | 1 | 3 | 2014 | 22–14 | 61.1% | #39 | 1,731 | 0 | 1 |
| 23 | 2020 | 8–7 | 53.3% | #44 | 1,793 | 1 | 3 | 2015 | 20–21 | 48.8% | #37 | 1,726 | 0 | 1 |
| 24 | 2021 | 31–18 | 63.3% | #28 | 1,896 | 1 | 4 | 2016 | 22–17 | 56.4% | #36 | 1,726 | 0 | 2 |
| 25 | 2022 | 31–19 | 62.0% | #18 | 1,844 | 1 | 5 | 2017 | 29–18 | 61.7% | #10 | 1,856 | 0 | 2 |
| 26 | 2023 | 38–22 | 63.3% | #13 | 1,912 | 1 | 6 | 2018 | 9–16 | 36.0% | #100 | 1,688 | 0 | 2 |
| 27 | 2024 | 29–17 | 63.0% | #15 | 1,842 | 1 | 8 | 2019 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #241 | 1,688 | 0 | 2 |
| 28 | 2025 | 17–19 | 47.2% | #23 | 1,773 | 1 | 9 | 2020 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #214 | 1,624 | 0 | 2 |
| 29 | 2026 | 21–15 | 58.3% | #29 | 1,869 | 1 | 9 | 2021 | 4–9 | 30.8% | #174 | 1,592 | 0 | 2 |
| 30 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2022 | 4–5 | 44.4% | #128 | 1,666 | 0 | 2 |
| 31 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2023 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #420 | 1,533 | 0 | 2 |