H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 14:15 UTC
Julie Coin vs Vania King H2H: 0-2
Vania King holds a 2–0 lead over Julie Coin in their WTA head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Vania King leads 2–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Vania King won the 2010 Monterrey fourth round 6-3 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.
FRA
Age 43
Right-Handed
172 cm / 5'8"
H2H
0
–
2
2 main draw meetings
USA
Age 37
Right-Handed
165 cm / 5'5"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 5, 2010* | Monterrey | WTA 500 | R16 | Hard | Vania King | 6-3 6-3 | Julie Coin | Match data |
| Oct 15, 2009* | Osaka | WTA 250 | R32 | Hard | Vania King | 2-6 6-3 6-4 | Julie Coin | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Julie Coin | #770 | #60 | 1,039 | 1,577 | 12 | 35 | 25.5% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Vania King | #824 | #50 | 1,225 | 1,760 | 128 | 160 | 44.4% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
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 | Julie Coin | Vania King | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 16 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2005 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #164 | 1,520 | 0 | 0 |
| 17 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2006 | 16–13 | 55.2% | #60 | 1,661 | 0 | 1 |
| 18 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2007 | 15–21 | 41.7% | #109 | 1,608 | 0 | 1 |
| 19 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2008 | 7–19 | 26.9% | #128 | 1,512 | 0 | 1 |
| 20 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2009 | 11–12 | 47.8% | #80 | 1,588 | 0 | 1 |
| 21 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2010 | 14–17 | 45.2% | #86 | 1,595 | 0 | 1 |
| 22 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2011 | 13–14 | 48.1% | #76 | 1,689 | 0 | 1 |
| 23 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2012 | 15–19 | 44.1% | #69 | 1,614 | 0 | 1 |
| 24 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2013 | 8–11 | 42.1% | #85 | 1,630 | 0 | 1 |
| 25 | 2008 | 2–1 | 66.7% | #97 | 1,548 | 0 | 0 | 2014 | 13–15 | 46.4% | #111 | 1,641 | 0 | 1 |
| 26 | 2009 | 5–15 | 25.0% | #74 | 1,475 | 0 | 0 | 2015 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #410 | 1,627 | 0 | 1 |
| 27 | 2010 | 3–16 | 15.8% | #214 | 1,420 | 0 | 0 | 2016 | 13–11 | 54.2% | #78 | 1,643 | 0 | 1 |
| 28 | 2011 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #268 | 1,431 | 0 | 0 | 2017 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #492 | 1,590 | 0 | 1 |
| 29 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2018 | 1–3 | 25.0% | #356 | 1,559 | 0 | 1 |
| 30 | 2013 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #165 | 1,444 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 32 | 2015 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #266 | 1,441 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |