VirtuAnalytics

Novel Insights Through Data & Analysis

Virtua Fighter 5 REVO · v1.10 · Character Matchup Winrates

Akira vs Aoi

Akira vs Aoi in Virtua Fighter 5 REVO v1.10: Akira wins 51.9% of 11,981 decided matches (Low, mid and high combined, 2026/03/26 – 2026/10/18). Stage by stage, 0 of 10 tested stage gaps survive correction.

The same figures as a 1080×1080 card, for posting. Click it to copy the image. Full size ↗
Matches counted11,981
Win rate51.9%
Widest gap, 80+ matches3.2 pts
Survive correction0
Period2026/03/26 – 2026/10/18

Where it was fought

Akira's win rate on each stage, against this matchup everywhere
StageGap from usualWin %ChangepMatches
Full fence55.0%+3.20.0211,183
Low fence52.6%+0.70.5851,234
Single wall52.6%+0.70.6081,122
Breakable full fence51.9%+0.10.9611,275
Open51.9%+0.00.9941,178
Octagon51.8%-0.10.9581,095
Breakable half fence51.7%-0.10.9241,216
Half fence51.0%-0.80.5381,256
Rectangle50.7%-1.20.3801,210
Fence and open50.5%-1.40.491606
p < 0.05 on its ownStill there after correcting for how many were tested· fewer than 80 decided matches: p on its own only, not corrected, coloured or ranked

Matchups with a stage played at least 80 times: 181. With a stage that survives correction: 13. Expected from chance alone: about 9.1.

The same figures as a 1080×1080 card, for posting. Click it to copy the image. Full size ↗

Stage against stage

Akira's win rate on the row's stage, minus the same on the column's

All ten shapes at once: chi-square 6.63 on 9 df, p 0.676

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence55.0%1,183+3.10.123+4.00.048+3.30.105+2.40.230+2.50.239+4.50.069+3.20.124+4.40.032+3.20.120
Breakable full fence-3.10.12351.9%1,275+0.90.655+0.20.923-0.70.736-0.70.746+1.40.563+0.10.979+1.30.530+0.10.945
Half fence-4.00.048-0.90.65551.0%1,256-0.70.731-1.60.437-1.50.450+0.50.827-0.80.681+0.40.853-0.70.718
Breakable half fence-3.30.105-0.20.923+0.70.73151.7%1,216-0.90.668-0.80.678+1.20.620-0.10.945+1.10.600-0.10.979
Low fence-2.40.230+0.70.736+1.60.437+0.90.66852.6%1,234+0.00.997+2.10.397+0.70.721+1.90.339+0.80.695
Single wall-2.50.239+0.70.746+1.50.450+0.80.678-0.00.99752.6%1,122+2.10.407+0.70.731+1.90.353+0.80.705
Fence and open-4.50.069-1.40.563-0.50.827-1.20.620-2.10.397-2.10.40750.5%606-1.40.583-0.20.947-1.30.611
Open-3.20.124-0.10.979+0.80.681+0.10.945-0.70.721-0.70.731+1.40.58351.9%1,178+1.20.555+0.10.967
Rectangle-4.40.032-1.30.530-0.40.853-1.10.600-1.90.339-1.90.353+0.20.947-1.20.55550.7%1,210-1.10.591
Octagon-3.20.120-0.10.945+0.70.718+0.10.979-0.80.695-0.80.705+1.30.611-0.10.967+1.10.59151.8%1,095
Better on the row's stage — deeper at 5 and 10 pointsBetter on the column's stagep < 0.05 on its ownStill there after correcting for how many were tested· fewer than 80 decided matches on one side of the comparison

Matchups with two stages each played at least 80 times: 180. With a stage-against-stage difference that survives correction: 12. Expected from chance alone: about 9.0.

How significance is decided
  • Each gap is two win rates compared with a pooled two-proportion z test, over decided matches only.
  • The 95% interval is Newcombe's hybrid score method, which keeps its shape near 0% and 100% where a symmetric interval does not.
  • q is p corrected for how many tests were asked at once, by Benjamini–Hochberg at a 5% false discovery rate. A figure is called real on q, never on p alone.
  • Standard errors are widened by a measured design effect, because one player appears in many matches and those matches are not independent of each other.
  • Stages are assigned at random, so a gap between them is the stage's own effect and not a difference in who chose to play where.
The same figures as a 1080×1080 card, for posting. Click it to copy the image. Full size ↗
Matches counted7,798
Win rate52.7%
Widest gap, 80+ matches-3.1 pts
Survive correction0
Period2026/03/26 – 2026/10/18

Where it was fought

Akira's win rate on each stage, against this matchup everywhere
StageGap from usualWin %ChangepMatches
Fence and open54.0%+1.30.576407
Full fence53.9%+1.20.477749
Single wall53.8%+1.10.545729
Low fence53.5%+0.80.626811
Open53.1%+0.40.806785
Half fence52.8%+0.10.968830
Breakable full fence52.7%-0.00.993799
Breakable half fence52.1%-0.60.719827
Octagon51.9%-0.80.661682
Rectangle49.6%-3.10.069778
p < 0.05 on its ownStill there after correcting for how many were tested· fewer than 80 decided matches: p on its own only, not corrected, coloured or ranked

Matchups with a stage played at least 80 times: 158. With a stage that survives correction: 14. Expected from chance alone: about 7.9.

The same figures as a 1080×1080 card, for posting. Click it to copy the image. Full size ↗

Stage against stage

Akira's win rate on the row's stage, minus the same on the column's

All ten shapes at once: chi-square 4.63 on 9 df, p 0.866

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence53.9%749+1.20.623+1.20.642+1.80.469+0.40.867+0.20.949-0.10.970+0.80.748+4.30.091+2.00.442
Breakable full fence-1.20.62352.7%799-0.10.974+0.60.817-0.80.741-1.10.672-1.40.654-0.40.864+3.10.222+0.80.763
Half fence-1.20.642+0.10.97452.8%830+0.70.790-0.70.763-1.00.693-1.30.671-0.30.888+3.20.206+0.90.738
Breakable half fence-1.80.469-0.60.817-0.70.79052.1%827-1.40.571-1.60.514-1.90.521-1.00.686+2.50.316+0.20.935
Low fence-0.40.867+0.80.741+0.70.763+1.40.57153.5%811-0.30.919-0.50.859+0.40.875+3.90.120+1.60.535
Single wall-0.20.949+1.10.672+1.00.693+1.60.514+0.30.91953.8%729-0.30.927+0.70.800+4.20.107+1.90.483
Fence and open+0.10.970+1.40.654+1.30.671+1.90.521+0.50.859+0.30.92754.0%407+0.90.759+4.40.147+2.10.492
Open-0.80.748+0.40.864+0.30.888+1.00.686-0.40.875-0.70.800-0.90.75953.1%785+3.50.165+1.20.642
Rectangle-4.30.091-3.10.222-3.20.206-2.50.316-3.90.120-4.20.107-4.40.147-3.50.16549.6%778-2.30.382
Octagon-2.00.442-0.80.763-0.90.738-0.20.935-1.60.535-1.90.483-2.10.492-1.20.642+2.30.38251.9%682
Better on the row's stage — deeper at 5 and 10 pointsBetter on the column's stagep < 0.05 on its ownStill there after correcting for how many were tested· fewer than 80 decided matches on one side of the comparison

Matchups with two stages each played at least 80 times: 152. With a stage-against-stage difference that survives correction: 11. Expected from chance alone: about 7.6.

How significance is decided
  • Each gap is two win rates compared with a pooled two-proportion z test, over decided matches only.
  • The 95% interval is Newcombe's hybrid score method, which keeps its shape near 0% and 100% where a symmetric interval does not.
  • q is p corrected for how many tests were asked at once, by Benjamini–Hochberg at a 5% false discovery rate. A figure is called real on q, never on p alone.
  • Standard errors are widened by a measured design effect, because one player appears in many matches and those matches are not independent of each other.
  • Stages are assigned at random, so a gap between them is the stage's own effect and not a difference in who chose to play where.
The same figures as a 1080×1080 card, for posting. Click it to copy the image. Full size ↗
Matches counted3,730
Win rate50.1%
Widest gap, 80+ matches-7.0 pts
Survive correction1
Period2026/03/26 – 2026/10/18

Where it was fought

Akira's win rate on each stage, against this matchup everywhere
StageGap from usualWin %ChangepMatches
Full fence57.1%+7.00.003392
Rectangle53.0%+2.90.223396
Octagon52.9%+2.80.269363
Low fence51.2%+1.10.658365
Breakable full fence49.9%-0.20.912415
Single wall49.9%-0.30.913347
Breakable half fence49.7%-0.40.869360
Open48.7%-1.40.576347
Half fence47.6%-2.60.283389
Fence and open43.1%-7.00.057174
p < 0.05 on its ownStill there after correcting for how many were tested· fewer than 80 decided matches: p on its own only, not corrected, coloured or ranked

Matchups with a stage played at least 80 times: 157. With a stage that survives correction: 11. Expected from chance alone: about 7.9.

The same figures as a 1080×1080 card, for posting. Click it to copy the image. Full size ↗

Stage against stage

Akira's win rate on the row's stage, minus the same on the column's

All ten shapes at once: chi-square 14.56 on 9 df, p 0.104

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence57.1%392+7.30.039+9.60.007+7.40.042+5.90.103+7.30.047+14.00.002+8.40.022+4.10.246+4.20.241
Breakable full fence-7.30.03949.9%415+2.30.510+0.20.965-1.40.706+0.00.995+6.80.133+1.20.746-3.10.370-3.00.402
Half fence-9.60.007-2.30.51047.6%389-2.20.554-3.70.313-2.30.534+4.50.327-1.10.756-5.50.125-5.30.144
Breakable half fence-7.40.042-0.20.965+2.20.55449.7%360-1.50.684-0.10.972+6.60.151+1.00.786-3.30.363-3.20.394
Low fence-5.90.103+1.40.706+3.70.313+1.50.68451.2%365+1.40.713+8.10.077+2.50.500-1.80.620-1.70.654
Single wall-7.30.047-0.00.995+2.30.534+0.10.972-1.40.71349.9%347+6.80.146+1.20.761-3.20.388-3.00.418
Fence and open-14.00.002-6.80.133-4.50.327-6.60.151-8.10.077-6.80.14643.1%174-5.60.227-9.90.029-9.80.034
Open-8.40.022-1.20.746+1.10.756-1.00.786-2.50.500-1.20.761+5.60.22748.7%347-4.30.239-4.20.264
Rectangle-4.10.246+3.10.370+5.50.125+3.30.363+1.80.620+3.20.388+9.90.029+4.30.23953.0%396+0.10.970
Octagon-4.20.241+3.00.402+5.30.144+3.20.394+1.70.654+3.00.418+9.80.034+4.20.264-0.10.97052.9%363
Better on the row's stage — deeper at 5 and 10 pointsBetter on the column's stagep < 0.05 on its ownStill there after correcting for how many were tested· fewer than 80 decided matches on one side of the comparison

Matchups with two stages each played at least 80 times: 152. With a stage-against-stage difference that survives correction: 8. Expected from chance alone: about 7.6.

How significance is decided
  • Each gap is two win rates compared with a pooled two-proportion z test, over decided matches only.
  • The 95% interval is Newcombe's hybrid score method, which keeps its shape near 0% and 100% where a symmetric interval does not.
  • q is p corrected for how many tests were asked at once, by Benjamini–Hochberg at a 5% false discovery rate. A figure is called real on q, never on p alone.
  • Standard errors are widened by a measured design effect, because one player appears in many matches and those matches are not independent of each other.
  • Stages are assigned at random, so a gap between them is the stage's own effect and not a difference in who chose to play where.
The same figures as a 1080×1080 card, for posting. Click it to copy the image. Full size ↗
Matches counted453
Win rate51.4%
Widest gap, 80+ matches—
Survive correction—
Period2026/03/26 – 2026/10/18

Where it was fought

Akira's win rate on each stage, against this matchup everywhere
StageGap from usualWin %ChangepMatches
Breakable half fence65.5%+14.10.11729 ·
Breakable full fence55.7%+4.30.47061 ·
Full fence54.8%+3.30.65142 ·
Open54.4%+2.90.67746 ·
Single wall54.4%+2.90.67746 ·
Half fence48.6%-2.80.72337 ·
Low fence48.3%-3.10.60658 ·
Rectangle47.2%-4.20.59836 ·
Fence and open44.0%-7.40.44425 ·
Octagon42.0%-9.40.15750 ·
p < 0.05 on its ownStill there after correcting for how many were tested· fewer than 80 decided matches: p on its own only, not corrected, coloured or ranked

No stage in this matchup has been played 80 times yet, so none is tested or ranked.

Matchups with a stage played at least 80 times: 23. With a stage that survives correction: 1. Expected from chance alone: about 1.2.

The same figures as a 1080×1080 card, for posting. Click it to copy the image. Full size ↗

Stage against stage

Akira's win rate on the row's stage, minus the same on the column's

All ten shapes at once: chi-square 6.19 on 9 df, p 0.721

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence54.8%42-1.00.922+6.10.587-10.80.365+6.50.522+0.40.969+10.80.394+0.40.969+7.50.507+12.80.222
Breakable full fence+1.00.92255.7%61+7.10.495-9.80.378+7.50.415+1.40.886+11.70.322+1.40.886+8.50.417+13.70.150
Half fence-6.10.587-7.10.49548.6%37-16.90.171+0.40.972-5.70.606+4.70.719-5.70.606+1.40.903+6.70.538
Breakable half fence+10.80.365+9.80.378+16.90.17165.5%29+17.20.128+11.20.339+21.50.113+11.20.339+18.30.140+23.50.044
Low fence-6.50.522-7.50.415-0.40.972-17.20.12848.3%58-6.10.538+4.30.720-6.10.538+1.10.921+6.30.514
Single wall-0.40.969-1.40.886+5.70.606-11.20.339+6.10.53854.4%46+10.30.405+0.01.000+7.10.522+12.30.226
Fence and open-10.80.394-11.70.322-4.70.719-21.50.113-4.30.720-10.30.40544.0%25-10.30.405-3.20.804+2.00.869
Open-0.40.969-1.40.886+5.70.606-11.20.339+6.10.538-0.01.000+10.30.40554.4%46+7.10.522+12.30.226
Rectangle-7.50.507-8.50.417-1.40.903-18.30.140-1.10.921-7.10.522+3.20.804-7.10.52247.2%36+5.20.630
Octagon-12.80.222-13.70.150-6.70.538-23.50.044-6.30.514-12.30.226-2.00.869-12.30.226-5.20.63042.0%50
Better on the row's stage — deeper at 5 and 10 pointsBetter on the column's stagep < 0.05 on its ownStill there after correcting for how many were tested· fewer than 80 decided matches on one side of the comparison

Matchups with two stages each played at least 80 times: 20. With a stage-against-stage difference that survives correction: 2. Expected from chance alone: about 1.0.

How significance is decided
  • Each gap is two win rates compared with a pooled two-proportion z test, over decided matches only.
  • The 95% interval is Newcombe's hybrid score method, which keeps its shape near 0% and 100% where a symmetric interval does not.
  • q is p corrected for how many tests were asked at once, by Benjamini–Hochberg at a 5% false discovery rate. A figure is called real on q, never on p alone.
  • Standard errors are widened by a measured design effect, because one player appears in many matches and those matches are not independent of each other.
  • Stages are assigned at random, so a gap between them is the stage's own effect and not a difference in who chose to play where.