VirtuAnalytics

Novel Insights Through Data & Analysis

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

Akira vs Jean

Akira vs Jean in Virtua Fighter 5 REVO v1.10: Akira wins 46.2% of 9,292 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 counted9,292
Win rate46.2%
Widest gap, 80+ matches2.5 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
Octagon48.6%+2.50.107948
Half fence47.5%+1.40.378945
Breakable full fence46.8%+0.60.698954
Full fence46.6%+0.40.796889
Single wall46.5%+0.30.848958
Open46.1%-0.00.998910
Breakable half fence45.8%-0.30.829884
Fence and open45.8%-0.40.874452
Low fence45.7%-0.40.779923
Rectangle44.7%-1.50.325976
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 3.97 on 9 df, p 0.913

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence46.6%889-0.20.938-0.90.686+0.80.750+0.80.717+0.10.959+0.80.789+0.40.860+1.90.411-2.10.377
Breakable full fence+0.20.93846.8%954-0.80.739+0.90.688+1.00.655+0.30.896+0.90.738+0.60.796+2.10.359-1.90.412
Half fence+0.90.686+0.80.73947.5%945+1.70.467+1.80.437+1.10.642+1.70.548+1.40.558+2.80.212-1.10.627
Breakable half fence-0.80.750-0.90.688-1.70.46745.8%884+0.10.968-0.60.784+0.00.995-0.30.885+1.10.621-2.80.228
Low fence-0.80.717-1.00.655-1.80.437-0.10.96845.7%923-0.70.751-0.10.979-0.40.852+1.10.646-2.90.208
Single wall-0.10.959-0.30.896-1.10.642+0.60.784+0.70.75146.5%958+0.70.818+0.30.898+1.80.432-2.20.341
Fence and open-0.80.789-0.90.738-1.70.548-0.00.995+0.10.979-0.70.81845.8%452-0.30.901+1.10.691-2.80.321
Open-0.40.860-0.60.796-1.40.558+0.30.885+0.40.852-0.30.898+0.30.90146.1%910+1.50.518-2.50.286
Rectangle-1.90.411-2.10.359-2.80.212-1.10.621-1.10.646-1.80.432-1.10.691-1.50.51844.7%976-4.00.082
Octagon+2.10.377+1.90.412+1.10.627+2.80.228+2.90.208+2.20.341+2.80.321+2.50.286+4.00.08248.6%948
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 counted3,868
Win rate43.9%
Widest gap, 80+ matches3.7 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
Octagon47.6%+3.70.148349
Single wall45.8%+1.90.405408
Full fence45.7%+1.80.448376
Half fence44.9%+0.90.692388
Open43.8%-0.10.975356
Breakable half fence43.8%-0.10.964354
Breakable full fence43.0%-0.90.702423
Fence and open43.0%-0.90.788207
Low fence42.3%-1.60.509369
Rectangle41.4%-2.50.280420
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 4.73 on 9 df, p 0.857

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence45.7%376+2.70.440+0.90.803+1.90.595+3.50.340-0.10.980+2.70.523+1.90.601+4.30.220-1.80.624
Breakable full fence-2.70.44043.0%423-1.80.602-0.80.832+0.80.832-2.80.415+0.00.994-0.80.824+1.60.639-4.50.207
Half fence-0.90.803+1.80.60244.9%388+1.10.772+2.60.476-1.00.780+1.90.665+1.00.779+3.40.327-2.70.460
Breakable half fence-1.90.595+0.80.832-1.10.77243.8%354+1.50.682-2.00.571+0.80.855-0.00.993+2.40.509-3.80.315
Low fence-3.50.340-0.80.832-2.60.476-1.50.68242.3%369-3.50.319-0.70.867-1.50.675+0.80.810-5.30.154
Single wall+0.10.980+2.80.415+1.00.780+2.00.571+3.50.31945.8%408+2.80.504+2.00.577+4.40.201-1.70.634
Fence and open-2.70.523-0.00.994-1.90.665-0.80.855+0.70.867-2.80.50443.0%207-0.80.849+1.60.709-4.60.296
Open-1.90.601+0.80.824-1.00.779+0.00.993+1.50.675-2.00.577+0.80.84943.8%356+2.40.502-3.70.318
Rectangle-4.30.220-1.60.639-3.40.327-2.40.509-0.80.810-4.40.201-1.60.709-2.40.50241.4%420-6.10.088
Octagon+1.80.624+4.50.207+2.70.460+3.80.315+5.30.154+1.70.634+4.60.296+3.70.318+6.10.08847.6%349
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 counted5,185
Win rate47.7%
Widest gap, 80+ matches2.1 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
Half fence49.8%+2.10.299530
Breakable full fence49.8%+2.10.315504
Octagon49.0%+1.30.519570
Fence and open48.3%+0.60.839238
Rectangle48.2%+0.50.803525
Low fence47.7%+0.00.998539
Open47.2%-0.50.829523
Full fence47.0%-0.70.735492
Single wall46.7%-1.00.640533
Breakable half fence46.3%-1.30.526505
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 2.85 on 9 df, p 0.970

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence47.0%492-2.90.368-2.90.361+0.60.846-0.70.815+0.20.940-1.40.729-0.30.930-1.20.693-2.00.516
Breakable full fence+2.90.36849.8%504-0.00.998+3.50.271+2.10.494+3.10.320+1.50.706+2.60.409+1.60.605+0.80.780
Half fence+2.90.361+0.00.99849.8%530+3.50.263+2.10.486+3.10.313+1.50.702+2.60.402+1.60.598+0.90.775
Breakable half fence-0.60.846-3.50.271-3.50.26346.3%505-1.30.664-0.40.902-2.00.613-0.90.775-1.90.551-2.60.392
Low fence+0.70.815-2.10.494-2.10.486+1.30.66447.7%539+1.00.752-0.60.870+0.50.882-0.50.868-1.30.673
Single wall-0.20.940-3.10.320-3.10.313+0.40.902-1.00.75246.7%533-1.60.681-0.50.868-1.50.631-2.20.459
Fence and open+1.40.729-1.50.706-1.50.702+2.00.613+0.60.870+1.60.68148.3%238+1.10.780+0.10.974-0.60.871
Open+0.30.930-2.60.409-2.60.402+0.90.775-0.50.882+0.50.868-1.10.78047.2%523-1.00.755-1.70.570
Rectangle+1.20.693-1.60.605-1.60.598+1.90.551+0.50.868+1.50.631-0.10.974+1.00.75548.2%525-0.80.802
Octagon+2.00.516-0.80.780-0.90.775+2.60.392+1.30.673+2.20.459+0.60.871+1.70.570+0.80.80249.0%570
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 counted239
Win rate49.8%
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 fence64.0%+14.20.13325 ·
Low fence60.0%+10.20.41415 ·
Octagon55.2%+5.40.53629 ·
Open54.8%+5.00.54731 ·
Single wall52.9%+3.10.78817 ·
Full fence52.4%+2.60.80421 ·
Breakable full fence48.1%-1.60.85627 ·
Fence and open42.9%-6.90.7107 ·
Half fence40.7%-9.10.31827 ·
Rectangle29.0%-20.80.01331 ·
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 9.81 on 9 df, p 0.366

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence52.4%21+4.20.771+11.60.422-11.60.425-7.60.650-0.60.973+9.50.663-2.50.862+23.40.089-2.80.845
Breakable full fence-4.20.77148.1%27+7.40.584-15.80.250-11.80.461-4.80.757+5.30.803-6.70.611+19.10.134-7.00.599
Half fence-11.60.422-7.40.58440.7%27-23.30.093-19.30.231-12.20.429-2.10.919-14.10.284+11.70.349-14.40.280
Breakable half fence+11.60.425+15.80.250+23.30.09364.0%25+4.00.800+11.10.474+21.10.314+9.20.488+35.00.009+8.80.510
Low fence+7.60.650+11.80.461+19.30.231-4.00.80060.0%15+7.10.688+17.10.452+5.20.741+31.00.044+4.80.759
Single wall+0.60.973+4.80.757+12.20.429-11.10.474-7.10.68852.9%17+10.10.653-1.90.900+23.90.102-2.20.883
Fence and open-9.50.663-5.30.803+2.10.919-21.10.314-17.10.452-10.10.65342.9%7-12.00.566+13.80.477-12.30.558
Open+2.50.862+6.70.611+14.10.284-9.20.488-5.20.741+1.90.900+12.00.56654.8%31+25.80.039-0.30.979
Rectangle-23.40.089-19.10.134-11.70.349-35.00.009-31.00.044-23.90.102-13.80.477-25.80.03929.0%31-26.10.040
Octagon+2.80.845+7.00.599+14.40.280-8.80.510-4.80.759+2.20.883+12.30.558+0.30.979+26.10.04055.2%29
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.