VirtuAnalytics

Novel Insights Through Data & Analysis

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

Akira vs Jeffry

Akira vs Jeffry in Virtua Fighter 5 REVO v1.10: Akira wins 47.1% of 11,208 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 counted11,208
Win rate47.1%
Widest gap, 80+ matches-2.6 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 fence49.5%+2.40.0851,174
Breakable half fence49.2%+2.10.1301,158
Open48.5%+1.40.3361,053
Full fence47.5%+0.30.8041,144
Breakable full fence47.1%-0.00.9941,106
Rectangle46.5%-0.60.6871,083
Single wall46.2%-0.90.5041,154
Octagon46.2%-1.00.4961,133
Fence and open45.6%-1.50.491502
Low fence44.5%-2.60.0671,136
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 10.03 on 9 df, p 0.348

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence47.5%1,144+0.40.865-2.00.330-1.80.399+2.90.161+1.30.539+1.90.489-1.10.618+0.90.661+1.30.533
Breakable full fence-0.40.86547.1%1,106-2.40.255-2.10.314+2.60.223+0.90.661+1.50.579-1.40.509+0.60.790+0.90.654
Half fence+2.00.330+2.40.25549.5%1,174+0.30.898+5.00.017+3.30.111+3.90.146+1.00.651+3.00.161+3.30.110
Breakable half fence+1.80.399+2.10.314-0.30.89849.2%1,158+4.70.025+3.00.144+3.60.177+0.70.744+2.70.204+3.10.142
Low fence-2.90.161-2.60.223-5.00.017-4.70.02544.5%1,136-1.60.429-1.10.687-4.00.062-2.00.345-1.60.439
Single wall-1.30.539-0.90.661-3.30.111-3.00.144+1.60.42946.2%1,154+0.60.831-2.30.271-0.30.868+0.00.990
Fence and open-1.90.489-1.50.579-3.90.146-3.60.177+1.10.687-0.60.83145.6%502-2.90.283-0.90.733-0.50.839
Open+1.10.618+1.40.509-1.00.651-0.70.744+4.00.062+2.30.271+2.90.28348.5%1,053+2.00.357+2.40.268
Rectangle-0.90.661-0.60.790-3.00.161-2.70.204+2.00.345+0.30.868+0.90.733-2.00.35746.5%1,083+0.40.859
Octagon-1.30.533-0.90.654-3.30.110-3.10.142+1.60.439-0.00.990+0.50.839-2.40.268-0.40.85946.2%1,133
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 counted5,719
Win rate45.7%
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
Breakable half fence48.9%+3.20.089634
Full fence48.3%+2.60.200557
Open48.2%+2.50.215558
Half fence47.1%+1.40.470605
Octagon44.5%-1.20.572523
Breakable full fence44.4%-1.30.497590
Low fence43.9%-1.80.378544
Fence and open43.9%-1.80.539271
Single wall43.5%-2.30.236603
Rectangle43.3%-2.40.229543
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 10.23 on 9 df, p 0.332

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence48.3%557+3.90.187+1.20.686-0.60.836+4.40.147+4.80.098+4.40.236+0.10.977+5.00.095+3.70.218
Breakable full fence-3.90.18744.4%590-2.70.349-4.50.116+0.50.873+1.00.739+0.50.892-3.80.197+1.10.702-0.10.962
Half fence-1.20.686+2.70.34947.1%605-1.80.529+3.20.281+3.70.202+3.20.380-1.10.707+3.80.193+2.60.390
Breakable half fence+0.60.836+4.50.116+1.80.52948.9%634+5.00.089+5.50.055+5.00.169+0.70.813+5.60.054+4.30.140
Low fence-4.40.147-0.50.873-3.20.281-5.00.08943.9%544+0.50.869+0.00.995-4.30.155+0.70.827-0.60.839
Single wall-4.80.098-1.00.739-3.70.202-5.50.055-0.50.86943.5%603-0.50.899-4.80.104+0.20.953-1.10.710
Fence and open-4.40.236-0.50.892-3.20.380-5.00.169-0.00.995+0.50.89943.9%271-4.30.245+0.60.864-0.60.864
Open-0.10.977+3.80.197+1.10.707-0.70.813+4.30.155+4.80.104+4.30.24548.2%558+4.90.101+3.70.228
Rectangle-5.00.095-1.10.702-3.80.193-5.60.054-0.70.827-0.20.953-0.60.864-4.90.10143.3%543-1.30.676
Octagon-3.70.218+0.10.962-2.60.390-4.30.140+0.60.839+1.10.710+0.60.864-3.70.228+1.30.67644.5%523
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 counted5,171
Win rate48.0%
Widest gap, 80+ matches4.1 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 fence52.1%+4.10.047524
Breakable full fence49.7%+1.70.430489
Breakable half fence49.4%+1.40.506504
Rectangle48.9%+0.90.666505
Open48.3%+0.30.889472
Single wall48.2%+0.20.912535
Fence and open47.3%-0.70.831222
Octagon46.5%-1.50.442568
Full fence46.0%-2.00.329539
Low fence44.8%-3.20.111560
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 8.35 on 9 df, p 0.499

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence46.0%539-3.70.238-6.10.047-3.40.273+1.20.692-2.20.468-1.30.746-2.30.466-2.90.348-0.50.876
Breakable full fence+3.70.23849.7%489-2.40.444+0.30.928+4.90.115+1.50.639+2.40.554+1.40.667+0.80.805+3.20.297
Half fence+6.10.047+2.40.44452.1%524+2.70.388+7.30.017+3.90.207+4.80.230+3.80.232+3.20.306+5.60.063
Breakable half fence+3.40.273-0.30.928-2.70.38849.4%504+4.60.135+1.20.704+2.10.601+1.10.731+0.50.875+2.90.338
Low fence-1.20.692-4.90.115-7.30.017-4.60.13544.8%560-3.40.259-2.50.531-3.50.264-4.10.182-1.70.576
Single wall+2.20.468-1.50.639-3.90.207-1.20.704+3.40.25948.2%535+0.90.816-0.10.980-0.70.825+1.70.562
Fence and open+1.30.746-2.40.554-4.80.230-2.10.601+2.50.531-0.90.81647.3%222-1.00.804-1.60.688+0.80.836
Open+2.30.466-1.40.667-3.80.232-1.10.731+3.50.264+0.10.980+1.00.80448.3%472-0.60.850+1.80.557
Rectangle+2.90.348-0.80.805-3.20.306-0.50.875+4.10.182+0.70.825+1.60.688+0.60.85048.9%505+2.40.426
Octagon+0.50.876-3.20.297-5.60.063-2.90.338+1.70.576-1.70.562-0.80.836-1.80.557-2.40.42646.5%568
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 counted318
Win rate57.9%
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
Single wall81.2%+23.40.05216 ·
Rectangle62.9%+5.00.52635 ·
Octagon61.9%+4.00.56942 ·
Open60.9%+3.00.76223 ·
Breakable full fence59.3%+1.40.87827 ·
Fence and open55.6%-2.30.8879 ·
Breakable half fence55.0%-2.90.78920 ·
Full fence54.2%-3.70.57448 ·
Half fence51.1%-6.80.32245 ·
Low fence50.0%-7.90.34232 ·
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 6.35 on 9 df, p 0.705

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence54.2%48-5.10.670+3.10.768-0.80.950+4.20.715-27.10.054-1.40.939-6.70.594-8.70.429-7.70.458
Breakable full fence+5.10.67059.3%27+8.20.502+4.30.770+9.30.477-22.00.137+3.70.845-1.60.908-3.60.773-2.60.826
Half fence-3.10.768-8.20.50251.1%45-3.90.772+1.10.923-30.10.035-4.50.808-9.80.445-11.80.293-10.80.310
Breakable half fence+0.80.950-4.30.770+3.90.77255.0%20+5.00.726-26.20.097-0.60.978-5.90.697-7.90.567-6.90.604
Low fence-4.20.715-9.30.477-1.10.923-5.00.72650.0%32-31.20.037-5.60.768-10.90.425-12.90.289-11.90.306
Single wall+27.10.054+22.00.137+30.10.035+26.20.097+31.20.03781.2%16+25.70.170+20.40.175+18.40.189+19.40.161
Fence and open+1.40.939-3.70.845+4.50.808+0.60.978+5.60.768-25.70.17055.6%9-5.30.783-7.30.688-6.30.723
Open+6.70.594+1.60.908+9.80.445+5.90.697+10.90.425-20.40.175+5.30.78360.9%23-2.00.879-1.00.935
Rectangle+8.70.429+3.60.773+11.80.293+7.90.567+12.90.289-18.40.189+7.30.688+2.00.87962.9%35+1.00.932
Octagon+7.70.458+2.60.826+10.80.310+6.90.604+11.90.306-19.40.161+6.30.723+1.00.935-1.00.93261.9%42
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.