VirtuAnalytics

Novel Insights Through Data & Analysis

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

Akira vs Shun

Akira vs Shun in Virtua Fighter 5 REVO v1.10: Akira wins 48.3% of 10,440 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 counted10,440
Win rate48.3%
Widest gap, 80+ matches-4.0 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
Rectangle52.0%+3.70.016989
Breakable half fence49.2%+0.90.541987
Low fence49.1%+0.80.5831,104
Breakable full fence49.0%+0.70.6021,109
Fence and open49.0%+0.70.719575
Half fence48.5%+0.20.8921,043
Octagon47.9%-0.40.7741,044
Open47.0%-1.30.3821,000
Full fence47.0%-1.40.3611,018
Single wall44.3%-4.00.0051,071
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 14.85 on 9 df, p 0.095

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence47.0%1,018-2.10.333-1.60.479-2.30.306-2.10.324+2.70.216-2.10.423-0.10.984-5.00.025-0.90.670
Breakable full fence+2.10.33349.0%1,109+0.50.802-0.20.932-0.00.985+4.80.025+0.00.997+2.00.346-2.90.182+1.20.590
Half fence+1.60.479-0.50.80248.5%1,043-0.70.744-0.60.788+4.20.050-0.50.838+1.50.493-3.50.119+0.60.776
Breakable half fence+2.30.306+0.20.932+0.70.74449.2%987+0.10.947+5.00.024+0.20.940+2.20.318-2.70.225+1.40.544
Low fence+2.10.324+0.00.985+0.60.788-0.10.94749.1%1,104+4.80.024+0.10.984+2.10.337-2.90.189+1.20.578
Single wall-2.70.216-4.80.025-4.20.050-5.00.024-4.80.02444.3%1,071-4.80.063-2.70.211-7.7<0.001-3.60.094
Fence and open+2.10.423-0.00.997+0.50.838-0.20.940-0.10.984+4.80.06349.0%575+2.00.434-2.90.264+1.10.657
Open+0.10.984-2.00.346-1.50.493-2.20.318-2.10.337+2.70.211-2.00.43447.0%1,000-5.00.027-0.90.686
Rectangle+5.00.025+2.90.182+3.50.119+2.70.225+2.90.189+7.7<0.001+2.90.264+5.00.02752.0%989+4.10.066
Octagon+0.90.670-1.20.590-0.60.776-1.40.544-1.20.578+3.60.094-1.10.657+0.90.686-4.10.06647.9%1,044
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 counted5,641
Win rate46.1%
Widest gap, 80+ matches-5.6 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
Fence and open48.8%+2.70.315332
Rectangle48.3%+2.20.289532
Breakable full fence47.3%+1.10.554588
Octagon47.1%+1.00.597596
Half fence46.9%+0.80.713544
Breakable half fence46.8%+0.70.727538
Low fence46.8%+0.70.734577
Full fence44.7%-1.40.489539
Open43.0%-3.20.121540
Single wall40.6%-5.60.005567
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 12.45 on 9 df, p 0.189

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence44.7%539-2.60.388-2.20.475-2.10.483-2.10.486+4.20.163-4.10.241+1.80.563-3.60.238-2.40.411
Breakable full fence+2.60.38847.3%588+0.40.892+0.40.883+0.50.868+6.70.022-1.50.658+4.30.146-1.00.731+0.10.964
Half fence+2.20.475-0.40.89246.9%544+0.00.991+0.10.978+6.30.034-1.90.581+3.90.195-1.40.638-0.30.927
Breakable half fence+2.10.483-0.40.883-0.00.99146.8%538+0.10.988+6.30.035-2.00.575+3.90.201-1.50.631-0.30.917
Low fence+2.10.486-0.50.868-0.10.978-0.10.98846.8%577+6.20.034-2.00.561+3.80.198-1.50.614-0.40.903
Single wall-4.20.163-6.70.022-6.30.034-6.30.035-6.20.03440.6%567-8.20.016-2.40.419-7.80.010-6.60.024
Fence and open+4.10.241+1.50.658+1.90.581+2.00.575+2.00.561+8.20.01648.8%332+5.80.093+0.50.889+1.60.630
Open-1.80.563-4.30.146-3.90.195-3.90.201-3.80.198+2.40.419-5.80.09343.0%540-5.30.079-4.20.157
Rectangle+3.60.238+1.00.731+1.40.638+1.50.631+1.50.614+7.80.010-0.50.889+5.30.07948.3%532+1.20.697
Octagon+2.40.411-0.10.964+0.30.927+0.30.917+0.40.903+6.60.024-1.60.630+4.20.157-1.20.69747.1%596
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 counted4,063
Win rate50.3%
Widest gap, 80+ matches6.5 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
Rectangle56.8%+6.50.007382
Breakable half fence51.8%+1.50.549365
Open51.6%+1.30.596380
Low fence50.5%+0.20.940442
Breakable full fence49.9%-0.40.859455
Single wall49.4%-0.90.705431
Half fence49.3%-1.00.668436
Fence and open48.6%-1.70.609208
Full fence48.5%-1.70.456412
Octagon48.0%-2.30.353375
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 8.89 on 9 df, p 0.448

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence48.5%412-1.40.692-0.80.823-3.20.368-1.90.577-0.90.799-0.00.997-3.00.393-8.30.020+0.50.879
Breakable full fence+1.40.69249.9%455+0.60.863-1.90.590-0.60.866+0.50.889+1.30.750-1.70.627-6.90.046+1.90.588
Half fence+0.80.823-0.60.86349.3%436-2.50.486-1.10.735-0.10.975+0.80.858-2.30.518-7.50.032+1.30.709
Breakable half fence+3.20.368+1.90.590+2.50.48651.8%365+1.30.707+2.40.507+3.20.458+0.20.956-5.00.168+3.80.304
Low fence+1.90.577+0.60.866+1.10.735-1.30.70750.5%442+1.00.760+1.90.652-1.10.747-6.40.068+2.50.485
Single wall+0.90.799-0.50.889+0.10.975-2.40.507-1.00.76049.4%431+0.90.838-2.20.539-7.40.035+1.40.687
Fence and open+0.00.997-1.30.750-0.80.858-3.20.458-1.90.652-0.90.83848.6%208-3.00.484-8.20.055+0.60.897
Open+3.00.393+1.70.627+2.30.518-0.20.956+1.10.747+2.20.539+3.00.48451.6%380-5.20.148+3.60.325
Rectangle+8.30.020+6.90.046+7.50.032+5.00.168+6.40.068+7.40.035+8.20.055+5.20.14856.8%382+8.80.015
Octagon-0.50.879-1.90.588-1.30.709-3.80.304-2.50.485-1.40.687-0.60.897-3.60.325-8.80.01548.0%375
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 counted736
Win rate54.2%
Widest gap, 80+ matches3.4 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 full fence59.1%+4.90.40466 ·
Low fence57.6%+3.40.49985
Half fence57.1%+2.90.62563 ·
Full fence55.2%+1.00.86267 ·
Fence and open54.3%+0.10.99335 ·
Breakable half fence53.6%-0.60.90084
Octagon53.4%-0.80.88773 ·
Rectangle53.3%-0.90.87275 ·
Open52.5%-1.70.74580
Single wall42.5%-11.70.03473 ·
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: 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 5.43 on 9 df, p 0.795

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence55.2%67-3.90.652-1.90.826+1.60.840-2.40.765+12.80.131+0.90.928+2.70.741+1.90.821+1.80.831
Breakable full fence+3.90.65259.1%66+1.90.823+5.50.499+1.40.858+16.60.050+4.80.642+6.60.425+5.80.492+5.70.501
Half fence+1.90.826-1.90.82357.1%63+3.60.667-0.50.951+14.70.088+2.90.785+4.60.580+3.80.654+3.70.664
Breakable half fence-1.60.840-5.50.499-3.60.66753.6%84-4.10.594+11.10.165-0.70.943+1.10.891+0.20.976+0.10.985
Low fence+2.40.765-1.40.858+0.50.951+4.10.59457.6%85+15.20.057+3.40.736+5.20.506+4.30.584+4.20.594
Single wall-12.80.131-16.60.050-14.70.088-11.10.165-15.20.05742.5%73-11.80.249-10.00.215-10.90.186-10.90.185
Fence and open-0.90.928-4.80.642-2.90.785+0.70.943-3.40.736+11.80.24954.3%35+1.80.860+1.00.926+0.90.933
Open-2.70.741-6.60.425-4.60.580-1.10.891-5.20.506+10.00.215-1.80.86052.5%80-0.80.917-0.90.909
Rectangle-1.90.821-5.80.492-3.80.654-0.20.976-4.30.584+10.90.186-1.00.926+0.80.91753.3%75-0.10.991
Octagon-1.80.831-5.70.501-3.70.664-0.10.985-4.20.594+10.90.185-0.90.933+0.90.909+0.10.99153.4%73
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.