VirtuAnalytics

Novel Insights Through Data & Analysis

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

Akira vs Wolf

Akira vs Wolf in Virtua Fighter 5 REVO v1.10: Akira wins 47.7% of 13,828 decided matches (Low, mid and high combined, 2026/03/26 – 2026/10/18). Stage by stage, 1 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 counted13,828
Win rate47.7%
Widest gap, 80+ matches-4.2 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 fence50.9%+3.20.0131,360
Octagon49.3%+1.60.2001,395
Breakable full fence49.0%+1.30.3161,426
Breakable half fence48.4%+0.70.5571,431
Half fence48.4%+0.70.5641,421
Fence and open48.2%+0.50.763736
Rectangle46.8%-0.90.4631,371
Open46.4%-1.30.3331,280
Single wall46.0%-1.70.1801,334
Low fence43.5%-4.2<0.0011,419
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 21.66 on 9 df, p 0.010

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence50.9%1,360+1.90.307+2.50.194+2.50.195+7.4<0.001+4.90.010+2.60.247+4.50.021+4.10.031+1.60.412
Breakable full fence-1.90.30749.0%1,426+0.50.777+0.50.781+5.50.003+3.00.115+0.70.753+2.50.186+2.20.246-0.40.844
Half fence-2.50.194-0.50.77748.4%1,421-0.00.995+4.90.008+2.50.195+0.20.936+2.00.296+1.70.379-0.90.632
Breakable half fence-2.50.195-0.50.781+0.00.99548.4%1,431+5.00.008+2.50.193+0.20.932+2.00.293+1.70.375-0.90.636
Low fence-7.4<0.001-5.50.003-4.90.008-5.00.00843.5%1,419-2.50.193-4.80.036-2.90.127-3.30.082-5.80.002
Single wall-4.90.010-3.00.115-2.50.195-2.50.193+2.50.19346.0%1,334-2.30.319-0.50.816-0.80.676-3.40.078
Fence and open-2.60.247-0.70.753-0.20.936-0.20.932+4.80.036+2.30.31948.2%736+1.80.429+1.50.517-1.10.634
Open-4.50.021-2.50.186-2.00.296-2.00.293+2.90.127+0.50.816-1.80.42946.4%1,280-0.30.858-2.90.132
Rectangle-4.10.031-2.20.246-1.70.379-1.70.375+3.30.082+0.80.676-1.50.517+0.30.85846.8%1,371-2.60.177
Octagon-1.60.412+0.40.844+0.90.632+0.90.636+5.80.002+3.40.078+1.10.634+2.90.132+2.60.17749.3%1,395
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 counted8,083
Win rate46.0%
Widest gap, 80+ matches-4.5 pts
Survive correction2
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 fence50.4%+4.30.010796
Fence and open48.1%+2.00.383439
Octagon48.0%+2.00.246781
Breakable half fence48.0%+1.90.233844
Breakable full fence46.7%+0.70.673828
Rectangle46.7%+0.60.703786
Half fence46.2%+0.10.930840
Open43.9%-2.10.226742
Single wall42.1%-3.90.022769
Low fence41.6%-4.50.006851
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 22.36 on 9 df, p 0.008

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence50.4%796+3.60.143+4.20.090+2.40.333+8.8<0.001+8.20.001+2.30.436+6.40.011+3.70.143+2.40.348
Breakable full fence-3.60.14346.7%828+0.60.822-1.20.610+5.10.034+4.60.064-1.30.653+2.80.265+0.10.985-1.30.608
Half fence-4.20.090-0.60.82246.2%840-1.80.461+4.60.057+4.10.102-1.90.524+2.20.368-0.50.839-1.80.462
Breakable half fence-2.40.333+1.20.610+1.80.46148.0%844+6.40.008+5.90.018-0.10.979+4.00.106+1.30.601-0.00.990
Low fence-8.8<0.001-5.10.034-4.60.057-6.40.00841.6%851-0.50.828-6.50.027-2.30.347-5.10.038-6.40.009
Single wall-8.20.001-4.60.064-4.10.102-5.90.018+0.50.82842.1%769-5.90.046-1.80.479-4.60.070-5.90.020
Fence and open-2.30.436+1.30.653+1.90.524+0.10.979+6.50.027+5.90.04648.1%439+4.10.169+1.40.645+0.00.987
Open-6.40.011-2.80.265-2.20.368-4.00.106+2.30.347+1.80.479-4.10.16943.9%742-2.80.279-4.10.110
Rectangle-3.70.143-0.10.985+0.50.839-1.30.601+5.10.038+4.60.070-1.40.645+2.80.27946.7%786-1.30.600
Octagon-2.40.348+1.30.608+1.80.462+0.00.990+6.40.009+5.90.020-0.00.987+4.10.110+1.30.60048.0%781
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 counted5,325
Win rate49.5%
Widest gap, 80+ matches-3.5 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
Breakable full fence51.6%+2.10.290548
Half fence51.6%+2.10.309535
Full fence51.0%+1.60.456523
Single wall51.0%+1.60.456525
Octagon50.5%+1.00.605580
Open49.2%-0.30.891508
Breakable half fence48.2%-1.30.528527
Fence and open46.5%-3.00.312273
Rectangle46.4%-3.10.126539
Low fence46.0%-3.50.093532
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 9.12 on 9 df, p 0.426

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence51.0%523-0.60.847-0.50.861+2.90.355+5.00.104+0.00.999+4.50.225+1.80.555+4.70.128+0.50.859
Breakable full fence+0.60.84751.6%548+0.10.986+3.40.259+5.60.066+0.60.846+5.10.167+2.40.430+5.30.083+1.10.706
Half fence+0.50.861-0.10.98651.6%535+3.40.269+5.50.070+0.50.860+5.10.173+2.40.443+5.20.088+1.10.721
Breakable half fence-2.90.355-3.40.259-3.40.26948.2%527+2.10.484-2.90.355+1.70.652-1.00.744+1.80.553-2.30.441
Low fence-5.00.104-5.60.066-5.50.070-2.10.48446.0%532-5.00.104-0.50.900-3.20.308-0.30.914-4.50.137
Single wall-0.00.999-0.60.846-0.50.860+2.90.355+5.00.10451.0%525+4.50.225+1.80.555+4.70.128+0.50.860
Fence and open-4.50.225-5.10.167-5.10.173-1.70.652+0.50.900-4.50.22546.5%273-2.70.473+0.10.970-4.00.276
Open-1.80.555-2.40.430-2.40.443+1.00.744+3.20.308-1.80.555+2.70.47349.2%508+2.80.359-1.30.668
Rectangle-4.70.128-5.30.083-5.20.088-1.80.553+0.30.914-4.70.128-0.10.970-2.80.35946.4%539-4.10.167
Octagon-0.50.859-1.10.706-1.10.721+2.30.441+4.50.137-0.50.860+4.00.276+1.30.668+4.10.16750.5%580
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 counted420
Win rate56.4%
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
Fence and open70.8%+14.40.14324 ·
Open60.0%+3.60.68230 ·
Octagon58.8%+2.40.76934 ·
Full fence58.5%+2.10.77441 ·
Breakable half fence56.7%+0.20.96860 ·
Breakable full fence56.0%-0.40.94850 ·
Single wall52.5%-3.90.59840 ·
Half fence52.2%-4.30.53746 ·
Rectangle52.2%-4.30.53746 ·
Low fence50.0%-6.40.41636 ·
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 3.84 on 9 df, p 0.922

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence58.5%41+2.50.808+6.40.551+1.90.852+8.50.453+6.00.585-12.30.321-1.50.901+6.40.551-0.30.980
Breakable full fence-2.50.80856.0%50+3.80.707-0.70.944+6.00.582+3.50.740-14.80.221-4.00.726+3.80.707-2.80.797
Half fence-6.40.551-3.80.70752.2%46-4.50.645+2.20.845-0.30.976-18.70.132-7.80.502+0.01.000-6.70.555
Breakable half fence-1.90.852+0.70.944+4.50.64556.7%60+6.70.526+4.20.682-14.20.230-3.30.763+4.50.645-2.10.839
Low fence-8.50.453-6.00.582-2.20.845-6.70.52650.0%36-2.50.828-20.80.109-10.00.417-2.20.845-8.80.459
Single wall-6.00.585-3.50.740+0.30.976-4.20.682+2.50.82852.5%40-18.30.148-7.50.532+0.30.976-6.30.585
Fence and open+12.30.321+14.80.221+18.70.132+14.20.230+20.80.109+18.30.14870.8%24+10.80.407+18.70.132+12.00.349
Open+1.50.901+4.00.726+7.80.502+3.30.763+10.00.417+7.50.532-10.80.40760.0%30+7.80.502+1.20.924
Rectangle-6.40.551-3.80.707-0.01.000-4.50.645+2.20.845-0.30.976-18.70.132-7.80.50252.2%46-6.70.555
Octagon+0.30.980+2.80.797+6.70.555+2.10.839+8.80.459+6.30.585-12.00.349-1.20.924+6.70.55558.8%34
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.