VirtuAnalytics

Novel Insights Through Data & Analysis

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

Aoi vs El Blaze

The same figures as a 1080×1080 card, for posting. Click it to copy the image. Full size ↗
Matches counted1,132
Win rate48.9%
Widest swing12.8 pts
Survive correction1
Period2026/03/26 – 2026/09/23

Where it was fought

Aoi's win rate on each stage, against this matchup everywhere
StageStage effectWin %ChangepMatches
Half fence61.6%+12.80.003125
Breakable half fence60.5%+11.60.02586
Breakable full fence58.6%+9.70.031111
Single wall47.5%-1.30.780101
Rectangle47.4%-1.40.76897
Octagon47.2%-1.70.716106
Low fence43.6%-5.30.229117
Fence and open43.3%-5.50.38060 ·
Open41.7%-7.10.073139
Full fence40.3%-8.50.044124
p < 0.05 on its ownStill there after correcting for how many were tested
The same figures as a 1080×1080 card, for posting. Click it to copy the image. Full size ↗

Stage against stage

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

All ten shapes at once: chi-square 25.67 on 9 df, p 0.002

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence40.3%124-18.20.005-21.3<0.001-20.10.004-3.30.607-7.20.278-3.00.697-1.40.817-7.10.291-6.80.296
Breakable full fence+18.20.00558.6%111-3.00.634-1.90.787+15.00.024+11.00.108+15.20.057+16.80.008+11.10.108+11.40.093
Half fence+21.3<0.001+3.00.63461.6%125+1.10.868+18.00.005+14.10.034+18.30.019+19.90.001+14.20.035+14.40.028
Breakable half fence+20.10.004+1.90.787-1.10.86860.5%86+16.90.017+12.90.077+17.10.041+18.70.006+13.10.077+13.30.066
Low fence+3.30.607-15.00.024-18.00.005-16.90.01743.6%117-3.90.561+0.30.974+1.90.764-3.80.575-3.60.592
Single wall+7.20.278-11.00.108-14.10.034-12.90.077+3.90.56147.5%101+4.20.606+5.80.372+0.10.989+0.30.959
Fence and open+3.00.697-15.20.057-18.30.019-17.10.041-0.30.974-4.20.60643.3%60+1.60.833-4.10.617-3.80.634
Open+1.40.817-16.80.008-19.90.001-18.70.006-1.90.764-5.80.372-1.60.83341.7%139-5.70.386-5.40.395
Rectangle+7.10.291-11.10.108-14.20.035-13.10.077+3.80.575-0.10.989+4.10.617+5.70.38647.4%97+0.20.971
Octagon+6.80.296-11.40.093-14.40.028-13.30.066+3.60.592-0.30.959+3.80.634+5.40.395-0.20.97147.2%106
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
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 counted993
Win rate47.7%
Widest swing10.8 pts
Survive correction0
Period2026/03/26 – 2026/09/23

Where it was fought

Aoi's win rate on each stage, against this matchup everywhere
StageStage effectWin %ChangepMatches
Half fence58.5%+10.80.019106
Breakable full fence57.9%+10.20.03795
Breakable half fence56.6%+8.80.10876 ·
Octagon48.5%+0.80.868101
Rectangle46.2%-1.50.76193
Fence and open45.8%-1.90.78748 ·
Single wall45.2%-2.50.63284
Low fence42.3%-5.50.25797
Open41.0%-6.70.096134
Full fence39.8%-7.90.09798
p < 0.05 on its ownStill there after correcting for how many were tested
The same figures as a 1080×1080 card, for posting. Click it to copy the image. Full size ↗

Stage against stage

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

All ten shapes at once: chi-square 17.63 on 9 df, p 0.040

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence39.8%98-18.10.012-18.70.008-16.80.028-2.50.726-5.40.459-6.00.487-1.20.848-6.40.369-8.70.216
Breakable full fence+18.10.01257.9%95-0.60.932+1.30.863+15.60.030+12.70.091+12.10.172+16.90.012+11.70.110+9.40.188
Half fence+18.70.008+0.60.93258.5%106+1.90.797+16.20.021+13.20.069+12.70.144+17.40.007+12.20.084+10.00.150
Breakable half fence+16.80.028-1.30.863-1.90.79756.6%76+14.30.062+11.30.152+10.80.243+15.50.030+10.30.181+8.10.288
Low fence+2.50.726-15.60.030-16.20.021-14.30.06242.3%97-3.00.688-3.60.684+1.20.852-4.00.582-6.20.378
Single wall+5.40.459-12.70.091-13.20.069-11.30.152+3.00.68845.2%84-0.60.947+4.20.542-1.00.894-3.30.657
Fence and open+6.00.487-12.10.172-12.70.144-10.80.243+3.60.684+0.60.94745.8%48+4.80.564-0.40.964-2.70.759
Open+1.20.848-16.90.012-17.40.007-15.50.030-1.20.852-4.20.542-4.80.56441.0%134-5.20.437-7.50.254
Rectangle+6.40.369-11.70.110-12.20.084-10.30.181+4.00.582+1.00.894+0.40.964+5.20.43746.2%93-2.30.751
Octagon+8.70.216-9.40.188-10.00.150-8.10.288+6.20.378+3.30.657+2.70.759+7.50.254+2.30.75148.5%101
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
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 counted139
Win rate56.8%
Widest swing-36.8 pts
Survive correction0
Period2026/03/26 – 2026/09/23

Where it was fought

Aoi's win rate on each stage, against this matchup everywhere
StageStage effectWin %ChangepMatches
Breakable half fence90.0%+33.20.02810 ·
Half fence79.0%+22.10.03619 ·
Rectangle75.0%+18.20.4574 ·
Breakable full fence62.5%+5.70.62716 ·
Open60.0%+3.20.8845 ·
Single wall58.8%+2.00.86017 ·
Low fence50.0%-6.80.50520 ·
Full fence42.3%-14.50.09726 ·
Fence and open33.3%-23.50.08612 ·
Octagon20.0%-36.80.0905 ·
p < 0.05 on its ownStill there after correcting for how many were tested
The same figures as a 1080×1080 card, for posting. Click it to copy the image. Full size ↗

Stage against stage

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

All ten shapes at once: chi-square 17.14 on 9 df, p 0.047

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence42.3%26-20.20.204-36.60.014-47.70.010-7.70.604-16.50.289+9.00.599-17.70.467-32.70.222+22.30.348
Breakable full fence+20.20.20462.5%16-16.40.283-27.50.124+12.50.453+3.70.829+29.20.127+2.50.920-12.50.639+42.50.097
Half fence+36.60.014+16.40.28379.0%19-11.10.454+28.90.060+20.10.191+45.60.011+18.90.384+4.00.862+59.00.013
Breakable half fence+47.70.010+27.50.124+11.10.45490.0%10+40.00.032+31.20.087+56.70.007+30.00.171+15.00.469+70.00.007
Low fence+7.70.604-12.50.453-28.90.060-40.00.03250.0%20-8.80.591+16.70.358-10.00.689-25.00.360+30.00.227
Single wall+16.50.289-3.70.829-20.10.191-31.20.087+8.80.59158.8%17+25.50.176-1.20.962-16.20.549+38.80.127
Fence and open-9.00.599-29.20.127-45.60.011-56.70.007-16.70.358-25.50.17633.3%12-26.70.309-41.70.146+13.30.582
Open+17.70.467-2.50.920-18.90.384-30.00.171+10.00.689+1.20.962+26.70.30960.0%5-15.00.635+40.00.197
Rectangle+32.70.222+12.50.639-4.00.862-15.00.469+25.00.360+16.20.549+41.70.146+15.00.63575.0%4+55.00.099
Octagon-22.30.348-42.50.097-59.00.013-70.00.007-30.00.227-38.80.127-13.30.582-40.00.197-55.00.09920.0%5
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
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.