VirtuAnalytics

Novel Insights Through Data & Analysis

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

Aoi vs Taka

The same figures as a 1080×1080 card, for posting. Click it to copy the image. Full size ↗
Matches counted484
Win rate41.3%
Widest swing14.8 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 full fence56.1%+14.80.04541 ·
Breakable half fence50.0%+8.70.16156 ·
Fence and open50.0%+8.70.42120 ·
Single wall45.5%+4.10.50955 ·
Half fence41.2%-0.10.98634 ·
Rectangle38.1%-3.20.57763 ·
Low fence37.2%-4.10.53351 ·
Octagon37.1%-4.20.60235 ·
Open37.1%-4.20.46962 ·
Full fence29.2%-12.20.07248 ·
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 10.67 on 9 df, p 0.299

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence29.2%48-26.90.010-12.00.259-20.80.031-8.10.394-16.30.089-20.80.101-7.90.383-8.90.326-8.00.444
Breakable full fence+26.90.01056.1%41+14.90.198+6.10.552+18.90.071+10.70.302+6.10.654+19.00.058+18.00.071+19.00.099
Half fence+12.00.259-14.90.19841.2%34-8.80.416+3.90.716-4.30.693-8.80.529+4.10.694+3.10.767+4.00.731
Breakable half fence+20.80.031-6.10.552+8.80.41650.0%56+12.80.185+4.50.632+0.01.000+12.90.158+11.90.191+12.90.230
Low fence+8.10.394-18.90.071-3.90.716-12.80.18537.2%51-8.20.392-12.80.326+0.10.986-0.80.927+0.10.992
Single wall+16.30.089-10.70.302+4.30.693-4.50.632+8.20.39245.5%55-4.50.727+8.30.359+7.30.418+8.30.436
Fence and open+20.80.101-6.10.654+8.80.529-0.01.000+12.80.326+4.50.72750.0%20+12.90.306+11.90.346+12.90.352
Open+7.90.383-19.00.058-4.10.694-12.90.158-0.10.986-8.30.359-12.90.30637.1%62-1.00.908-0.00.996
Rectangle+8.90.326-18.00.071-3.10.767-11.90.191+0.80.927-7.30.418-11.90.346+1.00.90838.1%63+1.00.926
Octagon+8.00.444-19.00.099-4.00.731-12.90.230-0.10.992-8.30.436-12.90.352+0.00.996-1.00.92637.1%35
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 counted418
Win rate40.0%
Widest swing13.0 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 full fence52.9%+13.00.10734 ·
Fence and open47.4%+7.40.49919 ·
Breakable half fence47.1%+7.10.26951 ·
Single wall43.8%+3.80.56848 ·
Half fence42.9%+2.90.74528 ·
Rectangle38.6%-1.40.82257 ·
Low fence38.1%-1.90.79642 ·
Octagon35.5%-4.50.59831 ·
Full fence31.8%-8.10.24444 ·
Open28.9%-11.10.10945 ·
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 8.14 on 9 df, p 0.520

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence31.8%44-21.10.060-11.00.342-15.20.131-6.30.542-11.90.239-15.60.239+2.90.764-6.80.481-3.70.740
Breakable full fence+21.10.06052.9%34+10.10.429+5.90.595+14.80.196+9.20.412+5.60.697+24.10.030+14.30.182+17.50.157
Half fence+11.00.342-10.10.42942.9%28-4.20.720+4.80.690-0.90.940-4.50.760+14.00.221+4.30.706+7.40.562
Breakable half fence+15.20.131-5.90.595+4.20.72047.1%51+9.00.385+3.30.741-0.30.982+18.20.068+8.50.375+11.60.304
Low fence+6.30.542-14.80.196-4.80.690-9.00.38538.1%42-5.70.586-9.30.495+9.20.363-0.50.960+2.60.819
Single wall+11.90.239-9.20.412+0.90.940-3.30.741+5.70.58643.8%48-3.60.788+14.90.137+5.20.593+8.30.465
Fence and open+15.60.239-5.60.697+4.50.760+0.30.982+9.30.495+3.60.78847.4%19+18.50.155+8.80.500+11.90.405
Open-2.90.764-24.10.030-14.00.221-18.20.068-9.20.363-14.90.137-18.50.15528.9%45-9.70.305-6.60.543
Rectangle+6.80.481-14.30.182-4.30.706-8.50.375+0.50.960-5.20.593-8.80.500+9.70.30538.6%57+3.10.773
Octagon+3.70.740-17.50.157-7.40.562-11.60.304-2.60.819-8.30.465-11.90.405+6.60.543-3.10.77335.5%31
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 counted66
Win rate50.0%
Widest swing50.0 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
Fence and open100.0%+50.00.3141 ·
Breakable half fence80.0%+30.00.1635 ·
Breakable full fence71.4%+21.40.2307 ·
Open58.8%+8.80.39817 ·
Single wall57.1%+7.10.6897 ·
Octagon50.0%+0.01.0004 ·
Half fence33.3%-16.70.3926 ·
Low fence33.3%-16.70.2829 ·
Rectangle33.3%-16.70.3926 ·
Full fence0.0%-50.00.0394 ·
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 11.09 on 9 df, p 0.270

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence0.0%4-71.40.022-33.30.197-80.00.016-33.30.188-57.10.058-100.00.025-58.80.034-33.30.197-50.00.102
Breakable full fence+71.40.02271.4%7+38.10.170-8.60.735+38.10.131+14.30.577-28.60.537+12.60.562+38.10.170+21.40.477
Half fence+33.30.197-38.10.17033.3%6-46.70.122+0.01.000-23.80.391-66.70.212-25.50.283+0.01.000-16.70.598
Breakable half fence+80.00.016+8.60.735+46.70.12280.0%5+46.70.094+22.90.408-20.00.624+21.20.387+46.70.122+30.00.343
Low fence+33.30.188-38.10.131-0.01.000-46.70.09433.3%9-23.80.341-66.70.197-25.50.216+0.01.000-16.70.569
Single wall+57.10.058-14.30.577+23.80.391-22.90.408+23.80.34157.1%7-42.90.408-1.70.939+23.80.391+7.10.819
Fence and open+100.00.025+28.60.537+66.70.212+20.00.624+66.70.197+42.90.408100.0%1+41.20.412+66.70.212+50.00.361
Open+58.80.034-12.60.562+25.50.283-21.20.387+25.50.216+1.70.939-41.20.41258.8%17+25.50.283+8.80.748
Rectangle+33.30.197-38.10.170-0.01.000-46.70.122-0.01.000-23.80.391-66.70.212-25.50.28333.3%6-16.70.598
Octagon+50.00.102-21.40.477+16.70.598-30.00.343+16.70.569-7.10.819-50.00.361-8.80.748+16.70.59850.0%4
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.