VirtuAnalytics

Novel Insights Through Data & Analysis

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

Kage vs Lei Fei

Kage vs Lei Fei in Virtua Fighter 5 REVO v1.10: Kage wins 51.5% of 3,254 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 counted3,254
Win rate51.5%
Widest gap, 80+ matches7.5 pts
Survive correction0
Period2026/03/26 – 2026/10/18

Where it was fought

Kage's win rate on each stage, against this matchup everywhere
StageGap from usualWin %ChangepMatches
Half fence59.0%+7.50.010273
Breakable full fence56.3%+4.80.090286
Full fence52.6%+1.10.680329
Octagon51.8%+0.30.917338
Low fence51.8%+0.20.920340
Fence and open50.0%-1.50.676182
Breakable half fence49.6%-1.90.443351
Single wall49.5%-2.00.460313
Open47.7%-3.80.133346
Rectangle47.0%-4.50.092321
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

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

All ten shapes at once: chi-square 14.64 on 9 df, p 0.101

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence52.6%329-3.70.357-6.40.116+3.00.433+0.80.832+3.10.438+2.60.576+4.90.204+5.50.158+0.80.834
Breakable full fence+3.70.35756.3%286-2.70.521+6.70.091+4.50.258+6.80.097+6.30.183+8.60.031+9.20.023+4.50.259
Half fence+6.40.116+2.70.52159.0%273+9.40.019+7.20.075+9.40.022+9.00.059+11.30.005+11.90.004+7.20.075
Breakable half fence-3.00.433-6.70.091-9.40.01949.6%351-2.20.564+0.10.989-0.40.925+1.90.619+2.50.512-2.20.563
Low fence-0.80.832-4.50.258-7.20.075+2.20.56451.8%340+2.20.567+1.80.701+4.10.286+4.70.225-0.00.998
Single wall-3.10.438-6.80.097-9.40.022-0.10.989-2.20.56749.5%313-0.50.918+1.80.638+2.50.532-2.30.565
Fence and open-2.60.576-6.30.183-9.00.059+0.40.925-1.80.701+0.50.91850.0%182+2.30.613+3.00.523-1.80.699
Open-4.90.204-8.60.031-11.30.005-1.90.619-4.10.286-1.80.638-2.30.61347.7%346+0.70.867-4.10.285
Rectangle-5.50.158-9.20.023-11.90.004-2.50.512-4.70.225-2.50.532-3.00.523-0.70.86747.0%321-4.70.224
Octagon-0.80.834-4.50.259-7.20.075+2.20.563+0.00.998+2.30.565+1.80.699+4.10.285+4.70.22451.8%338
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 counted851
Win rate51.0%
Widest gap, 80+ matches-6.1 pts
Survive correction0
Period2026/03/26 – 2026/10/18

Where it was fought

Kage's win rate on each stage, against this matchup everywhere
StageGap from usualWin %ChangepMatches
Half fence66.7%+15.70.03145 ·
Full fence54.0%+3.00.58274 ·
Breakable half fence52.4%+1.40.78482
Octagon52.3%+1.30.80188
Low fence49.5%-1.50.749101
Single wall49.4%-1.60.76081
Rectangle48.4%-2.60.59495
Open46.4%-4.60.33597
Fence and open46.1%-4.80.47152 ·
Breakable full fence44.9%-6.10.22789
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

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

All ten shapes at once: chi-square 7.68 on 9 df, p 0.566

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence54.0%74+9.10.247-12.60.175+1.60.840+4.50.552+4.70.561+7.90.383+7.70.321+5.60.467+1.80.821
Breakable full fence-9.10.24744.9%89-21.70.017-7.50.327-4.60.530-4.40.563-1.20.889-1.40.843-3.50.637-7.30.329
Half fence+12.60.175+21.70.01766.7%45+14.20.121+17.20.054+17.30.061+20.50.043+20.30.024+18.20.043+14.40.112
Breakable half fence-1.60.840+7.50.327-14.20.12152.4%82+2.90.693+3.10.696+6.30.478+6.00.420+4.00.594+0.20.983
Low fence-4.50.552+4.60.530-17.20.054-2.90.69349.5%101+0.10.987+3.40.694+3.10.661+1.10.879-2.80.704
Single wall-4.70.561+4.40.563-17.30.061-3.10.696-0.10.98749.4%81+3.20.716+3.00.691+1.00.899-2.90.707
Fence and open-7.90.383+1.20.889-20.50.043-6.30.478-3.40.694-3.20.71646.1%52-0.20.978-2.30.792-6.10.484
Open-7.70.321+1.40.843-20.30.024-6.00.420-3.10.661-3.00.691+0.20.97846.4%97-2.00.778-5.90.424
Rectangle-5.60.467+3.50.637-18.20.043-4.00.594-1.10.879-1.00.899+2.30.792+2.00.77848.4%95-3.90.603
Octagon-1.80.821+7.30.329-14.40.112-0.20.983+2.80.704+2.90.707+6.10.484+5.90.424+3.90.60352.3%88
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 counted1,892
Win rate52.8%
Widest gap, 80+ matches10.7 pts
Survive correction0
Period2026/03/26 – 2026/10/18

Where it was fought

Kage's win rate on each stage, against this matchup everywhere
StageGap from usualWin %ChangepMatches
Breakable full fence63.5%+10.70.005156
Half fence57.9%+5.20.165164
Full fence54.5%+1.80.588211
Single wall53.8%+1.10.772171
Low fence53.1%+0.30.919194
Octagon52.5%-0.20.947198
Open49.2%-3.60.309183
Breakable half fence49.1%-3.70.248220
Fence and open49.0%-3.80.44596
Rectangle48.1%-4.60.183185
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

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

All ten shapes at once: chi-square 13.53 on 9 df, p 0.140

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence54.5%211-9.00.085-3.40.508+5.40.261+1.40.776+0.70.891+5.50.367+5.30.292+6.40.204+2.00.689
Breakable full fence+9.00.08563.5%156+5.50.311+14.40.006+10.40.051+9.70.077+14.50.024+14.30.008+15.30.005+10.90.039
Half fence+3.40.508-5.50.31157.9%164+8.80.086+4.80.359+4.10.447+9.00.161+8.80.103+9.80.067+5.40.304
Breakable half fence-5.40.261-14.40.006-8.80.08649.1%220-4.00.416-4.70.355+0.10.983-0.10.986+1.00.844-3.40.483
Low fence-1.40.776-10.40.051-4.80.359+4.00.41653.1%194-0.70.892+4.10.507+3.90.448+5.00.332+0.60.910
Single wall-0.70.891-9.70.077-4.10.447+4.70.355+0.70.89253.8%171+4.80.447+4.60.385+5.70.283+1.30.807
Fence and open-5.50.367-14.50.024-9.00.161-0.10.983-4.10.507-4.80.44749.0%96-0.20.972+0.80.892-3.60.566
Open-5.30.292-14.30.008-8.80.103+0.10.986-3.90.448-4.60.385+0.20.97249.2%183+1.10.837-3.40.514
Rectangle-6.40.204-15.30.005-9.80.067-1.00.844-5.00.332-5.70.283-0.80.892-1.10.83748.1%185-4.40.388
Octagon-2.00.689-10.90.039-5.40.304+3.40.483-0.60.910-1.30.807+3.60.566+3.40.514+4.40.38852.5%198
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 counted511
Win rate47.8%
Widest gap, 80+ matches—
Survive correction—
Period2026/03/26 – 2026/10/18

Where it was fought

Kage's win rate on each stage, against this matchup everywhere
StageGap from usualWin %ChangepMatches
Fence and open58.8%+11.10.18134 ·
Half fence56.2%+8.50.14564 ·
Breakable full fence53.7%+5.90.43041 ·
Low fence51.1%+3.40.63645 ·
Octagon48.1%+0.30.96052 ·
Breakable half fence46.9%-0.80.90549 ·
Open45.5%-2.30.68966 ·
Full fence40.9%-6.80.34244 ·
Rectangle39.0%-8.70.24441 ·
Single wall37.7%-10.10.09461 ·
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

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

All ten shapes at once: chi-square 8.99 on 9 df, p 0.438

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence40.9%44-12.80.239-15.30.117-6.00.559-10.20.334+3.20.740-17.90.117-4.50.638+1.90.859-7.20.482
Breakable full fence+12.80.23953.7%41-2.60.794+6.70.525+2.50.813+16.00.112-5.20.654+8.20.409+14.60.184+5.60.593
Half fence+15.30.117+2.60.79456.2%64+9.30.326+5.10.596+18.60.038-2.60.806+10.80.218+17.20.085+8.20.381
Breakable half fence+6.00.559-6.70.525-9.30.32646.9%49-4.20.686+9.20.329-11.90.287+1.50.875+7.90.450-1.10.909
Low fence+10.20.334-2.50.813-5.10.596+4.20.68651.1%45+13.40.169-7.70.496+5.70.558+12.10.261+3.00.766
Single wall-3.20.740-16.00.112-18.60.038-9.20.329-13.40.16937.7%61-21.10.047-7.80.376-1.30.893-10.40.266
Fence and open+17.90.117+5.20.654+2.60.806+11.90.287+7.70.496+21.10.04758.8%34+13.40.205+19.80.088+10.70.329
Open+4.50.638-8.20.409-10.80.218-1.50.875-5.70.558+7.80.376-13.40.20545.5%66+6.40.514-2.60.777
Rectangle-1.90.859-14.60.184-17.20.085-7.90.450-12.10.261+1.30.893-19.80.088-6.40.51439.0%41-9.10.383
Octagon+7.20.482-5.60.593-8.20.381+1.10.909-3.00.766+10.40.266-10.70.329+2.60.777+9.10.38348.1%52
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.