VirtuAnalytics

Novel Insights Through Data & Analysis

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

Kage vs Lion

Kage vs Lion in Virtua Fighter 5 REVO v1.10: Kage wins 49.9% of 5,051 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 counted5,051
Win rate49.9%
Widest gap, 80+ matches-4.2 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 fence52.5%+2.50.230509
Octagon52.1%+2.10.349432
Rectangle51.8%+1.90.389461
Fence and open51.4%+1.40.638257
Half fence51.3%+1.30.524517
Breakable half fence51.1%+1.20.558528
Open49.0%-1.00.656484
Full fence48.2%-1.70.402531
Low fence46.3%-3.60.075544
Single wall45.8%-4.20.043533
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 10.92 on 9 df, p 0.281

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence48.2%531-4.20.171-3.00.324-2.90.341+1.90.535+2.40.427-3.10.407-0.80.810-3.60.254-3.90.232
Breakable full fence+4.20.17152.5%509+1.20.701+1.30.671+6.10.047+6.70.031+1.10.775+3.50.272+0.60.849+0.40.909
Half fence+3.00.324-1.20.70151.3%517+0.10.969+4.90.108+5.50.076-0.10.978+2.30.469-0.60.855-0.80.800
Breakable half fence+2.90.341-1.30.671-0.10.96951.1%528+4.80.115+5.40.081-0.20.953+2.20.491-0.70.824-0.90.770
Low fence-1.90.535-6.10.047-4.90.108-4.80.11546.3%544+0.50.858-5.00.183-2.60.397-5.50.081-5.80.074
Single wall-2.40.427-6.70.031-5.50.076-5.40.081-0.50.85845.8%533-5.60.141-3.20.309-6.10.056-6.30.051
Fence and open+3.10.407-1.10.775+0.10.978+0.20.953+5.00.183+5.60.14151.4%257+2.40.535-0.50.901-0.70.855
Open+0.80.810-3.50.272-2.30.469-2.20.491+2.60.397+3.20.309-2.40.53549.0%484-2.90.377-3.10.346
Rectangle+3.60.254-0.60.849+0.60.855+0.70.824+5.50.081+6.10.056+0.50.901+2.90.37751.8%461-0.20.943
Octagon+3.90.232-0.40.909+0.80.800+0.90.770+5.80.074+6.30.051+0.70.855+3.10.346+0.20.94352.1%432
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 counted1,521
Win rate50.4%
Widest gap, 80+ matches-7.6 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
Open55.4%+5.00.187157
Half fence52.5%+2.10.576158
Breakable half fence51.5%+1.10.796134
Fence and open51.2%+0.80.88684
Breakable full fence50.9%+0.50.894163
Full fence50.3%-0.10.967177
Rectangle50.0%-0.40.926110
Octagon49.6%-0.80.847127
Single wall47.8%-2.60.449180
Low fence42.9%-7.60.053147
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 5.82 on 9 df, p 0.758

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence50.3%177-0.60.906-2.20.681-1.20.833+7.40.182+2.50.636-0.90.891-5.10.349+0.30.963+0.70.907
Breakable full fence+0.60.90650.9%163-1.60.773-0.60.922+8.10.156+3.10.561-0.30.968-4.50.421+0.90.881+1.30.824
Half fence+2.20.681+1.60.77352.5%158+1.00.859+9.70.091+4.80.383+1.30.842-2.90.608+2.50.683+2.90.623
Breakable half fence+1.20.833+0.60.922-1.00.85951.5%134+8.60.147+3.70.515+0.30.965-3.90.504+1.50.817+1.90.761
Low fence-7.40.182-8.10.156-9.70.091-8.60.14742.9%147-4.90.374-8.30.221-12.60.029-7.10.256-6.80.264
Single wall-2.50.636-3.10.561-4.80.383-3.70.515+4.90.37447.8%180-3.40.605-7.60.162-2.20.713-1.80.752
Fence and open+0.90.891+0.30.968-1.30.842-0.30.965+8.30.221+3.40.60551.2%84-4.20.531+1.20.869+1.60.822
Open+5.10.349+4.50.421+2.90.608+3.90.504+12.60.029+7.60.162+4.20.53155.4%157+5.40.383+5.80.330
Rectangle-0.30.963-0.90.881-2.50.683-1.50.817+7.10.256+2.20.713-1.20.869-5.40.38350.0%110+0.40.952
Octagon-0.70.907-1.30.824-2.90.623-1.90.761+6.80.264+1.80.752-1.60.822-5.80.330-0.40.95249.6%127
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 counted2,771
Win rate50.8%
Widest gap, 80+ matches-5.8 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 fence54.9%+4.10.149275
Fence and open53.7%+2.90.488136
Breakable half fence52.7%+1.90.468315
Rectangle52.6%+1.80.530270
Half fence52.2%+1.50.614268
Octagon52.1%+1.30.649259
Full fence48.9%-1.90.514276
Low fence48.4%-2.40.373316
Open46.3%-4.50.133259
Single wall44.9%-5.80.041276
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 10.42 on 9 df, p 0.318

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence48.9%276-6.00.159-3.30.438-3.80.358+0.50.904+4.00.348-4.80.363+2.60.550-3.70.390-3.20.458
Breakable full fence+6.00.15954.9%275+2.70.533+2.20.591+6.50.115+10.00.019+1.20.813+8.60.048+2.30.588+2.80.519
Half fence+3.30.438-2.70.53352.2%268-0.50.912+3.80.357+7.30.088-1.40.784+5.90.175-0.30.935+0.10.979
Breakable half fence+3.80.358-2.20.591+0.50.91252.7%315+4.30.282+7.80.059-1.00.849+6.40.129+0.10.980+0.60.891
Low fence-0.50.904-6.50.115-3.80.357-4.30.28248.4%316+3.50.396-5.30.305+2.10.618-4.20.314-3.70.377
Single wall-4.00.348-10.00.019-7.30.088-7.80.059-3.50.39644.9%276-8.80.095-1.40.744-7.70.073-7.20.096
Fence and open+4.80.363-1.20.813+1.40.784+1.00.849+5.30.305+8.80.09553.7%136+7.30.165+1.10.836+1.60.769
Open-2.60.550-8.60.048-5.90.175-6.40.129-2.10.618+1.40.744-7.30.16546.3%259-6.30.150-5.80.187
Rectangle+3.70.390-2.30.588+0.30.935-0.10.980+4.20.314+7.70.073-1.10.836+6.30.15052.6%270+0.50.914
Octagon+3.20.458-2.80.519-0.10.979-0.60.891+3.70.377+7.20.096-1.60.769+5.80.187-0.50.91452.1%259
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 counted759
Win rate45.9%
Widest gap, 80+ matches6.0 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
Octagon58.7%+12.80.07146 ·
Rectangle51.9%+6.00.25181
Breakable full fence46.5%+0.60.91171 ·
Half fence46.1%+0.30.95191
Low fence44.4%-1.40.78881
Breakable half fence44.3%-1.60.77179 ·
Single wall44.2%-1.70.75377 ·
Open44.1%-1.70.76468 ·
Fence and open43.2%-2.60.74437 ·
Full fence41.0%-4.80.36778 ·
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

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

All ten shapes at once: chi-square 5.37 on 9 df, p 0.801

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence41.0%78-5.50.503-5.10.503-3.30.678-3.40.663-3.10.694-2.20.822-3.10.706-10.80.171-17.70.057
Breakable full fence+5.50.50346.5%71+0.30.967+2.20.789+2.00.802+2.30.777+3.20.749+2.40.780-5.40.509-12.20.197
Half fence+5.10.503-0.30.96746.1%91+1.90.809+1.70.822+2.00.795+2.90.764+2.00.799-5.70.456-12.60.166
Breakable half fence+3.30.678-2.20.789-1.90.80944.3%79-0.10.986+0.10.985+1.10.915+0.20.982-7.50.339-14.40.121
Low fence+3.40.663-2.00.802-1.70.822+0.10.98644.4%81+0.30.971+1.20.903+0.30.968-7.40.345-14.30.123
Single wall+3.10.694-2.30.777-2.00.795-0.10.985-0.30.97144.2%77+0.90.927+0.00.996-7.70.333-14.50.119
Fence and open+2.20.822-3.20.749-2.90.764-1.10.915-1.20.903-0.90.92743.2%37-0.90.931-8.60.385-15.50.161
Open+3.10.706-2.40.780-2.00.799-0.20.982-0.30.968-0.00.996+0.90.93144.1%68-7.70.347-14.60.127
Rectangle+10.80.171+5.40.509+5.70.456+7.50.339+7.40.345+7.70.333+8.60.385+7.70.34751.9%81-6.80.457
Octagon+17.70.057+12.20.197+12.60.166+14.40.121+14.30.123+14.50.119+15.50.161+14.60.127+6.80.45758.7%46
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.