VirtuAnalytics

Novel Insights Through Data & Analysis

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

Kage vs Pai

Kage vs Pai in Virtua Fighter 5 REVO v1.10: Kage wins 49.1% of 5,336 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 counted5,336
Win rate49.1%
Widest gap, 80+ matches4.5 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
Fence and open53.7%+4.50.114287
Low fence50.3%+1.20.577511
Breakable half fence50.2%+1.10.600546
Single wall50.1%+1.00.650483
Full fence48.6%-0.50.801492
Open48.5%-0.60.757569
Half fence48.3%-0.80.690569
Breakable full fence48.3%-0.80.676551
Octagon47.6%-1.50.495489
Rectangle47.2%-1.90.327566
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 4.79 on 9 df, p 0.852

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence48.6%492+0.30.923+0.20.936-1.60.605-1.70.587-1.50.634-5.10.171+0.10.982+1.40.648+0.90.771
Breakable full fence-0.30.92348.3%551-0.10.985-1.90.528-2.00.511-1.80.558-5.40.139-0.20.939+1.10.712+0.60.840
Half fence-0.20.936+0.10.98548.3%569-1.90.536-2.00.519-1.80.566-5.30.141-0.20.953+1.20.696+0.70.825
Breakable half fence+1.60.605+1.90.528+1.90.53650.2%546-0.10.971+0.10.980-3.50.340+1.70.576+3.00.315+2.50.415
Low fence+1.70.587+2.00.511+2.00.519+0.10.97150.3%511+0.20.952-3.40.361+1.80.557+3.10.306+2.60.403
Single wall+1.50.634+1.80.558+1.80.566-0.10.980-0.20.95250.1%483-3.60.340+1.60.606+2.90.344+2.50.444
Fence and open+5.10.171+5.40.139+5.30.141+3.50.340+3.40.361+3.60.34053.7%287+5.20.155+6.50.073+6.00.106
Open-0.10.982+0.20.939+0.20.953-1.70.576-1.80.557-1.60.606-5.20.15548.5%569+1.30.653+0.90.781
Rectangle-1.40.648-1.10.712-1.20.696-3.00.315-3.10.306-2.90.344-6.50.073-1.30.65347.2%566-0.50.878
Octagon-0.90.771-0.60.840-0.70.825-2.50.415-2.60.403-2.50.444-6.00.106-0.90.781+0.50.87847.6%489
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 counted2,511
Win rate48.2%
Widest gap, 80+ matches4.6 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
Full fence52.8%+4.60.161214
Breakable full fence52.6%+4.40.163226
Breakable half fence50.6%+2.30.423261
Fence and open48.9%+0.70.874135
Low fence48.5%+0.30.920239
Open47.7%-0.60.855235
Single wall47.0%-1.20.680249
Octagon46.3%-1.90.524242
Half fence45.6%-2.60.352287
Rectangle44.4%-3.90.174275
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 7.14 on 9 df, p 0.623

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence52.8%214+0.10.975+7.20.113+2.20.629+4.30.364+5.80.212+3.90.476+5.10.276+8.40.064+6.50.164
Breakable full fence-0.10.97552.6%226+7.00.115+2.10.647+4.10.375+5.70.217+3.80.489+5.00.284+8.30.065+6.40.168
Half fence-7.20.113-7.00.11545.6%287-4.90.249-2.90.508-1.40.756-3.20.533-2.00.646+1.30.760-0.60.884
Breakable half fence-2.20.629-2.10.647+4.90.24950.6%261+2.00.649+3.60.418+1.70.750+2.90.517+6.20.150+4.30.336
Low fence-4.30.364-4.10.375+2.90.508-2.00.64948.5%239+1.60.732-0.30.948+0.90.849+4.20.344+2.30.621
Single wall-5.80.212-5.70.217+1.40.756-3.60.418-1.60.73247.0%249-1.90.722-0.70.882+2.60.547+0.70.875
Fence and open-3.90.476-3.80.489+3.20.533-1.70.750+0.30.948+1.90.72248.9%135+1.20.820+4.50.387+2.60.627
Open-5.10.276-5.00.284+2.00.646-2.90.517-0.90.849+0.70.882-1.20.82047.7%235+3.30.457+1.40.763
Rectangle-8.40.064-8.30.065-1.30.760-6.20.150-4.20.344-2.60.547-4.50.387-3.30.45744.4%275-1.90.662
Octagon-6.50.164-6.40.168+0.60.884-4.30.336-2.30.621-0.70.875-2.60.627-1.40.763+1.90.66246.3%242
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 counted2,317
Win rate50.0%
Widest gap, 80+ matches7.7 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
Fence and open57.7%+7.70.079123
Single wall57.3%+7.30.039185
Half fence52.2%+2.20.490228
Rectangle50.4%+0.40.897238
Low fence50.0%-0.00.995218
Octagon49.0%-1.00.767210
Open48.7%-1.30.642265
Breakable half fence48.3%-1.70.581240
Full fence45.3%-4.70.128234
Breakable full fence43.5%-6.50.025262
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 14.21 on 9 df, p 0.115

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence45.3%234+1.80.689-6.90.138-3.00.508-4.70.317-12.00.015-12.40.026-3.40.450-5.10.265-3.80.429
Breakable full fence-1.80.68943.5%262-8.70.055-4.80.279-6.50.156-13.80.004-14.20.009-5.20.234-6.90.122-5.50.230
Half fence+6.90.138+8.70.05552.2%228+3.90.404+2.20.643-5.10.300-5.50.321+3.50.437+1.80.702+3.10.511
Breakable half fence+3.00.508+4.80.279-3.90.40448.3%240-1.70.722-9.00.067-9.40.090-0.30.938-2.10.648-0.70.880
Low fence+4.70.317+6.50.156-2.20.643+1.70.72250.0%218-7.30.143-7.70.170+1.30.773-0.40.929+0.90.844
Single wall+12.00.015+13.80.004+5.10.300+9.00.067+7.30.14357.3%185-0.40.941+8.60.072+6.90.160+8.20.101
Fence and open+12.40.026+14.20.009+5.50.321+9.40.090+7.70.170+0.40.94157.7%123+9.00.097+7.30.188+8.70.126
Open+3.40.450+5.20.234-3.50.437+0.30.938-1.30.773-8.60.072-9.00.09748.7%265-1.70.697-0.40.936
Rectangle+5.10.265+6.90.122-1.80.702+2.10.648+0.40.929-6.90.160-7.30.188+1.70.69750.4%238+1.40.772
Octagon+3.80.429+5.50.230-3.10.511+0.70.880-0.90.844-8.20.101-8.70.126+0.40.936-1.40.77249.0%210
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 counted508
Win rate49.4%
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
Low fence59.3%+9.80.12654 ·
Fence and open58.6%+9.20.30729 ·
Breakable half fence57.8%+8.40.24045 ·
Breakable full fence52.4%+3.00.61463 ·
Open50.7%+1.30.81469 ·
Octagon48.6%-0.80.92337 ·
Rectangle47.2%-2.20.73053 ·
Half fence46.3%-3.10.62854 ·
Full fence45.5%-4.00.58344 ·
Single wall38.8%-10.60.11749 ·
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 7.27 on 9 df, p 0.609

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence45.5%44-6.90.481-0.80.934-12.30.245-13.80.173+6.70.515-13.20.271-5.30.585-1.70.866-3.20.774
Breakable full fence+6.90.48152.4%63+6.10.512-5.40.579-6.90.455+13.60.152-6.20.577+1.70.849+5.20.576+3.70.718
Half fence+0.80.934-6.10.51246.3%54-11.50.255-13.00.177+7.50.441-12.30.284-4.40.626-0.90.928-2.40.825
Breakable half fence+12.30.245+5.40.579+11.50.25557.8%45-1.50.882+19.00.065-0.80.943+7.10.461+10.60.295+9.10.409
Low fence+13.80.173+6.90.455+13.00.177+1.50.88259.3%54+20.50.038+0.60.955+8.50.346+12.10.210+10.60.318
Single wall-6.70.515-13.60.152-7.50.441-19.00.065-20.50.03838.8%49-19.80.089-11.90.199-8.40.392-9.90.360
Fence and open+13.20.271+6.20.577+12.30.284+0.80.943-0.60.955+19.80.08958.6%29+7.90.475+11.40.321+10.00.420
Open+5.30.585-1.70.849+4.40.626-7.10.461-8.50.346+11.90.199-7.90.47550.7%69+3.50.697+2.10.839
Rectangle+1.70.866-5.20.576+0.90.928-10.60.295-12.10.210+8.40.392-11.40.321-3.50.69747.2%53-1.50.890
Octagon+3.20.774-3.70.718+2.40.825-9.10.409-10.60.318+9.90.360-10.00.420-2.10.839+1.50.89048.6%37
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.