VirtuAnalytics

Novel Insights Through Data & Analysis

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

Kage vs Taka

Kage vs Taka in Virtua Fighter 5 REVO v1.10: Kage wins 44.5% of 1,669 decided matches (Low, mid and high combined, 2026/03/26 – 2026/10/18). Stage by stage, 2 of 9 tested stage gaps survive correction.

The same figures as a 1080×1080 card, for posting. Click it to copy the image. Full size ↗
Matches counted1,669
Win rate44.5%
Widest gap, 80+ matches17.4 pts
Survive correction2
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 fence61.9%+17.4<0.001139
Half fence50.0%+5.50.134166
Fence and open49.3%+4.80.39175 ·
Full fence48.3%+3.80.292174
Low fence46.3%+1.80.632162
Octagon45.6%+1.00.773169
Rectangle42.5%-2.00.583167
Open38.3%-6.20.069188
Breakable half fence36.9%-7.60.050149
Single wall34.2%-10.30.002196
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 36.11 on 9 df, p <0.001

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence48.3%174-13.60.016-1.70.751+11.40.040+2.00.716+14.10.006-1.10.878+10.00.055+5.80.286+2.70.615
Breakable full fence+13.60.01661.9%139+11.90.038+25.0<0.001+15.60.007+27.7<0.001+12.50.077+23.6<0.001+19.4<0.001+16.30.004
Half fence+1.70.751-11.90.03850.0%166+13.10.019+3.70.502+15.80.002+0.70.924+11.70.027+7.50.171+4.40.416
Breakable half fence-11.40.040-25.0<0.001-13.10.01936.9%149-9.40.094+2.70.599-12.40.075-1.40.794-5.60.310-8.70.118
Low fence-2.00.716-15.60.007-3.70.502+9.40.09446.3%162+12.10.020-3.00.663+8.00.131+3.80.490+0.70.893
Single wall-14.10.006-27.7<0.001-15.80.002-2.70.599-12.10.02034.2%196-15.20.022-4.10.402-8.30.103-11.40.027
Fence and open+1.10.878-12.50.077-0.70.924+12.40.075+3.00.663+15.20.02249.3%75+11.00.101+6.80.324+3.80.586
Open-10.00.055-23.6<0.001-11.70.027+1.40.794-8.00.131+4.10.402-11.00.10138.3%188-4.20.419-7.30.165
Rectangle-5.80.286-19.4<0.001-7.50.171+5.60.310-3.80.490+8.30.103-6.80.324+4.20.41942.5%167-3.00.574
Octagon-2.70.615-16.30.004-4.40.416+8.70.118-0.70.893+11.40.027-3.80.586+7.30.165+3.00.57445.6%169
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 counted458
Win rate42.6%
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 fence59.0%+16.40.03039 ·
Breakable full fence54.7%+12.10.05753 ·
Full fence48.9%+6.30.36745 ·
Fence and open47.8%+5.20.60123 ·
Half fence45.5%+2.90.72933 ·
Octagon45.5%+2.90.68544 ·
Rectangle43.1%+0.60.93251 ·
Single wall30.8%-11.80.06752 ·
Open30.0%-12.60.05750 ·
Breakable half fence20.0%-22.60.00535 ·
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: 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 22.26 on 9 df, p 0.008

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence48.9%45-5.80.565+3.40.764+28.90.008-10.10.355+18.10.068+1.10.934+18.90.059+5.80.572+3.40.746
Breakable full fence+5.80.56554.7%53+9.30.403+34.70.001-4.20.684+23.90.013+6.90.580+24.70.011+11.60.238+9.30.364
Half fence-3.40.764-9.30.40345.5%33+25.40.025-13.50.252+14.70.170-2.40.861+15.40.151+2.30.834+0.01.000
Breakable half fence-28.90.008-34.70.001-25.40.02520.0%35-39.0<0.001-10.80.264-27.80.025-10.00.300-23.10.026-25.40.018
Low fence+10.10.355+4.20.684+13.50.252+39.0<0.00159.0%39+28.20.007+11.10.394+29.00.006+15.80.136+13.50.219
Single wall-18.10.068-23.90.013-14.70.170+10.80.264-28.20.00730.8%52-17.10.156+0.80.933-12.40.193-14.70.139
Fence and open-1.10.934-6.90.580+2.40.861+27.80.025-11.10.394+17.10.15647.8%23+17.80.140+4.70.707+2.40.853
Open-18.90.059-24.70.011-15.40.151+10.00.300-29.00.006-0.80.933-17.80.14030.0%50-13.10.171-15.40.122
Rectangle-5.80.572-11.60.238-2.30.834+23.10.026-15.80.136+12.40.193-4.70.707+13.10.17143.1%51-2.30.821
Octagon-3.40.746-9.30.364-0.01.000+25.40.018-13.50.219+14.70.139-2.40.853+15.40.122+2.30.82145.5%44
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 counted896
Win rate44.6%
Widest gap, 80+ matches-14.5 pts
Survive correction1
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 fence60.3%+15.70.00963 ·
Fence and open53.5%+8.80.23243 ·
Half fence51.0%+6.40.17898
Octagon47.9%+3.30.49596
Full fence46.1%+1.40.757102
Breakable half fence44.0%-0.60.90775 ·
Low fence43.2%-1.40.78681
Open42.5%-2.20.629106
Rectangle40.7%-4.00.42091
Single wall30.1%-14.50.002103
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 19.39 on 9 df, p 0.022

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence46.1%102-14.20.075-4.90.485+2.10.784+2.90.698+16.00.018-7.40.415+3.60.599+5.40.448-1.80.796
Breakable full fence+14.20.07560.3%63+9.30.247+16.30.056+17.10.042+30.2<0.001+6.80.485+17.90.025+19.70.016+12.40.126
Half fence+4.90.485-9.30.24751.0%98+7.00.360+7.80.298+20.90.003-2.50.787+8.60.220+10.40.153+3.10.666
Breakable half fence-2.10.784-16.30.056-7.00.36044.0%75+0.80.921+13.90.056-9.50.321+1.60.836+3.30.664-3.90.610
Low fence-2.90.698-17.10.042-7.80.298-0.80.92143.2%81+13.10.066-10.30.275+0.80.917+2.50.735-4.70.531
Single wall-16.00.018-30.2<0.001-20.90.003-13.90.056-13.10.06630.1%103-23.40.008-12.30.063-10.60.124-17.80.010
Fence and open+7.40.415-6.80.485+2.50.787+9.50.321+10.30.275+23.40.00853.5%43+11.00.220+12.80.163+5.60.544
Open-3.60.599-17.90.025-8.60.220-1.60.836-0.80.917+12.30.063-11.00.22042.5%106+1.80.799-5.50.436
Rectangle-5.40.448-19.70.016-10.40.153-3.30.664-2.50.735+10.60.124-12.80.163-1.80.79940.7%91-7.30.318
Octagon+1.80.796-12.40.126-3.10.666+3.90.610+4.70.531+17.80.010-5.60.544+5.50.436+7.30.31847.9%96
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 counted315
Win rate47.0%
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
Breakable full fence82.6%+35.6<0.00123 ·
Full fence55.6%+8.60.35127 ·
Half fence51.4%+4.50.57635 ·
Single wall48.8%+1.80.80541 ·
Rectangle48.0%+1.00.91625 ·
Low fence40.5%-6.50.36442 ·
Breakable half fence38.5%-8.50.25539 ·
Octagon37.9%-9.10.30529 ·
Open37.5%-9.50.25732 ·
Fence and open33.3%-13.70.4059 ·
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 17.49 on 9 df, p 0.042

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence55.6%27-27.10.041+4.10.747+17.10.170+15.10.220+6.80.584+22.20.248+18.10.165+7.60.586+17.60.186
Breakable full fence+27.10.04182.6%23+31.20.016+44.1<0.001+42.10.001+33.80.008+49.30.007+45.1<0.001+34.60.012+44.70.001
Half fence-4.10.747-31.20.01651.4%35+13.00.263+10.90.337+2.60.818+18.10.332+13.90.252+3.40.793+13.50.280
Breakable half fence-17.10.170-44.1<0.001-13.00.26338.5%39-2.00.853-10.30.352+5.10.775+1.00.934-9.50.451+0.50.964
Low fence-15.10.220-42.10.001-10.90.337+2.00.85340.5%42-8.30.447+7.20.690+3.00.795-7.50.548+2.50.829
Single wall-6.80.584-33.80.008-2.60.818+10.30.352+8.30.44748.8%41+15.40.400+11.30.335+0.80.951+10.80.368
Fence and open-22.20.248-49.30.007-18.10.332-5.10.775-7.20.690-15.40.40033.3%9-4.20.819-14.70.447-4.60.803
Open-18.10.165-45.1<0.001-13.90.252-1.00.934-3.00.795-11.30.335+4.20.81937.5%32-10.50.426-0.40.972
Rectangle-7.60.586-34.60.012-3.40.793+9.50.451+7.50.548-0.80.951+14.70.447+10.50.42648.0%25+10.10.456
Octagon-17.60.186-44.70.001-13.50.280-0.50.964-2.50.829-10.80.368+4.60.803+0.40.972-10.10.45637.9%29
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.