VirtuAnalytics

Novel Insights Through Data & Analysis

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

Kage vs Vanessa

Kage vs Vanessa in Virtua Fighter 5 REVO v1.10: Kage wins 52.9% of 3,332 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 counted3,332
Win rate52.9%
Widest gap, 80+ matches-3.9 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 fence56.8%+3.90.136329
Full fence56.6%+3.60.183304
Breakable full fence55.8%+2.80.280330
Open54.0%+1.10.684324
Fence and open53.3%+0.30.929184
Rectangle53.2%+0.20.922361
Breakable half fence52.7%-0.20.933313
Low fence50.9%-2.10.406352
Single wall49.4%-3.50.161356
Octagon49.0%-3.90.148308
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 9.07 on 9 df, p 0.431

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence56.6%304+0.80.835-0.30.947+3.90.335+5.70.143+7.10.067+3.30.475+2.60.518+3.40.381+7.50.061
Breakable full fence-0.80.83555.8%330-1.10.780+3.00.439+4.90.199+6.30.098+2.50.586+1.80.654+2.60.498+6.70.089
Half fence+0.30.947+1.10.78056.8%329+4.10.294+6.00.117+7.40.053+3.60.434+2.80.467+3.60.335+7.80.048
Breakable half fence-3.90.335-3.00.439-4.10.29452.7%313+1.90.631+3.30.397-0.50.906-1.30.743-0.50.903+3.70.358
Low fence-5.70.143-4.90.199-6.00.117-1.90.63150.9%352+1.40.707-2.40.596-3.20.411-2.30.533+1.80.640
Single wall-7.10.067-6.30.098-7.40.053-3.30.397-1.40.70749.4%356-3.80.400-4.60.233-3.80.315+0.40.916
Fence and open-3.30.475-2.50.586-3.60.434+0.50.906+2.40.596+3.80.40053.3%184-0.80.870+0.10.987+4.20.363
Open-2.60.518-1.80.654-2.80.467+1.30.743+3.20.411+4.60.233+0.80.87054.0%324+0.80.829+5.00.210
Rectangle-3.40.381-2.60.498-3.60.335+0.50.903+2.30.533+3.80.315-0.10.987-0.80.82953.2%361+4.20.283
Octagon-7.50.061-6.70.089-7.80.048-3.70.358-1.80.640-0.40.916-4.20.363-5.00.210-4.20.28349.0%308
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 counted1,117
Win rate54.6%
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
Breakable full fence59.5%+4.90.240126
Half fence57.9%+3.30.457114
Full fence57.7%+3.10.51897
Rectangle57.3%+2.70.555110
Low fence54.4%-0.20.960136
Open53.3%-1.30.782105
Breakable half fence53.1%-1.50.733113
Fence and open52.5%-2.10.74359 ·
Octagon50.0%-4.60.34894
Single wall48.5%-6.10.20099
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 5.00 on 9 df, p 0.834

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence57.7%97-1.80.788-0.20.981+4.60.501+3.30.615+9.20.195+5.20.527+4.40.530+0.50.947+7.70.284
Breakable full fence+1.80.78859.5%126+1.60.798+6.40.317+5.10.404+11.00.099+7.00.371+6.20.344+2.20.726+9.50.160
Half fence+0.20.981-1.60.79857.9%114+4.80.467+3.50.581+9.40.170+5.30.501+4.60.497+0.60.925+7.90.255
Breakable half fence-4.60.501-6.40.317-4.80.46753.1%113-1.30.836+4.60.503+0.60.945-0.20.972-4.20.531+3.10.657
Low fence-3.30.615-5.10.404-3.50.581+1.30.83654.4%136+5.90.369+1.90.810+1.10.868-2.90.653+4.40.510
Single wall-9.20.195-11.00.099-9.40.170-4.60.503-5.90.36948.5%99-4.10.622-4.80.489-8.80.204-1.50.833
Fence and open-5.20.527-7.00.371-5.30.501-0.60.945-1.90.810+4.10.62252.5%59-0.80.922-4.70.555+2.50.759
Open-4.40.530-6.20.344-4.60.497+0.20.972-1.10.868+4.80.489+0.80.92253.3%105-3.90.561+3.30.639
Rectangle-0.50.947-2.20.726-0.60.925+4.20.531+2.90.653+8.80.204+4.70.555+3.90.56157.3%110+7.30.299
Octagon-7.70.284-9.50.160-7.90.255-3.10.657-4.40.510+1.50.833-2.50.759-3.30.639-7.30.29950.0%94
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 counted1,642
Win rate51.0%
Widest gap, 80+ matches-7.7 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
Half fence58.2%+7.10.053165
Open55.7%+4.60.192176
Full fence54.3%+3.30.399151
Breakable half fence53.0%+1.90.638134
Breakable full fence52.0%+1.00.804150
Fence and open51.5%+0.50.92299
Rectangle50.2%-0.80.815197
Single wall48.9%-2.20.542178
Octagon45.9%-5.20.173157
Low fence43.3%-7.70.042157
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 11.58 on 9 df, p 0.238

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence54.3%151+2.30.689-3.90.488+1.30.824+11.00.054+5.40.326+2.80.666-1.40.803+4.00.453+8.40.138
Breakable full fence-2.30.68952.0%150-6.20.270-1.00.868+8.70.128+3.10.573+0.50.940-3.70.506+1.80.747+6.10.282
Half fence+3.90.488+6.20.27058.2%165+5.20.368+14.90.008+9.30.084+6.70.291+2.50.641+7.90.132+12.30.027
Breakable half fence-1.30.824+1.00.868-5.20.36853.0%134+9.70.100+4.10.472+1.50.824-2.70.637+2.70.626+7.10.226
Low fence-11.00.054-8.70.128-14.90.008-9.70.10043.3%157-5.60.308-8.20.200-12.40.024-6.90.194-2.50.650
Single wall-5.40.326-3.10.573-9.30.084-4.10.472+5.60.30848.9%178-2.60.674-6.80.200-1.40.790+3.00.581
Fence and open-2.80.666-0.50.940-6.70.291-1.50.824+8.20.200+2.60.67451.5%99-4.20.506+1.30.838+5.70.378
Open+1.40.803+3.70.506-2.50.641+2.70.637+12.40.024+6.80.200+4.20.50655.7%176+5.40.294+9.80.073
Rectangle-4.00.453-1.80.747-7.90.132-2.70.626+6.90.194+1.40.790-1.30.838-5.40.29450.2%197+4.40.411
Octagon-8.40.138-6.10.282-12.30.027-7.10.226+2.50.650-3.00.581-5.70.378-9.80.073-4.40.41145.9%157
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 counted573
Win rate55.1%
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 fence62.7%+7.60.21759 ·
Fence and open61.5%+6.40.50326 ·
Full fence60.7%+5.60.37856 ·
Breakable full fence57.4%+2.30.72654 ·
Octagon56.1%+1.00.87457 ·
Rectangle55.6%+0.40.95054 ·
Single wall51.9%-3.20.53279 ·
Breakable half fence51.5%-3.60.52866 ·
Half fence50.0%-5.20.44450 ·
Open48.8%-6.30.38743 ·
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 4.55 on 9 df, p 0.872

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence60.7%56+3.30.724+10.70.268+9.20.308-2.00.826+8.80.310-0.80.943+11.90.238+5.20.583+4.60.622
Breakable full fence-3.30.72457.4%54+7.40.449+5.90.519-5.30.565+5.50.531-4.10.725+8.60.400+1.90.846+1.30.893
Half fence-10.70.268-7.40.44950.0%50-1.50.872-12.70.182-1.90.834-11.50.338+1.20.911-5.60.571-6.10.525
Breakable half fence-9.20.308-5.90.519+1.50.87251.5%66-11.20.207-0.40.963-10.00.385+2.70.785-4.00.659-4.60.608
Low fence+2.00.826+5.30.565+12.70.182+11.20.20762.7%59+10.80.205+1.20.918+13.90.162+7.20.439+6.60.471
Single wall-8.80.310-5.50.531+1.90.834+0.40.963-10.80.20551.9%79-9.60.392+3.10.747-3.70.678-4.20.625
Fence and open+0.80.943+4.10.725+11.50.338+10.00.385-1.20.918+9.60.39261.5%26+12.70.305+6.00.612+5.40.644
Open-11.90.238-8.60.400-1.20.911-2.70.785-13.90.162-3.10.747-12.70.30548.8%43-6.70.510-7.30.469
Rectangle-5.20.583-1.90.846+5.60.571+4.00.659-7.20.439+3.70.678-6.00.612+6.70.51055.6%54-0.60.951
Octagon-4.60.622-1.30.893+6.10.525+4.60.608-6.60.471+4.20.625-5.40.644+7.30.469+0.60.95156.1%57
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.