VirtuAnalytics

Novel Insights Through Data & Analysis

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

Kage vs Wolf

Kage vs Wolf in Virtua Fighter 5 REVO v1.10: Kage wins 52.7% of 5,891 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 counted5,891
Win rate52.7%
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
Fence and open57.2%+4.60.119276
Low fence54.7%+2.10.291592
Half fence54.0%+1.30.504591
Single wall53.4%+0.70.724562
Full fence53.4%+0.70.725579
Breakable half fence52.3%-0.30.861560
Rectangle51.6%-1.10.571601
Breakable full fence51.4%-1.30.515553
Open51.2%-1.40.441644
Octagon50.1%-2.50.173648
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 6.83 on 9 df, p 0.655

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence53.4%579+2.00.498-0.60.835+1.10.724-1.40.640-0.00.997-3.90.287+2.10.457+1.80.539+3.20.261
Breakable full fence-2.00.49851.4%553-2.60.375-1.00.747-3.40.253-2.00.499-5.90.109+0.10.969-0.20.939+1.20.678
Half fence+0.60.835+2.60.37554.0%591+1.70.574-0.80.795+0.60.839-3.30.367+2.70.336+2.40.407+3.80.179
Breakable half fence-1.10.724+1.00.747-1.70.57452.3%560-2.40.413-1.10.722-4.90.179+1.10.709+0.70.801+2.20.452
Low fence+1.40.640+3.40.253+0.80.795+2.40.41354.7%592+1.40.646-2.50.487+3.50.220+3.10.276+4.60.107
Single wall+0.00.997+2.00.499-0.60.839+1.10.722-1.40.64653.4%562-3.90.291+2.10.458+1.80.539+3.20.263
Fence and open+3.90.287+5.90.109+3.30.367+4.90.179+2.50.487+3.90.29157.2%276+6.00.094+5.70.118+7.10.048
Open-2.10.457-0.10.969-2.70.336-1.10.709-3.50.220-2.10.458-6.00.09451.2%644-0.30.905+1.10.696
Rectangle-1.80.539+0.20.939-2.40.407-0.70.801-3.10.276-1.80.539-5.70.118+0.30.90551.6%601+1.40.614
Octagon-3.20.261-1.20.678-3.80.179-2.20.452-4.60.107-3.20.263-7.10.048-1.10.696-1.40.61450.1%648
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 counted2,499
Win rate50.8%
Widest gap, 80+ matches8.5 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 open59.3%+8.50.058118
Half fence54.3%+3.50.228267
Full fence52.2%+1.40.655222
Low fence51.6%+0.80.790246
Rectangle50.7%-0.10.973276
Breakable half fence50.7%-0.20.960227
Open49.3%-1.60.587272
Breakable full fence48.4%-2.50.419246
Single wall47.6%-3.20.306229
Octagon45.7%-5.10.070282
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 9.56 on 9 df, p 0.387

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence52.2%222+3.90.402-2.10.650+1.60.736+0.60.892+4.70.323-7.10.213+3.00.509+1.50.735+6.50.147
Breakable full fence-3.90.40248.4%246-5.90.179-2.30.619-3.30.471+0.80.866-10.90.050-0.90.840-2.40.592+2.60.546
Half fence+2.10.650+5.90.17954.3%267+3.60.419+2.70.543+6.70.136-5.00.361+5.00.241+3.60.403+8.60.045
Breakable half fence-1.60.736+2.30.619-3.60.41950.7%227-1.00.834+3.10.513-8.70.126+1.40.756-0.10.989+4.90.270
Low fence-0.60.892+3.30.471-2.70.543+1.00.83451.6%246+4.00.380-7.70.168+2.40.591+0.90.837+5.90.177
Single wall-4.70.323-0.80.866-6.70.136-3.10.513-4.00.38047.6%229-11.70.038-1.70.710-3.10.484+1.90.676
Fence and open+7.10.213+10.90.050+5.00.361+8.70.126+7.70.168+11.70.03859.3%118+10.10.068+8.60.117+13.60.013
Open-3.00.509+0.90.840-5.00.241-1.40.756-2.40.591+1.70.710-10.10.06849.3%272-1.50.733+3.50.407
Rectangle-1.50.735+2.40.592-3.60.403+0.10.989-0.90.837+3.10.484-8.60.117+1.50.73350.7%276+5.00.239
Octagon-6.50.147-2.60.546-8.60.045-4.90.270-5.90.177-1.90.676-13.60.013-3.50.407-5.00.23945.7%282
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 counted2,951
Win rate53.6%
Widest gap, 80+ matches4.2 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
Single wall57.8%+4.20.130294
Low fence56.0%+2.40.382309
Breakable full fence54.7%+1.10.701274
Breakable half fence53.9%+0.20.935284
Half fence53.8%+0.10.959277
Fence and open53.4%-0.20.961131
Full fence53.3%-0.30.901317
Octagon52.4%-1.20.656307
Open52.0%-1.60.533323
Rectangle50.7%-2.90.299282
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 4.37 on 9 df, p 0.885

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence53.3%317-1.40.728-0.50.907-0.60.891-2.70.502-4.50.262-0.10.981+1.30.742+2.60.524+0.90.828
Breakable full fence+1.40.72854.7%274+0.90.822+0.90.836-1.20.763-3.10.460+1.30.805+2.70.505+4.00.341+2.30.579
Half fence+0.50.907-0.90.82253.8%277-0.10.984-2.20.594-4.00.332+0.30.946+1.80.664+3.10.466+1.40.745
Breakable half fence+0.60.891-0.90.836+0.10.98453.9%284-2.10.605-4.00.339+0.40.934+1.90.647+3.20.451+1.40.728
Low fence+2.70.502+1.20.763+2.20.594+2.10.60556.0%309-1.80.649+2.50.623+4.00.316+5.30.199+3.50.377
Single wall+4.50.262+3.10.460+4.00.332+4.00.339+1.80.64957.8%294+4.40.399+5.80.148+7.10.087+5.40.185
Fence and open+0.10.981-1.30.805-0.30.946-0.40.934-2.50.623-4.40.39953.4%131+1.40.783+2.70.606+1.00.849
Open-1.30.742-2.70.505-1.80.664-1.90.647-4.00.316-5.80.148-1.40.78352.0%323+1.30.749-0.40.914
Rectangle-2.60.524-4.00.341-3.10.466-3.20.451-5.30.199-7.10.087-2.70.606-1.30.74950.7%282-1.70.674
Octagon-0.90.828-2.30.579-1.40.745-1.40.728-3.50.377-5.40.185-1.00.849+0.40.914+1.70.67452.4%307
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 counted441
Win rate56.7%
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 open66.7%+10.00.28027 ·
Low fence64.9%+8.20.29437 ·
Rectangle62.8%+6.10.39543 ·
Full fence60.0%+3.30.65840 ·
Octagon59.3%+2.60.66159 ·
Open57.1%+0.50.94649 ·
Single wall53.9%-2.80.70739 ·
Half fence53.2%-3.50.60947 ·
Breakable half fence51.0%-5.70.39649 ·
Breakable full fence45.5%-11.20.17633 ·
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 5.77 on 9 df, p 0.762

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence60.0%40+14.60.215+6.80.523+9.00.397-4.90.660+6.20.581-6.70.580+2.90.786-2.80.794+0.70.946
Breakable full fence-14.60.21545.5%33-7.70.496-5.60.621-19.40.103-8.40.478-21.20.100-11.70.299-17.30.132-13.90.200
Half fence-6.80.523+7.70.49653.2%47+2.20.831-11.70.281-0.70.952-13.50.258-4.00.697-9.60.357-6.10.527
Breakable half fence-9.00.397+5.60.621-2.20.83151.0%49-13.80.199-2.80.792-15.70.188-6.10.543-11.80.256-8.30.387
Low fence+4.90.660+19.40.103+11.70.281+13.80.19964.9%37+11.00.329-1.80.881+7.70.468+2.10.847+5.50.587
Single wall-6.20.581+8.40.478+0.70.952+2.80.792-11.00.32953.9%39-12.80.298-3.30.757-8.90.412-5.50.592
Fence and open+6.70.580+21.20.100+13.50.258+15.70.188+1.80.881+12.80.29866.7%27+9.50.416+3.90.742+7.30.516
Open-2.90.786+11.70.299+4.00.697+6.10.543-7.70.468+3.30.757-9.50.41657.1%49-5.70.581-2.20.819
Rectangle+2.80.794+17.30.132+9.60.357+11.80.256-2.10.847+8.90.412-3.90.742+5.70.58162.8%43+3.50.723
Octagon-0.70.946+13.90.200+6.10.527+8.30.387-5.50.587+5.50.592-7.30.516+2.20.819-3.50.72359.3%59
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.