VirtuAnalytics

Novel Insights Through Data & Analysis

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

Lei Fei vs Lion

The same figures as a 1080×1080 card, for posting. Click it to copy the image. Full size ↗
Matches counted1,773
Win rate49.3%
Widest swing7.6 pts
Survive correction0
Period2026/03/26 – 2026/09/23

Where it was fought

Lei Fei's win rate on each stage, against this matchup everywhere
StageStage effectWin %ChangepMatches
Breakable half fence56.9%+7.60.027188
Half fence52.3%+3.00.371193
Breakable full fence52.2%+2.90.376203
Rectangle52.1%+2.80.448169
Full fence50.0%+0.70.853158
Open48.1%-1.20.756160
Single wall46.2%-3.00.398173
Octagon44.9%-4.40.218176
Fence and open43.2%-6.10.23988
Low fence43.0%-6.30.083172
p < 0.05 on its ownStill there after correcting for how many were tested
The same figures as a 1080×1080 card, for posting. Click it to copy the image. Full size ↗

Stage against stage

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

All ten shapes at once: chi-square 12.45 on 9 df, p 0.189

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence50.0%158-2.20.676-2.30.664-6.90.199+7.00.204+3.80.494+6.80.305+1.90.738-2.10.708+5.10.350
Breakable full fence+2.20.67652.2%203-0.10.982-4.70.351+9.20.076+6.00.248+9.00.157+4.10.439+0.10.978+7.30.154
Half fence+2.30.664+0.10.98252.3%193-4.60.369+9.30.076+6.10.245+9.20.155+4.20.431+0.30.961+7.40.153
Breakable half fence+6.90.199+4.70.351+4.60.36956.9%188+13.90.008+10.70.043+13.70.033+8.80.102+4.80.359+12.00.022
Low fence-7.00.204-9.20.076-9.30.076-13.90.00843.0%172-3.20.548-0.20.981-5.10.351-9.10.094-1.90.726
Single wall-3.80.494-6.00.248-6.10.245-10.70.043+3.20.54846.2%173+3.10.639-1.90.731-5.80.281+1.40.799
Fence and open-6.80.305-9.00.157-9.20.155-13.70.033+0.20.981-3.10.63943.2%88-4.90.455-8.90.176-1.70.793
Open-1.90.738-4.10.439-4.20.431-8.80.102+5.10.351+1.90.731+4.90.45548.1%160-4.00.474+3.20.552
Rectangle+2.10.708-0.10.978-0.30.961-4.80.359+9.10.094+5.80.281+8.90.176+4.00.47452.1%169+7.20.182
Octagon-5.10.350-7.30.154-7.40.153-12.00.022+1.90.726-1.40.799+1.70.793-3.20.552-7.20.18244.9%176
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
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 counted1,338
Win rate47.7%
Widest swing-9.7 pts
Survive correction0
Period2026/03/26 – 2026/09/23

Where it was fought

Lei Fei's win rate on each stage, against this matchup everywhere
StageStage effectWin %ChangepMatches
Breakable half fence55.2%+7.60.055143
Breakable full fence50.6%+2.90.425162
Half fence49.3%+1.60.668150
Octagon48.2%+0.50.903137
Rectangle47.8%+0.10.974115
Full fence47.7%+0.10.991132
Open46.7%-1.00.823122
Fence and open44.8%-2.90.62567 ·
Single wall44.1%-3.50.436111
Low fence38.0%-9.70.026121
p < 0.05 on its ownStill there after correcting for how many were tested
The same figures as a 1080×1080 card, for posting. Click it to copy the image. Full size ↗

Stage against stage

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

All ten shapes at once: chi-square 9.38 on 9 df, p 0.403

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence47.7%132-2.90.622-1.60.788-7.50.213+9.70.119+3.60.577+3.00.693+1.00.873-0.10.988-0.50.941
Breakable full fence+2.90.62250.6%162+1.30.821-4.60.419+12.60.035+6.50.293+5.80.421+3.90.516+2.80.647+2.40.674
Half fence+1.60.788-1.30.82149.3%150-5.90.311+11.30.062+5.20.406+4.50.535+2.60.668+1.50.808+1.10.845
Breakable half fence+7.50.213+4.60.419+5.90.31155.2%143+17.20.005+11.10.079+10.50.157+8.50.166+7.40.236+7.10.237
Low fence-9.70.119-12.60.035-11.30.062-17.20.00538.0%121-6.10.343-6.80.366-8.70.170-9.80.128-10.20.100
Single wall-3.60.577-6.50.293-5.20.406-11.10.079+6.10.34344.1%111-0.60.934-2.60.693-3.70.579-4.00.527
Fence and open-3.00.693-5.80.421-4.50.535-10.50.157+6.80.366+0.60.93444.8%67-1.90.797-3.00.691-3.40.648
Open-1.00.873-3.90.516-2.60.668-8.50.166+8.70.170+2.60.693+1.90.79746.7%122-1.10.865-1.50.815
Rectangle+0.10.988-2.80.647-1.50.808-7.40.236+9.80.128+3.70.579+3.00.691+1.10.86547.8%115-0.30.956
Octagon+0.50.941-2.40.674-1.10.845-7.10.237+10.20.100+4.00.527+3.40.648+1.50.815+0.30.95648.2%137
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
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 counted435
Win rate54.2%
Widest swing-20.9 pts
Survive correction0
Period2026/03/26 – 2026/09/23

Where it was fought

Lei Fei's win rate on each stage, against this matchup everywhere
StageStage effectWin %ChangepMatches
Half fence62.8%+8.50.23643 ·
Breakable half fence62.2%+8.00.25745 ·
Full fence61.5%+7.30.44226 ·
Rectangle61.1%+6.90.28054 ·
Breakable full fence58.5%+4.30.56341 ·
Low fence54.9%+0.70.92151 ·
Open52.6%-1.60.83438 ·
Single wall50.0%-4.20.46862 ·
Fence and open38.1%-16.10.12821 ·
Octagon33.3%-20.90.00639 ·
p < 0.05 on its ownStill there after correcting for how many were tested
The same figures as a 1080×1080 card, for posting. Click it to copy the image. Full size ↗

Stage against stage

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

All ten shapes at once: chi-square 13.88 on 9 df, p 0.126

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence61.5%26+3.00.807-1.20.917-0.70.954+6.60.578+11.50.322+23.40.110+8.90.481+0.40.971+28.20.025
Breakable full fence-3.00.80758.5%41-4.20.690-3.70.727+3.60.727+8.50.395+20.40.127+5.90.598-2.60.800+25.20.024
Half fence+1.20.917+4.20.69062.8%43+0.60.956+7.90.439+12.80.195+24.70.062+10.20.355+1.70.866+29.50.008
Breakable half fence+0.70.954+3.70.727-0.60.95662.2%45+7.30.468+12.20.210+24.10.067+9.60.378+1.10.910+28.90.008
Low fence-6.60.578-3.60.727-7.90.439-7.30.46854.9%51+4.90.604+16.80.195+2.30.832-6.20.519+21.60.042
Single wall-11.50.322-8.50.395-12.80.195-12.20.210-4.90.60450.0%62+11.90.345-2.60.798-11.10.230+16.70.100
Fence and open-23.40.110-20.40.127-24.70.062-24.10.067-16.80.195-11.90.34538.1%21-14.50.284-23.00.072+4.80.712
Open-8.90.481-5.90.598-10.20.355-9.60.378-2.30.832+2.60.798+14.50.28452.6%38-8.50.418+19.30.087
Rectangle-0.40.971+2.60.800-1.70.866-1.10.910+6.20.519+11.10.230+23.00.072+8.50.41861.1%54+27.80.008
Octagon-28.20.025-25.20.024-29.50.008-28.90.008-21.60.042-16.70.100-4.80.712-19.30.087-27.80.00833.3%39
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
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.