VirtuAnalytics

Novel Insights Through Data & Analysis

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

Lei Fei vs Sarah

The same figures as a 1080×1080 card, for posting. Click it to copy the image. Full size ↗
Matches counted1,715
Win rate48.8%
Widest swing6.7 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
Single wall55.5%+6.70.069164
Fence and open53.8%+5.00.35980
Rectangle53.0%+4.30.222181
Octagon50.2%+1.50.648205
Low fence49.2%+0.40.901183
Half fence47.1%-1.70.647172
Open46.4%-2.40.561138
Full fence45.2%-3.50.338168
Breakable half fence45.1%-3.60.296184
Breakable full fence44.0%-4.70.211159
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 9.04 on 9 df, p 0.434

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence45.2%168+1.20.825-1.90.732+0.10.981-3.90.460-10.20.062-8.50.210-1.10.842-7.80.145-5.00.336
Breakable full fence-1.20.82544.0%159-3.10.576-1.10.840-5.20.341-11.50.039-9.70.155-2.40.685-9.00.097-6.20.239
Half fence+1.90.732+3.10.57647.1%172+2.00.707-2.10.694-8.40.124-6.70.325+0.70.900-6.00.264-3.10.542
Breakable half fence-0.10.981+1.10.840-2.00.70745.1%184-4.10.435-10.40.053-8.60.196-1.30.821-7.90.130-5.10.311
Low fence+3.90.460+5.20.341+2.10.694+4.10.43549.2%183-6.30.240-4.60.495+2.80.619-3.90.462-1.10.834
Single wall+10.20.062+11.50.039+8.40.124+10.40.053+6.30.24055.5%164+1.70.798+9.10.115+2.50.648+5.20.316
Fence and open+8.50.210+9.70.155+6.70.325+8.60.196+4.60.495-1.70.79853.8%80+7.40.294+0.70.915+3.50.595
Open+1.10.842+2.40.685-0.70.900+1.30.821-2.80.619-9.10.115-7.40.29446.4%138-6.70.238-3.90.482
Rectangle+7.80.145+9.00.097+6.00.264+7.90.130+3.90.462-2.50.648-0.70.915+6.70.23853.0%181+2.80.583
Octagon+5.00.336+6.20.239+3.10.542+5.10.311+1.10.834-5.20.316-3.50.595+3.90.482-2.80.58350.2%205
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 counted1,475
Win rate47.0%
Widest swing6.0 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
Single wall52.9%+6.00.144136
Rectangle51.2%+4.20.249164
Fence and open50.8%+3.80.53663 ·
Low fence50.0%+3.00.415162
Octagon47.4%+0.40.914171
Breakable half fence45.6%-1.40.694169
Full fence44.9%-2.00.611138
Half fence44.0%-3.00.451141
Breakable full fence42.7%-4.30.275143
Open41.1%-5.90.192112
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 7.62 on 9 df, p 0.573

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence44.9%138+2.30.701+1.00.872-0.60.912-5.10.381-8.00.185-5.90.439+3.90.540-6.30.276-2.40.669
Breakable full fence-2.30.70142.7%143-1.30.823-2.90.607-7.30.200-10.30.086-8.10.280+1.60.799-8.60.134-4.70.404
Half fence-1.00.872+1.30.82344.0%141-1.60.779-6.00.294-9.00.135-6.80.366+2.90.643-7.20.206-3.40.549
Breakable half fence+0.60.912+2.90.607+1.60.77945.6%169-4.40.419-7.40.200-5.20.478+4.50.458-5.70.302-1.80.738
Low fence+5.10.381+7.30.200+6.00.294+4.40.41950.0%162-2.90.613-0.80.915+8.90.145-1.20.826+2.60.631
Single wall+8.00.185+10.30.086+9.00.135+7.40.200+2.90.61352.9%136+2.10.778+11.90.063+1.70.766+5.60.332
Fence and open+5.90.439+8.10.280+6.80.366+5.20.478+0.80.915-2.10.77850.8%63+9.70.214-0.40.954+3.40.642
Open-3.90.540-1.60.799-2.90.643-4.50.458-8.90.145-11.90.063-9.70.21441.1%112-10.20.097-6.30.298
Rectangle+6.30.276+8.60.134+7.20.206+5.70.302+1.20.826-1.70.766+0.40.954+10.20.09751.2%164+3.90.481
Octagon+2.40.669+4.70.404+3.40.549+1.80.738-2.60.631-5.60.332-3.40.642+6.30.298-3.90.48147.4%171
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 counted240
Win rate59.6%
Widest swing-19.6 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
Rectangle70.6%+11.00.33717 ·
Open69.2%+9.70.28826 ·
Single wall67.9%+8.30.34228 ·
Fence and open64.7%+5.10.65517 ·
Octagon64.7%+5.10.51134 ·
Half fence61.3%+1.70.83631 ·
Breakable full fence56.2%-3.30.77916 ·
Full fence46.7%-12.90.12330 ·
Low fence42.9%-16.70.10221 ·
Breakable half fence40.0%-19.60.11015 ·
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 10.18 on 9 df, p 0.336

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence46.7%30-9.60.536-14.60.252+6.70.671+3.80.788-21.20.103-18.00.234-22.60.089-23.90.113-18.00.147
Breakable full fence+9.60.53656.2%16-5.00.739+16.20.366+13.40.419-11.60.441-8.50.619-13.00.394-14.30.392-8.50.566
Half fence+14.60.252+5.00.73961.3%31+21.30.174+18.40.191-6.60.599-3.40.815-7.90.532-9.30.519-3.40.776
Breakable half fence-6.70.671-16.20.366-21.30.17440.0%15-2.90.864-27.90.078-24.70.162-29.20.067-30.60.082-24.70.107
Low fence-3.80.788-13.40.419-18.40.191+2.90.86442.9%21-25.00.080-21.90.180-26.40.069-27.70.087-21.90.112
Single wall+21.20.103+11.60.441+6.60.599+27.90.078+25.00.08067.9%28+3.10.828-1.40.914-2.70.848+3.10.794
Fence and open+18.00.234+8.50.619+3.40.815+24.70.162+21.90.180-3.10.82864.7%17-4.50.757-5.90.714+0.01.000
Open+22.60.089+13.00.394+7.90.532+29.20.067+26.40.069+1.40.914+4.50.75769.2%26-1.40.925+4.50.713
Rectangle+23.90.113+14.30.392+9.30.519+30.60.082+27.70.087+2.70.848+5.90.714+1.40.92570.6%17+5.90.674
Octagon+18.00.147+8.50.566+3.40.776+24.70.107+21.90.112-3.10.794-0.01.000-4.50.713-5.90.67464.7%34
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.