VirtuAnalytics

Novel Insights Through Data & Analysis

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

Lei Fei vs Shun

Lei Fei vs Shun in Virtua Fighter 5 REVO v1.10: Lei Fei wins 52.1% of 3,376 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 counted3,376
Win rate52.1%
Widest gap, 80+ matches-5.6 pts
Survive correction0
Period2026/03/26 – 2026/10/18

Where it was fought

Lei Fei's win rate on each stage, against this matchup everywhere
StageGap from usualWin %ChangepMatches
Rectangle55.3%+3.20.192378
Breakable half fence54.9%+2.80.274346
Single wall54.4%+2.30.366351
Fence and open54.4%+2.20.561160
Half fence53.0%+0.80.742355
Breakable full fence50.9%-1.20.626340
Low fence50.7%-1.40.622278
Octagon50.6%-1.50.566324
Open50.0%-2.10.370390
Full fence46.5%-5.60.036314
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

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

All ten shapes at once: chi-square 9.16 on 9 df, p 0.422

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence46.5%314-4.40.262-6.50.095-8.40.031-4.20.305-7.90.041-7.90.105-3.50.355-8.80.021-4.10.298
Breakable full fence+4.40.26250.9%340-2.10.584-4.00.290+0.20.968-3.50.352-3.50.466+0.90.812-4.40.237+0.30.946
Half fence+6.50.095+2.10.58453.0%355-1.90.604+2.20.576-1.50.698-1.40.765+3.00.420-2.30.526+2.30.542
Breakable half fence+8.40.031+4.00.290+1.90.60454.9%346+4.20.297+0.50.895+0.50.910+4.90.183-0.40.919+4.30.266
Low fence+4.20.305-0.20.968-2.20.576-4.20.29750.7%278-3.70.356-3.70.461+0.70.855-4.60.246+0.10.980
Single wall+7.90.041+3.50.352+1.50.698-0.50.895+3.70.35654.4%351+0.00.993+4.40.230-0.90.812+3.80.323
Fence and open+7.90.105+3.50.466+1.40.765-0.50.910+3.70.461-0.00.99354.4%160+4.40.351-0.90.845+3.80.436
Open+3.50.355-0.90.812-3.00.420-4.90.183-0.70.855-4.40.230-4.40.35150.0%390-5.30.142-0.60.870
Rectangle+8.80.021+4.40.237+2.30.526+0.40.919+4.60.246+0.90.812+0.90.845+5.30.14255.3%378+4.70.216
Octagon+4.10.298-0.30.946-2.30.542-4.30.266-0.10.980-3.80.323-3.80.436+0.60.870-4.70.21650.6%324
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 counted1,440
Win rate55.4%
Widest gap, 80+ matches11.2 pts
Survive correction1
Period2026/03/26 – 2026/10/18

Where it was fought

Lei Fei's win rate on each stage, against this matchup everywhere
StageGap from usualWin %ChangepMatches
Single wall66.7%+11.20.002159
Breakable half fence62.3%+6.90.086138
Fence and open56.3%+0.90.87371 ·
Open55.4%-0.00.996139
Full fence55.4%-0.00.994130
Octagon54.9%-0.50.908122
Rectangle54.5%-0.90.833132
Half fence54.3%-1.10.760173
Breakable full fence48.8%-6.60.064172
Low fence47.9%-7.50.057142
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

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

All ten shapes at once: chi-square 17.23 on 9 df, p 0.045

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence55.4%130+6.50.260+1.00.856-6.90.249+7.50.217-11.30.050-1.00.897-0.00.999+0.80.891+0.50.941
Breakable full fence-6.50.26048.8%172-5.50.307-13.50.018+0.90.867-17.80.001-7.50.287-6.60.250-5.70.324-6.10.304
Half fence-1.00.856+5.50.30754.3%173-8.00.157+6.50.255-12.30.022-2.00.775-1.10.852-0.20.971-0.60.921
Breakable half fence+6.90.249+13.50.018+8.00.15762.3%138+14.40.015-4.30.434+6.00.403+6.90.242+7.80.195+7.40.226
Low fence-7.50.217-0.90.867-6.50.255-14.40.01547.9%142-18.8<0.001-8.40.245-7.50.208-6.70.271-7.00.255
Single wall+11.30.050+17.80.001+12.30.022+4.30.434+18.8<0.00166.7%159+10.30.133+11.30.046+12.10.035+11.80.045
Fence and open+1.00.897+7.50.287+2.00.775-6.00.403+8.40.245-10.30.13356.3%71+0.90.897+1.80.807+1.40.848
Open+0.00.999+6.60.250+1.10.852-6.90.242+7.50.208-11.30.046-0.90.89755.4%139+0.80.888+0.50.938
Rectangle-0.80.891+5.70.324+0.20.971-7.80.195+6.70.271-12.10.035-1.80.807-0.80.88854.5%132-0.40.952
Octagon-0.50.941+6.10.304+0.60.921-7.40.226+7.00.255-11.80.045-1.40.848-0.50.938+0.40.95254.9%122
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 counted1,600
Win rate48.9%
Widest gap, 80+ matches-11.8 pts
Survive correction1
Period2026/03/26 – 2026/10/18

Where it was fought

Lei Fei's win rate on each stage, against this matchup everywhere
StageGap from usualWin %ChangepMatches
Low fence55.4%+6.40.159112
Half fence53.4%+4.40.257148
Rectangle52.8%+3.90.224214
Breakable full fence51.2%+2.20.598129
Breakable half fence49.4%+0.50.900166
Fence and open49.4%+0.40.93879 ·
Open48.5%-0.40.904206
Octagon47.4%-1.60.684152
Single wall43.4%-5.60.120173
Full fence37.2%-11.80.003148
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

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

All ten shapes at once: chi-square 15.06 on 9 df, p 0.089

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence37.2%148-14.00.019-16.20.005-12.20.029-18.20.003-6.20.260-12.20.075-11.40.033-15.60.003-10.20.074
Breakable full fence+14.00.01951.2%129-2.20.713+1.80.764-4.20.515+7.80.178+1.80.802+2.60.641-1.60.768+3.80.526
Half fence+16.20.005+2.20.71353.4%148+4.00.481-2.00.751+10.00.073+4.00.564+4.80.370+0.60.914+6.00.298
Breakable half fence+12.20.029-1.80.764-4.00.48149.4%166-6.00.329+6.00.265+0.00.996+0.90.870-3.40.510+2.00.718
Low fence+18.20.003+4.20.515+2.00.751+6.00.32955.4%112+12.00.048+6.00.414+6.80.246+2.60.661+8.00.199
Single wall+6.20.260-7.80.178-10.00.073-6.00.265-12.00.04843.4%173-6.00.374-5.20.313-9.40.064-4.00.468
Fence and open+12.20.075-1.80.802-4.00.564-0.00.996-6.00.414+6.00.37449.4%79+0.80.901-3.40.601+2.00.773
Open+11.40.033-2.60.641-4.80.370-0.90.870-6.80.246+5.20.313-0.80.90148.5%206-4.30.383+1.20.826
Rectangle+15.60.003+1.60.768-0.60.914+3.40.510-2.60.661+9.40.064+3.40.601+4.30.38352.8%214+5.40.305
Octagon+10.20.074-3.80.526-6.00.298-2.00.718-8.00.199+4.00.468-2.00.773-1.20.826-5.40.30547.4%152
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 counted336
Win rate53.3%
Widest gap, 80+ matches—
Survive correction—
Period2026/03/26 – 2026/10/18

Where it was fought

Lei Fei's win rate on each stage, against this matchup everywhere
StageGap from usualWin %ChangepMatches
Fence and open80.0%+26.70.08510 ·
Rectangle75.0%+21.70.01032 ·
Breakable full fence59.0%+5.70.44839 ·
Full fence52.8%-0.50.95036 ·
Single wall52.6%-0.60.95419 ·
Breakable half fence52.4%-0.90.90142 ·
Octagon50.0%-3.30.61550 ·
Low fence45.8%-7.40.44824 ·
Half fence44.1%-9.20.25934 ·
Open40.0%-13.30.05545 ·
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

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

All ten shapes at once: chi-square 14.51 on 9 df, p 0.105

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence52.8%36-6.20.589+8.70.469+0.40.972+7.00.598+0.10.992-27.20.122+12.80.251-22.20.058+2.80.799
Breakable full fence+6.20.58959.0%39+14.80.205+6.60.551+13.10.310+6.30.647-21.00.219+19.00.083-16.00.156+9.00.399
Half fence-8.70.469-14.80.20544.1%34-8.30.474-1.70.897-8.50.552-35.90.046+4.10.713-30.90.011-5.90.596
Breakable half fence-0.40.972-6.60.551+8.30.47452.4%42+6.50.609-0.20.986-27.60.112+12.40.247-22.60.047+2.40.820
Low fence-7.00.598-13.10.310+1.70.897-6.50.60945.8%24-6.80.658-34.20.068+5.80.640-29.20.026-4.20.737
Single wall-0.10.992-6.30.647+8.50.552+0.20.986+6.80.65852.6%19-27.40.149+12.60.352-22.40.101+2.60.845
Fence and open+27.20.122+21.00.219+35.90.046+27.60.112+34.20.068+27.40.14980.0%10+40.00.022+5.00.746+30.00.082
Open-12.80.251-19.00.083-4.10.713-12.40.247-5.80.640-12.60.352-40.00.02240.0%45-35.00.002-10.00.328
Rectangle+22.20.058+16.00.156+30.90.011+22.60.047+29.20.026+22.40.101-5.00.746+35.00.00275.0%32+25.00.024
Octagon-2.80.799-9.00.399+5.90.596-2.40.820+4.20.737-2.60.845-30.00.082+10.00.328-25.00.02450.0%50
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.