VirtuAnalytics

Novel Insights Through Data & Analysis

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

Lei Fei vs Wolf

The same figures as a 1080×1080 card, for posting. Click it to copy the image. Full size ↗
Matches counted1,776
Win rate50.6%
Widest swing6.5 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
Full fence57.1%+6.50.062184
Breakable half fence55.6%+5.00.146189
Breakable full fence54.1%+3.50.351159
Fence and open52.5%+1.90.72380
Half fence52.0%+1.40.689175
Single wall49.1%-1.40.692173
Octagon48.7%-1.90.583189
Open48.5%-2.10.534196
Low fence47.9%-2.70.434186
Rectangle47.1%-3.50.337170
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 7.96 on 9 df, p 0.538

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence57.1%184+3.00.580+5.10.335+1.50.769+9.20.076+7.90.133+4.60.493+8.60.094+10.00.060+8.40.105
Breakable full fence-3.00.58054.1%159+2.10.703-1.50.784+6.20.248+5.00.367+1.60.816+5.60.292+7.00.203+5.40.314
Half fence-5.10.335-2.10.70352.0%175-3.60.497+4.20.431+2.90.593-0.50.941+3.50.497+4.90.359+3.30.526
Breakable half fence-1.50.769+1.50.784+3.60.49755.6%189+7.70.135+6.40.222+3.10.645+7.10.164+8.50.108+6.90.181
Low fence-9.20.076-6.20.248-4.20.431-7.70.13547.9%186-1.30.808-4.70.487-0.60.904+0.80.881-0.80.873
Single wall-7.90.133-5.00.367-2.90.593-6.40.222+1.30.80849.1%173-3.40.618+0.70.899+2.10.701+0.50.931
Fence and open-4.60.493-1.60.816+0.50.941-3.10.645+4.70.487+3.40.61852.5%80+4.00.543+5.40.422+3.80.567
Open-8.60.094-5.60.292-3.50.497-7.10.164+0.60.904-0.70.899-4.00.54348.5%196+1.40.788-0.20.967
Rectangle-10.00.060-7.00.203-4.90.359-8.50.108-0.80.881-2.10.701-5.40.422-1.40.78847.1%170-1.60.759
Octagon-8.40.105-5.40.314-3.30.526-6.90.181+0.80.873-0.50.931-3.80.567+0.20.967+1.60.75948.7%189
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 counted1,637
Win rate50.6%
Widest swing7.3 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
Full fence57.9%+7.30.043171
Breakable full fence56.5%+5.90.135147
Breakable half fence54.5%+3.90.286167
Fence and open53.2%+2.60.63879 ·
Half fence51.8%+1.20.736164
Open49.7%-0.90.807179
Octagon48.9%-1.70.631182
Single wall47.6%-3.00.415164
Low fence46.3%-4.20.231177
Rectangle45.5%-5.10.199143
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 10.54 on 9 df, p 0.309

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence57.9%171+1.40.797+6.10.265+3.40.528+11.60.031+10.30.058+4.70.483+8.20.125+12.40.028+9.00.091
Breakable full fence-1.40.79756.5%147+4.60.413+2.00.726+10.10.069+8.90.117+3.30.634+6.70.225+11.00.061+7.60.172
Half fence-6.10.265-4.60.41351.8%164-2.70.628+5.50.310+4.30.440-1.30.845+2.10.696+6.40.265+2.90.586
Breakable half fence-3.40.528-2.00.726+2.70.62854.5%167+8.20.130+6.90.207+1.30.845+4.80.375+9.00.113+5.60.297
Low fence-11.60.031-10.10.069-5.50.310-8.20.13046.3%177-1.20.820-6.80.312-3.40.522+0.90.876-2.60.625
Single wall-10.30.058-8.90.117-4.30.440-6.90.207+1.20.82047.6%164-5.60.413-2.20.689+2.10.712-1.30.803
Fence and open-4.70.483-3.30.634+1.30.845-1.30.845+6.80.312+5.60.41353.2%79+3.40.610+7.70.271+4.30.527
Open-8.20.125-6.70.225-2.10.696-4.80.375+3.40.522+2.20.689-3.40.61049.7%179+4.30.446+0.80.876
Rectangle-12.40.028-11.00.061-6.40.265-9.00.113-0.90.876-2.10.712-7.70.271-4.30.44645.5%143-3.50.537
Octagon-9.00.091-7.60.172-2.90.586-5.60.297+2.60.625+1.30.803-4.30.527-0.80.876+3.50.53748.9%182
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 counted139
Win rate50.4%
Widest swing-50.4 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
Low fence77.8%+27.40.0899 ·
Single wall77.8%+27.40.0899 ·
Breakable half fence63.6%+13.30.17522 ·
Rectangle55.6%+5.20.54727 ·
Half fence54.5%+4.20.77211 ·
Full fence46.1%-4.20.75013 ·
Octagon42.9%-7.50.6847 ·
Open35.3%-15.10.18517 ·
Breakable full fence25.0%-25.40.06612 ·
Fence and open0.0%-50.40.3121 ·
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 13.05 on 9 df, p 0.160

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence46.1%13+21.10.271-8.40.682-17.50.313-31.60.138-31.60.138+46.10.369+10.90.547-9.40.577+3.30.888
Breakable full fence-21.10.27125.0%12-29.60.147-38.60.031-52.80.017-52.80.017+25.00.569-10.30.555-30.60.077-17.90.419
Half fence+8.40.682+29.60.14754.5%11-9.10.614-23.20.279-23.20.279+54.50.296+19.30.315-1.00.955+11.70.629
Breakable half fence+17.50.313+38.60.031+9.10.61463.6%22-14.10.445-14.10.445+63.60.202+28.40.079+8.10.567+20.80.331
Low fence+31.60.138+52.80.017+23.20.279+14.10.44577.8%9+0.01.000+77.80.107+42.50.039+22.20.236+34.90.152
Single wall+31.60.138+52.80.017+23.20.279+14.10.445-0.01.00077.8%9+77.80.107+42.50.039+22.20.236+34.90.152
Fence and open-46.10.369-25.00.569-54.50.296-63.60.202-77.80.107-77.80.1070.0%1-35.30.467-55.60.274-42.90.408
Open-10.90.547+10.30.555-19.30.315-28.40.079-42.50.039-42.50.039+35.30.46735.3%17-20.30.190-7.60.728
Rectangle+9.40.577+30.60.077+1.00.955-8.10.567-22.20.236-22.20.236+55.60.274+20.30.19055.6%27+12.70.549
Octagon-3.30.888+17.90.419-11.70.629-20.80.331-34.90.152-34.90.152+42.90.408+7.60.728-12.70.54942.9%7
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.