VirtuAnalytics

Novel Insights Through Data & Analysis

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

Lei Fei vs Wolf

Lei Fei vs Wolf in Virtua Fighter 5 REVO v1.10: Lei Fei wins 49.8% of 3,817 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 counted3,817
Win rate49.8%
Widest gap, 80+ matches4.3 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
Full fence54.2%+4.30.084360
Breakable full fence53.5%+3.60.138374
Breakable half fence53.3%+3.40.166368
Half fence51.7%+1.80.444391
Fence and open50.6%+0.70.841178
Open49.3%-0.60.812418
Single wall48.4%-1.40.563380
Rectangle47.9%-2.00.407397
Octagon47.7%-2.10.374392
Low fence45.7%-4.10.082394
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 11.26 on 9 df, p 0.258

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence54.2%360+0.70.851+2.50.492+0.90.806+8.50.020+5.80.118+3.60.431+4.90.174+6.30.083+6.50.077
Breakable full fence-0.70.85153.5%374+1.80.616+0.20.953+7.80.031+5.10.165+2.90.522+4.20.238+5.60.119+5.80.110
Half fence-2.50.492-1.80.61651.7%391-1.60.659+6.00.094+3.20.368+1.10.808+2.40.499+3.80.286+4.00.268
Breakable half fence-0.90.806-0.20.953+1.60.65953.3%368+7.60.037+4.80.186+2.70.554+4.00.266+5.40.135+5.60.126
Low fence-8.50.020-7.80.031-6.00.094-7.60.03745.7%394-2.70.446-4.90.279-3.60.305-2.20.540-2.00.571
Single wall-5.80.118-5.10.165-3.20.368-4.80.186+2.70.44648.4%380-2.10.637-0.90.808+0.60.875+0.70.842
Fence and open-3.60.431-2.90.522-1.10.808-2.70.554+4.90.279+2.10.63750.6%178+1.30.775+2.70.549+2.90.527
Open-4.90.174-4.20.238-2.40.499-4.00.266+3.60.305+0.90.808-1.30.77549.3%418+1.40.684+1.60.653
Rectangle-6.30.083-5.60.119-3.80.286-5.40.135+2.20.540-0.60.875-2.70.549-1.40.68447.9%397+0.20.965
Octagon-6.50.077-5.80.110-4.00.268-5.60.126+2.00.571-0.70.842-2.90.527-1.60.653-0.20.96547.7%392
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 counted1,706
Win rate48.2%
Widest gap, 80+ matches-6.4 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
Breakable half fence51.9%+3.70.334156
Breakable full fence51.9%+3.60.292187
Fence and open50.7%+2.40.66973 ·
Half fence50.3%+2.10.577165
Full fence49.7%+1.40.716149
Rectangle48.3%+0.00.992203
Open48.0%-0.20.956179
Octagon47.1%-1.10.751172
Single wall45.2%-3.00.392177
Low fence41.9%-6.40.077172
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 5.96 on 9 df, p 0.744

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence49.7%149-2.20.688-0.60.910-2.30.693+7.80.161+4.50.421-1.00.886+1.60.770+1.40.797+2.60.646
Breakable full fence+2.20.68851.9%187+1.60.769-0.10.992+10.00.058+6.70.203+1.20.863+3.80.464+3.60.478+4.80.366
Half fence+0.60.910-1.60.76950.3%165-1.60.772+8.40.120+5.10.345-0.40.957+2.30.676+2.00.699+3.20.556
Breakable half fence+2.30.693+0.10.992+1.60.77251.9%156+10.10.068+6.70.220+1.20.861+3.90.479+3.60.493+4.80.382
Low fence-7.80.161-10.00.058-8.40.120-10.10.06841.9%172-3.30.530-8.80.204-6.20.244-6.40.214-5.20.329
Single wall-4.50.421-6.70.203-5.10.345-6.70.220+3.30.53045.2%177-5.50.429-2.80.590-3.10.549-1.90.723
Fence and open+1.00.886-1.20.863+0.40.957-1.20.861+8.80.204+5.50.42950.7%73+2.60.704+2.40.724+3.60.607
Open-1.60.770-3.80.464-2.30.676-3.90.479+6.20.244+2.80.590-2.60.70448.0%179-0.20.964+0.90.858
Rectangle-1.40.797-3.60.478-2.00.699-3.60.493+6.40.214+3.10.549-2.40.724+0.20.96448.3%203+1.20.819
Octagon-2.60.646-4.80.366-3.20.556-4.80.382+5.20.329+1.90.723-3.60.607-0.90.858-1.20.81947.1%172
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 counted1,929
Win rate51.0%
Widest gap, 80+ matches7.0 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
Full fence58.0%+7.00.039195
Breakable full fence56.4%+5.40.135172
Breakable half fence53.5%+2.50.469187
Half fence52.4%+1.40.662210
Fence and open51.0%+0.01.000104
Open50.7%-0.30.933217
Single wall48.9%-2.00.559188
Octagon48.8%-2.20.509207
Low fence47.9%-3.10.341211
Rectangle45.7%-5.20.162164
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 9.70 on 9 df, p 0.375

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence58.0%195+1.60.764+5.60.260+4.50.379+10.10.042+9.00.077+7.00.247+7.30.140+12.20.021+9.20.066
Breakable full fence-1.60.76456.4%172+4.00.433+2.90.579+8.50.097+7.50.157+5.40.380+5.70.263+10.70.051+7.60.140
Half fence-5.60.260-4.00.43352.4%210-1.10.827+4.50.354+3.40.493+1.40.813+1.70.727+6.70.202+3.60.464
Breakable half fence-4.50.379-2.90.579+1.10.82753.5%187+5.60.264+4.50.379+2.50.681+2.80.576+7.80.148+4.70.353
Low fence-10.10.042-8.50.097-4.50.354-5.60.26447.9%211-1.10.831-3.10.605-2.80.559+2.10.681-0.90.850
Single wall-9.00.077-7.50.157-3.40.493-4.50.379+1.10.83148.9%188-2.00.740-1.80.725+3.20.548+0.10.977
Fence and open-7.00.247-5.40.380-1.40.813-2.50.681+3.10.605+2.00.74051.0%104+0.30.964+5.20.404+2.20.718
Open-7.30.140-5.70.263-1.70.727-2.80.576+2.80.559+1.80.725-0.30.96450.7%217+5.00.338+1.90.696
Rectangle-12.20.021-10.70.051-6.70.202-7.80.148-2.10.681-3.20.548-5.20.404-5.00.33845.7%164-3.10.558
Octagon-9.20.066-7.60.140-3.60.464-4.70.353+0.90.850-0.10.977-2.20.718-1.90.696+3.10.55848.8%207
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 counted182
Win rate52.8%
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
Single wall80.0%+27.20.02715 ·
Low fence63.6%+10.90.45511 ·
Breakable half fence60.0%+7.20.43425 ·
Rectangle56.7%+3.90.63830 ·
Half fence56.2%+3.50.76916 ·
Full fence50.0%-2.80.81816 ·
Open45.5%-7.30.46522 ·
Breakable full fence40.0%-12.80.30215 ·
Octagon38.5%-14.30.28413 ·
Fence and open0.0%-52.80.2891 ·
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 9.35 on 9 df, p 0.406

StageFullBreak. fullHalfBreak. halfLowWallMixedOpenRectOct
Full fence50.0%16+10.00.576-6.20.723-10.00.529-13.60.484-30.00.081+50.00.331+4.50.782-6.70.665+11.50.534
Breakable full fence-10.00.57640.0%15-16.20.366-20.00.220-23.60.234-40.00.025+40.00.424-5.50.742-16.70.292+1.50.934
Half fence+6.20.723+16.20.36656.2%16-3.80.812-7.40.701-23.80.157+56.20.274+10.80.511-0.40.978+17.80.340
Breakable half fence+10.00.529+20.00.220+3.80.81260.0%25-3.60.837-20.00.191+60.00.234+14.60.319+3.30.803+21.50.207
Low fence+13.60.484+23.60.234+7.40.701+3.60.83763.6%11-16.40.353+63.60.217+18.20.325+7.00.688+25.20.219
Single wall+30.00.081+40.00.025+23.80.157+20.00.191+16.40.35380.0%15+80.00.074+34.50.036+23.30.123+41.50.025
Fence and open-50.00.331-40.00.424-56.20.274-60.00.234-63.60.217-80.00.0740.0%1-45.50.370-56.70.263-38.50.439
Open-4.50.782+5.50.742-10.80.511-14.60.319-18.20.325-34.50.036+45.50.37045.5%22-11.20.424+7.00.686
Rectangle+6.70.665+16.70.292+0.40.978-3.30.803-7.00.688-23.30.123+56.70.263+11.20.42456.7%30+18.20.273
Octagon-11.50.534-1.50.934-17.80.340-21.50.207-25.20.219-41.50.025+38.50.439-7.00.686-18.20.27338.5%13
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.