Top Performing Decklists
| Deck | Creator | Record | Best Finish |
|---|---|---|---|
| Esper Pixie | kthanakit26 | 9-1 | 1st in MTGO Standard Challenge 32 #12769881 |
| Esper Pixie | houseofmanamtg | 7-2 | 1st in MTGO Standard Challenge 32 #12765757 |
| Esper Pixie | gyrabbit47 | 7-2 | 1st in MTGO Standard Challenge 32 #12765778 |
| Esper Pixie | platinum-mythic rank player | 6-0 | 1st in Traditional Standard Ranked Decklists: April 14, 2025 |
| Orzhov Pixie | platinum-mythic rank player | 6-0 | 1st in Traditional Standard Ranked Decklists: April 14, 2025 |
| Mardu Tokens | platinum-mythic rank player | 6-0 | 1st in Traditional Standard Ranked Decklists: April 14, 2025 |
| Orzhov Pixie | sam_lewin | 7-2 | None |
| Unknown Archetype | elvin7 | 7-2 | None |
| Orzhov Tokens | ivan_draw_go | 6-1 | None |
| Esper Pixie | ejk | 6-1 | None |
Performance Stats (Last 14 Days)
Win Rate Impact
Top Table Win Rate
Meta Trend
Sample Size
Tournament Results
Average Copies
Archetypes Using This Card:
4 Color Legends , 4 Color Omniscience , 5 Color Legends , Abzan Beanstalk , Abzan Doubling , Abzan Midrange , Abzan Pixie , Abzan Reanimator , Abzan Roots
Meta Performance Analysis
Concealed Courtyard ranks #411 out of approximately 410 cards in raw efficiency (top 100%).
Game Impact Factor
Color Differential
Colorless average: 64.0%
Performance compared to other Colorless cardsBased on our comprehensive multi-metric analysis, Concealed Courtyard is an underperforming card in the current meta.
Recommended number of copies: 1
Win Rate Timeline
Card Efficiency Analysis
Raw Efficiency (Win Rate/Mana)
Relative Efficiency
Performance Efficiency: 35.82 (Win rate × Top 8 rate ÷ Mana value)
At 0 mana, the average win rate in the format is 74.4%. Concealed Courtyard has a win rate of 71.1%, making it 4.4% worse than other 0-mana cards.
Top Performing Partners
| Card Name | Type | Deck Count | Win Rate | 1st Places |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Haughty Djinn | Creature — Djinn | 5 | 79.3% | 2 |
| Binding Negotiation | Sorcery | 5 | 69.3% | 0 |
| Thought-Stalker Warlock | Creature — Lizard Warlock | 9 | 68.2% | 5 |
| Dewdrop Cure | Sorcery | 8 | 66.9% | 4 |
| Recommission | Sorcery | 16 | 66.7% | 6 |
| Skyfisher Spider | Creature — Spider | 5 | 65.7% | 2 |
| Skrelv, Defector Mite | Legendary Artifact Creature — Phyrexian Mite | 8 | 65.4% | 4 |
| Sunpearl Kirin | Creature — Kirin | 114 | 63.7% | 35 |
| Knight of Grace | Creature — Human Knight | 62 | 63.7% | 29 |
| Abhorrent Oculus | Creature — Eye | 12 | 62.9% | 4 |
Card Synergy Analysis
Cards that perform better with Concealed Courtyard than they do on average. A positive synergy score indicates stronger performance together.
| Card Name | Type | Mana | Decks | Win Rate Together | Win Rate Apart | Synergy Score |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Torch the Tower | Instant | 1 | 6 | 88.9% | 73.9% | +15.0% |
| Tishana's Tidebinder | Creature — Merfolk Wizard | 3 | 6 | 84.8% | 72.5% | +12.3% |
| Authority of the Consuls | Enchantment | 1 | 8 | 81.1% | 74.3% | +6.8% |
| Break the Spell | Instant | 1 | 13 | 79.1% | 75.3% | +3.8% |
| Liliana of the Veil | Legendary Planeswalker — Liliana | 3 | 15 | 78.9% | 75.2% | +3.7% |
| Sheltered by Ghosts | Enchantment — Aura | 2 | 11 | 77.4% | 75.1% | +2.3% |
| Kaito, Bane of Nightmares | Legendary Planeswalker — Kaito | 4 | 63 | 74.4% | 72.1% | +2.3% |
| Tinybones Joins Up | Legendary Enchantment | 1 | 14 | 75.6% | 73.4% | +2.2% |
| No More Lies | Instant | 2 | 75 | 73.3% | 71.1% | +2.2% |
| Spell Pierce | Instant | 1 | 20 | 76.2% | 74.4% | +1.8% |
Top Archetypes
| Archetype | Deck Count | % of Archetype | Win Rate |
|---|---|---|---|
| Esper Pixie | 1579 | 100.0% | 54.1% |
| Orzhov Pixie | 76 | 100.0% | 46.6% |
| Orzhov Lifegain | 71 | 89.9% | 22.9% |
| Unknown Archetype | 36 | 9.9% | 45.2% |
| Orzhov Tokens | 29 | 96.7% | 46.9% |
Statistics Explanation
| Statistic | Description | Formula |
|---|---|---|
| Win Rate Impact | How much this card increases or decreases the win rate of decks that include it, compared to the average deck in the format. | (Win rate of decks with this card) - (Average win rate of all decks) |
| Top Table Win Rate | A weighted win rate that gives more significance to performance in higher tournament placements. First place finishes count for 2x, with diminishing weight down to 8th place. | ∑(wins × placement_weight) / ∑((wins + losses) × placement_weight) |
| Meta Trend | Shows if the card is performing better or worse in the most recent period compared to earlier periods. Positive values indicate improving performance. | (Win rate in recent half of time period) - (Win rate in earlier half of time period) |
| Confidence Factor | A measure of statistical reliability based on sample size. The progress bar indicates how confident we are in the statistics (with larger sample sizes providing higher confidence). | log10(Number of decks + 1) |
| Average Copies | The average number of copies of this card included in decks that use it. | ∑(Copies in each deck) / (Number of decks) |
| Card Synergy Score | Measures how well this card performs with other cards compared to their individual performance. | (Win rate together) - (Average of individual win rates) |
| Raw Efficiency | Win rate points per mana invested. Higher values indicate better returns on mana investment. | (Win rate) / (Mana value) |
| Relative Efficiency | How efficient this card is compared to the average card of the same mana value. | ((Win rate) / (Format average win rate for same mana)) / (Mana value) |
| Performance Efficiency | Combined metric that accounts for win rate, tournament success, and mana investment. | (Win rate × Top 8 placement rate) / (Mana value) |
| Game Impact Factor | A measure of how much this card affects game outcomes, based on win rate adjusted by its deviation from the format average. | Win rate × (1 + (Win rate - Format average) / 100) |
| Color Differential | How this card's win rate compares to the average win rate of other cards of the same color. | Win rate - Average win rate for same color |
All statistics are calculated using tournament data from the selected time period. Sample sizes below 10 decks may not provide statistically significant results.