Top Performing Decklists
| Deck | Creator | Record | Best Finish |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dimir Bounce | enter | 9-1 | 1st in MTGO Standard Challenge 64 #12763190 |
| 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 |
| Mono Black Demons | 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 |
| Esper Pixie | 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 |
| 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:
Abzan Pixie , Dimir Bounce , Dimir Midrange , Esper Enchantments , Esper Paragon , Esper Pixie , Grixis Bounce , Mardu Siegebreaker , Mono Black , Mono Black Demons
Meta Performance Analysis
Hopeless Nightmare ranks #70 out of approximately 406 cards in raw efficiency (top 17%).
Game Impact Factor
Color Differential
Black average: 74.5%
Performance compared to other Black cardsBased on our comprehensive multi-metric analysis, Hopeless Nightmare is a solid card that performs above average in the current meta.
Recommended number of copies: 3
Win Rate Timeline
Card Efficiency Analysis
Raw Efficiency (Win Rate/Mana)
Relative Efficiency
Performance Efficiency: 39.01 (Win rate × Top 8 rate ÷ Mana value)
At 1 mana, the average win rate in the format is 76.0%. Hopeless Nightmare has a win rate of 73.2%, making it 3.7% worse than other 1-mana cards.
Top Performing Partners
| Card Name | Type | Deck Count | Win Rate | 1st Places |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Saiba Cryptomancer | Creature — Moonfolk Ninja | 28 | 81.5% | 15 |
| Serra Paragon | Creature — Angel | 11 | 75.8% | 3 |
| Thought-Stalker Warlock | Creature — Lizard Warlock | 41 | 73.0% | 16 |
| Elesh Norn, Mother of Machines | Legendary Creature — Phyrexian Praetor | 6 | 71.8% | 2 |
| Invasion of Amonkhet | Battle — Siege | 10 | 70.5% | 5 |
| Knight of Grace | Creature — Human Knight | 53 | 70.4% | 27 |
| Defabricate | Instant | 5 | 68.6% | 3 |
| Cori-Steel Cutter | Artifact — Equipment | 6 | 68.2% | 2 |
| Abrade | Instant | 5 | 67.4% | 1 |
| Opt | Instant | 7 | 65.0% | 2 |
Card Synergy Analysis
Cards that perform better with Hopeless Nightmare 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Anoint with Affliction | Instant | 2 | 5 | 92.6% | 72.5% | +20.1% |
| Malicious Eclipse | Sorcery | 3 | 6 | 77.3% | 72.5% | +4.8% |
| Enduring Curiosity | Enchantment Creature — Cat Glimmer | 4 | 5 | 77.3% | 72.6% | +4.7% |
| Cori-Steel Cutter | Artifact — Equipment | 2 | 6 | 80.0% | 75.6% | +4.4% |
| Spell Pierce | Instant | 1 | 24 | 79.5% | 75.1% | +4.3% |
| Authority of the Consuls | Enchantment | 1 | 5 | 79.3% | 75.3% | +4.0% |
| Sheltered by Ghosts | Enchantment — Aura | 2 | 11 | 78.6% | 75.4% | +3.1% |
| Ghost Vacuum | Artifact | 1 | 69 | 77.1% | 74.3% | +2.8% |
| Floodpits Drowner | Creature — Merfolk | 2 | 27 | 75.5% | 72.9% | +2.6% |
| Liliana of the Veil | Legendary Planeswalker — Liliana | 3 | 14 | 78.9% | 76.3% | +2.6% |
Top Archetypes
| Archetype | Deck Count | % of Archetype | Win Rate |
|---|---|---|---|
| Esper Pixie | 1560 | 99.9% | 54.5% |
| Dimir Bounce | 345 | 69.8% | 50.4% |
| Dimir Midrange | 270 | 13.0% | 49.4% |
| Orzhov Pixie | 67 | 91.8% | 48.4% |
| Rakdos Sacrifice | 61 | 79.2% | 46.4% |
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.