Team Rankings
Explore complete teams ranked by observed Usage Rate. Compare the published population, then open a composition to inspect its evidence.
The Team Rankings page is built around answering one question:
Which teams are used most often across recent endgame content?
To answer that, we compare complete four-Character teams across up to the latest 3 published cycles. 3 cycles are currently available. Use Team Comp Finder to explore teams containing a particular Character.
- Eligibility:
A team needs at least 20 observations in at least one independent encounter context to appear. Once it qualifies, its count includes all accepted positive observations across the selected compatible contexts, including smaller fragments. Two samples of 19 alone do not qualify.
- Usage Rate:
A qualifying team's complete count divided by all 64,721 accepted team observations across the selected encounters, including unpublished teams. Counts are pooled before division; equal counts share a rank. Supported-context coverage still counts only contexts with at least 20 observations, not every positive fragment.
- Team identity:
The same four Characters form one team regardless of their order. Overall totals are not added to individual halves or battlefields, and overlapping Stygian difficulty samples are not counted twice.
- Scope:
Fearless + Dire across all three battlefields. These capped published lists show accepted team observations, not unique players or every team played. Absence from a list is not proof of zero use.
- Performance:
This ranking measures usage, not strength. Comparable performance and investment data are unavailable, so it has no Team Index or investment filter.
Data & sources
Data comes from YShelper public aggregate statistics. AstraVoy independently calculates the displayed statistics and creates their visualizations.
Cycle starts: 6.7 (2026-07-08); 7.0 (2026-08-19); 7.1 (2026-09-30). Exact cycle end dates are unavailable.
View YShelperObserved team rankings
3 recent cycles, 64,721 observations, 287 eligible compositions
| Rank | Team | Usage Rate | Observations | Team evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| #500.39% Usage Rate |     | 0.39% | 255 observations | |
| #520.39% Usage Rate |     | 0.39% | 250 observations | |
| #530.36% Usage Rate |     | 0.36% | 232 observations | |
| #540.36% Usage Rate |    | 0.36% | 230 observations | |
| #550.35% Usage Rate |    | 0.35% | 226 observations | |
| #560.33% Usage Rate |   | 0.33% | 215 observations | |
| #570.33% Usage Rate |    | 0.33% | 212 observations | |
| #580.31% Usage Rate | | 0.31% | 203 observations | |
| #590.30% Usage Rate |   | 0.30% | 196 observations | |
| #600.30% Usage Rate |  | 0.30% | 193 observations | |
| #610.28% Usage Rate | | 0.28% | 182 observations | |
| #620.28% Usage Rate | | 0.28% | 178 observations | |
| #630.27% Usage Rate | | 0.27% | 173 observations | |
| #640.26% Usage Rate |    | 0.26% | 171 observations | |
| #650.25% Usage Rate |  | 0.25% | 162 observations | |
| #660.22% Usage Rate |   | 0.22% | 142 observations | |
| #670.21% Usage Rate |   | 0.21% | 136 observations | |
| #670.21% Usage Rate | | 0.21% | 136 observations | |
| #690.21% Usage Rate |    | 0.21% | 134 observations | |
| #700.20% Usage Rate | | 0.20% | 131 observations | |
| #710.20% Usage Rate |   | 0.20% | 127 observations | |
| #720.19% Usage Rate |  | 0.19% | 124 observations | |
| #730.19% Usage Rate | | 0.19% | 123 observations | |
| #740.19% Usage Rate | | 0.19% | 122 observations | |
| #750.19% Usage Rate | | 0.19% | 121 observations | |
| #750.19% Usage Rate | | 0.19% | 121 observations | |
| #770.18% Usage Rate |  | 0.18% | 119 observations | |
| #770.18% Usage Rate |  | 0.18% | 119 observations | |
| #790.18% Usage Rate | | 0.18% | 117 observations | |
| #800.18% Usage Rate | | 0.18% | 116 observations | |
| #800.18% Usage Rate |  | 0.18% | 116 observations | |
| #820.17% Usage Rate |  | 0.17% | 113 observations | |
| #830.17% Usage Rate | | 0.17% | 108 observations | |
| #830.17% Usage Rate |   | 0.17% | 108 observations | |
| #850.16% Usage Rate | | 0.16% | 106 observations | |
| #860.16% Usage Rate | | 0.16% | 104 observations | |
| #860.16% Usage Rate | | 0.16% | 104 observations | |
| #880.16% Usage Rate | | 0.16% | 103 observations | |
| #890.16% Usage Rate | | 0.16% | 102 observations | |
| #900.16% Usage Rate | | 0.16% | 101 observations | |
| #910.15% Usage Rate | | 0.15% | 100 observations | |
| #910.15% Usage Rate | | 0.15% | 100 observations | |
| #930.15% Usage Rate |   | 0.15% | 99 observations | |
| #940.15% Usage Rate |  | 0.15% | 97 observations | |
| #950.15% Usage Rate | | 0.15% | 96 observations | |
| #950.15% Usage Rate | | 0.15% | 96 observations | |
| #970.15% Usage Rate | | 0.15% | 95 observations | |
| #970.15% Usage Rate | | 0.15% | 95 observations | |
| #990.15% Usage Rate | | 0.15% | 94 observations | |
| #1000.14% Usage Rate | | 0.14% | 92 observations |