This chapter assesses the strength of two prominent arguments against realism, namely the Pessimistic Meta Induction and the (related) Problem of Unconceived Alternatives. The chapter concludes that the latter does not pose a threat that is significantly distinct from the former. The chapter then argues that the more fundamental concern of realists (and antirealists alike) must be the so-called base-rate fallacy, as highlighted by Magnus and Callender, in particular. On the basis of the Kuhnian framework of theory-choice and an epistemological insight by Earman, the chapter advances a new argument for realism. This ‘no-virtue-coincidence argument’ for realism shows that a theory that possesses all of the standard virtues and is embraced by numerous scientists is likely to be true.