US 10-City Composite Historical Replay: 2004-04 to 2006-09
Replay 30 monthly bars from April 2004 through September 2006 as a U.S. 10-city housing bubble scenario with a 29.2% rise. Step through each period, face six decision points, and receive AI coach feedback in a simulated, educational setting.
30 monthly bars · 6 decision points · 2004-04 to 2006-09 · Property
Key facts
Peak-to-trough drawdown of 1.8% with a 31.6% run-up.
- Max drawdown
- −1.8%
- Max run-up
- +31.6%
- Largest single-month move
- +1.9%
- Bars
- 30 Monthly bars
- Decision points
- 6
Every figure above is computed programmatically from this replay’s own candle series — no editorial input, no LLM. Methodology: Methodology
The market advances day by day. You only see candles up to the current day — as if you were really there.
At key decision points choose Buy / Trim / Exit / Hold. Each decision advances the timeline by one day.
After settlement you get a six-dimension score and an AI coach review. Your result enters the scenario leaderboard.
Event Replay
What happened — and what it teaches
The replay drops you into the U.S. 10-city housing market at a moment when rising prices had become self-reinforcing conventional wisdom. Between April 2004 and September 2006, easy credit and eager buyers created an environment where doubt felt like missed opportunity. Thirty monthly bars captured a market that seemed to offer only one direction. The stakes were real: participants had to decide when to enter, when to hold, and when to protect capital in a climate where caution was often ridiculed and skepticism was mistaken for timidity.
What the data shows is a steady, seemingly irresistible climb: the index gained 29.2 percent, moving from 172.48 to 222.84. Yet the mechanics of that rise reveal something striking. Maximum drawdown throughout the entire period was only 1.8 percent, and the largest single monthly move topped out at just 1.9 percent. This was a low-volatility ascent that rewarded patience and punished hesitation. Six decision points were embedded in the trajectory, two of them critical inflection moments where positioning determined everything that followed.
The educational value lies precisely here: this was a market that felt safe because it was calm. Low volatility masked accumulating systemic risk, and smooth upward drift trained participants to equate consistency with security. The scenario trains you to question the psychology of momentum, to recognize that tranquil markets can be the most dangerous, and to practice discipline when the environment seems to reward the opposite approach. Six decision points offer six chances to rehearse that discipline in a setting where outcomes are known but timing is not.
Featured in the archive