Atlanta Historical Replay: 2010-10 to 2013-03
Replay 30 monthly bars of Atlanta's 2010-10 to 2013-03 property market, where a 21.1% max drawdown tested every decision-maker. Walk through authentic historical days, face six decision points with two critical, and receive an AI coach review of your simulated choices.
30 monthly bars · 6 decision points · 2010-10 to 2013-03 · Property
Key facts
Peak-to-trough drawdown of 21.1% with a 19.0% run-up.
- Max drawdown
- −21.1%
- Max run-up
- +19.0%
- Largest single-month move
- −5.9%
- 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
Atlanta's property market entered October 2010 in the depths of the worst housing crash in decades. The 2010s were supposed to mark a recovery, yet the city faced persistent headwinds: underwater mortgages, high foreclosure rates, and uncertain demand. The question for any investor or analyst was whether the market had found a bottom or whether further declines lay ahead. This 30-month window compressed the dilemma into sharp relief, asking participants to act without certainty about the future.
Over the next 30 monthly bars through March 2013, the market delivered a sobering answer. The closing level fell from 103.3 to 98.25, a net decline of -4.9%. Yet the headline number masked the true severity: a maximum drawdown of 21.1% tested every participant who held through the period, and a largest single-bar move of 5.9% revealed the kind of violent swings that can shatter discipline and confidence alike.
This scenario places participants at six decision points, two of which are critical, demanding navigation of false breakouts, capitulation phases, and policy uncertainty. The key training takeaways center on process over prediction: position sizing determines survivability, emotional regulation determines execution quality, and the willingness to reassess determines long-term resilience. The -4.9% net loss and 21.1% max drawdown together illustrate that surviving a brutal drawdown requires discipline long before the recovery arrives.