US 10-City Composite Historical Replay: 2018-03 to 2020-08
Replay 30 monthly bars of a US 10-city property index rising 8.0% from 2018-03 to 2020-08 across a Fed rate-hike cycle. You step through each bar, make choices at 6 decision points including 2 critical ones, and receive an AI coach review of your reasoning in a simulated, educational environment.
30 monthly bars · 6 decision points · 2018-03 to 2020-08 · Property
Key facts
Peak-to-trough drawdown of 0.2% with a 8.0% run-up.
- Max drawdown
- −0.2%
- Max run-up
- +8.0%
- Largest single-month move
- +1.7%
- 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 US 10-city composite property index entered a challenging environment in March 2018 as the Federal Reserve embarked on a rate-hike cycle. Investors holding real estate exposure faced a critical test: would property values withstand the pressure of rising borrowing costs, or would the secular tailwinds of the post-crisis recovery be enough to sustain performance? This 30-month replay captures the tension between monetary policy tightening and the fundamental resilience of diversified urban property markets.
Over the full period, the index rose modestly from 223.22 to 240.98, delivering an 8.0% total return. The journey was remarkably smooth—the maximum drawdown measured just 0.2%, and the largest single monthly move reached only 1.7%. Six decision points punctuated the timeline, with two emerging as critical inflection moments that tested investors' conviction and discipline. The tight trading range and limited volatility masked the underlying policy uncertainty, creating a deceptive sense of stability.
For decision training, this replay teaches the danger of confusing low volatility with low risk. With max drawdown at 0.2% and most monthly bars showing subdued movement, participants must practice the discipline of looking beyond price stability to identify shifting macro conditions. The two critical decision points likely coincided with Fed communications or economic data that, on the surface, appeared innocuous given the narrow price range. Training your evaluation process to question whether steady performance creates complacency—rather than confirming a sound thesis—is the psychological skill this scenario develops.
Featured in the archive