US 10-City Composite Historical Replay: 2020-11 to 2023-04
Replay 30 monthly bars of a U.S. city property index from November 2020 to April 2023, climbing 25.6% from 253.46 to 318.39. Step through decision points day by day in this simulated historical scenario and receive an AI coach review of your choices.
30 monthly bars · 6 decision points · 2020-11 to 2023-04 · Property
Key facts
Peak-to-trough drawdown of 3.4% with a 28.5% run-up.
- Max drawdown
- −3.4%
- Max run-up
- +28.5%
- Largest single-month move
- +2.1%
- 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 immerses participants in a U.S. city composite property index spanning November 2020 to April 2023, replaying 30 monthly bars that capture an extraordinary post-pandemic surge. This era was defined by rock-bottom interest rates, constrained housing supply, and ravenous buyer demand—a perfect storm that pushed property valuations to levels that tested conventional valuation logic. Participants entering this environment faced a market where every assumption about risk and return was challenged by historical extremes.
The index climbed from 253.46 to 318.39, delivering a 25.6% cumulative return across the 30-month data span. Remarkably, the maximum drawdown registered just 3.4%, while the largest single monthly candle measured a modest 2.1%. Six decision points punctuated the replay, two of which carried critical status—moments where directional commitment would be severely tested. The combination of steady appreciation and compressed volatility created a backdrop where patience was rewarded and reactive selling was punished.
This scenario exposes how low-volatility trends breed complacency. With a maximum drawdown of only 3.4%, participants may have underestimated exposure sizing and risk buffers. The 2.1% monthly swings—appearances of calm—belie the psychological difficulty of holding positions through critical junctures. The lesson for decision training is clear: favorable statistics can mask fragility. Participants learn to question whether smooth sailing reflects genuine market health or merely a pause before reversal, and to maintain discipline regardless of how gentle the drawdown appears.
Featured in the archive