USD/PEN Historical Replay: 2018-07 to 2018-10
Step into 64 daily bars of USD/PEN from July to October 2018, when emerging-market stress drove a 3.2% peak drawdown. You will replay each session, make calls at 4 critical decision points, and receive an AI coach review.
64 daily bars · 11 decision points · 2018-07 to 2018-10 · Forex
Key facts
This window spans 87 days with a peak-to-trough drawdown of 3.2% and a 4.8% run-up.
- Max drawdown
- −3.2%
- Max run-up
- +4.8%
- Duration
- 87 days
- Largest single-day move
- +3.0%
- Bars
- 64 Daily bars
- Decision points
- 11
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 USD/PEN market during July-October 2018 found itself caught in a crosswind of emerging-market stress. As Turkey and Argentina grappled with currency crises, investor risk appetite for developing nations wobbled. Peru's sol, while historically stable, was not immune to the contagion dynamics rippling through the EM FX space. The data span of 64 daily bars from 2018-07-09 to 2018-10-04 captures this episode of vulnerability.
The period saw the USD/PEN close shift from 3.275 to 3.326, a modest 1.6% depreciation of the sol. Yet beneath that tame headline figure lay sharper turbulence: peak drawdown reached 3.2% and the largest single-bar move hit 3.0%, reminding traders that aggregate calm can mask acute intraday spikes. Eleven decision points were embedded across the dataset, four flagged as critical, demanding responses when momentum shifted abruptly.
This replay sharpens decision-training across three dimensions. Process discipline requires traders to define entries and exits before volatility accelerates, not after. Risk calibration asks whether a 3.0% single-bar shock would breach position limits or sleep thresholds. Psychology confronts the temptation to dismiss a 1.6% net move as trivial while ignoring the 3.2% drawdown trail beneath it. Navigating these tensions builds the judgment needed when systemic EM stress resurfaces.
Featured in the archive