Soybean Meal Historical Replay: 2006-11 to 2007-05
Replay the early phase of the 2007 grain shock across 122 daily bars as soybean meal swings from 190 to 202. Step into 21 decision points, including 7 critical ones, and receive an AI coach review of your simulated choices in this educational market replay.
122 daily bars · 21 decision points · 2006-11 to 2007-05 · Commodities
Key facts
This window spans 179 days with a peak-to-trough drawdown of 17.5% and a 26.2% run-up.
- Max drawdown
- −17.5%
- Max run-up
- +26.2%
- Duration
- 179 days
- Largest single-day move
- +8.1%
- Bars
- 122 Daily bars
- Decision points
- 21
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 soybean meal market entered a volatile period in late 2006 as grain markets began experiencing the early tremors of what would become the 2007 commodity shock. Across the 2000s decade, agricultural commodities faced mounting pressures from global supply shifts and growing demand. This replay places you in the thick of 122 daily bars spanning November 2006 to May 2007, where soybean meal prices sat at 190 and the rules of engagement were being rewritten by forces that would reshape the entire grains complex.
The numbers tell a story of deceptive calm punctuated by sudden turbulence. Soybean meal closed the period at 202, a gain of 6.3 percent that on the surface seems modest. Yet this outcome required navigating a maximum drawdown of 17.5 percent and absorbing the shock of an 8.1 percent single-bar move along the way. The 21 decision points embedded in this replay, including 7 critical junctures, offered no comfortable margin for error. Each turning point demanded that participants choose a direction while uncertainty reigned.
This scenario strips away the comfort of hindsight to test what matters most in trading: process discipline and psychological resilience. The gap between the 6.3 percent final return and the 17.5 percent drawdown reveals how survival and profitability depend on risk management under adverse conditions. Educational replays like this one train participants to maintain composure when markets move violently, stick to defined rules rather than react impulsively, and recognize that outcomes visible in history were anything but certain to participants living through them. Understanding this gap between retrospective clarity and real-time uncertainty is the foundation of sound decision training.
Featured in the archive