Collapse · KOSPI Index (1998)
Replay 150 trading days as the KOSPI plunges 29.5% from 438.7 to 309.28, with a peak drawdown of 51.2% and a 10.2% single-day shock. Make decisions across 26 checkpoints and receive an AI coach review of each choice in this simulated, educational scenario.
150 daily bars · 26 decision points · 1997-11 to 1998-07 · Stocks
Key facts
This window spans 226 days with a peak-to-trough drawdown of 51.2% and a 63.8% run-up.
- Max drawdown
- −51.2%
- Max run-up
- +63.8%
- Duration
- 226 days
- Largest single-day move
- +10.2%
- Bars
- 150 Daily bars
- Decision points
- 26
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
In late 1997, South Korea stood at the epicenter of the Asian Financial Crisis. The won was collapsing, major conglomerates faced imminent default, and the IMF had stepped in with a historic bailout package. For Korean equity investors, the fundamental question was brutally simple: hold positions in a market unraveling under capital flight and corporate distress, or cut losses and flee. The KOSPI, once a proxy for Korea's economic ascent, now measured the depth of its contraction.
From November 26, 1997 to July 10, 1998, the KOSPI Index fell from 438.7 to 309.28, a decline of 29.5% across 150 trading days. The index touched a maximum drawdown of 51.2%—meaning peak-to-trough losses exceeded half the market's value. A single trading session saw a 10.2% move, underscoring the regime of extreme volatility. Participants in this replay navigate 26 decision checkpoints, including 9 critical junctures where positioning could mean the difference between preserving capital or compounding losses.
This scenario strips away the comfort of hindsight to test real decision-making under stress. Participants confront core challenges: when does a declining market offer value, and when does it signal fundamental breakdown? How should position sizing account for drawdowns that exceed historical norms? The psychological dimension proves as demanding as the analytical one—holding through a 51.2% drawdown tests conviction, while selling at the bottom reveals the gap between intended strategy and executed behavior. The replay ultimately trains participants to separate process from outcome, building habits that hold under pressure rather than only in favorable conditions.