War · KOSPI Index (2016)
Replay 144 daily bars of the KOSPI from September 2015 to April 2016, navigating a 10.6% max drawdown amid war-driven sanctions anxiety. You make decisions at 9 critical points, receive an AI coach review, and learn from simulated capital only.
144 daily bars · 25 decision points · 2015-09 to 2016-04 · Stocks
Key facts
This window spans 215 days with a peak-to-trough drawdown of 10.6% and a 9.1% run-up.
- Max drawdown
- −10.6%
- Max run-up
- +9.1%
- Duration
- 215 days
- Largest single-day move
- −2.9%
- Bars
- 144 Daily bars
- Decision points
- 25
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
Between September 2015 and April 2016, the KOSPI navigated 144 daily bars against a geopolitical backdrop that few investors could ignore. War-driven sanctions anxiety, rooted in the North Korean nuclear situation, created sustained uncertainty over the Korean economy and its equity markets. The index opened at 1934.2, challenging participants to make decisions under conditions where political risk defied easy quantification.
Despite the tense environment, the KOSPI closed the era at 1970.37, delivering a modest 1.9% return over approximately seven months. Yet this headline figure obscures a wilder internal journey. The market endured a maximum drawdown of 10.6% and its largest single session moved 2.9%, underscoring how geopolitical crises can generate severe intraperiod volatility even when long-run outcomes appear tame. Participants faced 25 decision points across 9 critical junctures, demanding both timing precision and emotional steadiness.
This scenario exposes the psychological core of risk management during geopolitical stress. A disciplined process—pre-defined drawdown thresholds, calibrated position sizing, and detached adherence to rules—separates recovery from capitulation. The episode teaches that surviving temporary adversity without forced decisions often determines whether one captures the eventual rebound. These are lessons no textbook conveys as effectively as live simulation under authentic historical pressure.