Merval Downtrend Replay (2025-02-20 to 2025-03-10)
Replay a 14.6% drawdown across the Argentine Merval from February 6 to March 21, 2025. Step through 7 decision points day by day in this simulated environment and receive AI coach feedback on each call.
30 daily bars · 7 decision points · 2025-02 to 2025-03 · Stocks
Key facts
This window spans 43 days with a peak-to-trough drawdown of 14.6% and a 13.8% run-up.
- Max drawdown
- −14.6%
- Max run-up
- +13.8%
- Duration
- 43 days
- Largest single-day move
- +6.1%
- Bars
- 30 Daily bars
- Decision points
- 7
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 Argentine Merval, one of Latin America's most closely watched equity indices, entered a challenging period in the first quarter of 2025. From February 6 to March 21, the index navigated a sustained pullback that tested the resolve of participants across 30 trading days. This was not a flash crash but a grinding, multi-week affair—one that forced investors to confront the difference between temporary turbulence and a genuine shift in market character. Seven decision points punctuated the journey, three of them flagged as critical inflection moments where the stakes were highest.
The headline number tells only part of the story. The index closed the period at 2,433,538 points, representing a 2.8% decline from the opening level of 2,503,483. Yet the maximum drawdown reached 14.6%, meaning peak-to-trough losses substantially exceeded the final headline figure. A single day's move of 6.1% demonstrated the kind of intraday volatility that can unsettle even prepared investors. These numbers—2.8%, 14.6%, 6.1%—frame a landscape where the difference between reported loss and actual pain was considerable.
This replay strips away the comfort of hindsight to expose the raw texture of decision-making under uncertainty. Participants confront whether they can distinguish necessary portfolio protection from panic-driven selling. The three critical moments become pressure points where anchoring, loss aversion, and recency bias reveal themselves most starkly. The scenario teaches that managing a 14.6% drawdown requires discipline, not prediction—sticking to process when every instinct screams for action. For trainees, the lesson is clear: the goal is not to avoid losses but to make sound decisions when losses arrive.
Featured in the archive