US National (FHFA, 1975Q1+) Historical Replay: 1990-07 to 1997-10
Replay the U.S. national FHFA property index from 1990-07 to 1997-10, capturing a 22.7% climb across 30 monthly bars. Work through six decision points, including two critical ones, with day-by-day replay and AI coach review in a simulated, educational environment.
30 monthly bars · 6 decision points · 1990-07 to 1997-10 · Property
Key facts
Peak-to-trough drawdown of 0.4% with a 23.2% run-up.
- Max drawdown
- −0.4%
- Max run-up
- +23.2%
- Largest single-month move
- +1.6%
- Bars
- 30 Monthly bars
- Decision points
- 6
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 U.S. national FHFA property index from July 1990 to October 1997 captures a significant chapter in American housing history. Following the early 1990s recession, the market entered a gradual recovery phase that would unfold over seven years. This replay spans 30 monthly bars across the 1990s, placing participants in the mindset of an investor navigating post-recession uncertainty while trying to capture the emerging uptrend.
The index advanced from 166.79 to 204.65, delivering a cumulative return of 22.7% across the full period. Remarkably, the maximum drawdown held to just 0.4%, and the largest single monthly move reached only 1.6%. Six decision points were embedded throughout the replay, with two flagged as critical junctures where directional conviction was most tested. The market offered no dramatic crises or windfall opportunities—only steady, measured appreciation.
This scenario excels as a laboratory for process over prediction. The minimal volatility and shallow pullbacks rewarded patience and disciplined position management rather than aggressive trading. At the two critical decision points, participants faced the psychological challenge of maintaining exposure during periods when the market offered no exciting cues. The narrow daily range demanded precise risk calibration, while the absence of dramatic events tested whether traders could follow their own rules when nothing felt urgent. For decision-training purposes, the lesson is clear: low-volatility trending markets punish overactivity and reward those who define their process before the noise begins.
Featured in the archive