Regulation · Shanghai Composite Index (2015)
Replay 144 trading days from May 13 to December 10, 2015, as China's Shanghai Composite fell 21.0% amid a sweeping cleanup of leveraged stock trading. Step through each session, face critical decision points, and receive AI coach review of your choices in this simulated educational scenario.
144 daily bars · 25 decision points · 2015-05 to 2015-12 · Stocks
Key facts
This window spans 211 days with a peak-to-trough drawdown of 43.3% and a 24.7% run-up.
- Max drawdown
- −43.3%
- Max run-up
- +24.7%
- Duration
- 211 days
- Largest single-day move
- −8.5%
- 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
In May 2015 the Shanghai Composite Index sat near historic highs as China's stock market boomed on easy credit and speculative fervor. Behind the rally lay a vast shadow-banking system: off-exchange leveraged trading, estimated to involve hundreds of billions of yuan, amplified gains and concealed systemic risk. Regulators moved to unwind this leverage, triggering a crisis of confidence that would reshape the market for years to come. This replay steps through 144 trading days, placing you inside the policy maelstrom as decisions had to be made without knowing how the saga would end.
The index closed at 4375.76 on May 13 and fell to 3455.5 by December 10, an overall decline of 21.0%. Yet the true story was one of violent oscillation: maximum drawdown reached 43.3%, and the largest single trading session moved the market by 8.5%. Across the replay, 25 decision points were embedded—9 deemed critical—forcing participants to navigate cascading margin calls, government interventions, and shifting sentiment. The market did not fall in a straight line; it lurched between panic and fleeting rallies, creating repeated false dawns.
This scenario trains traders to manage process under duress rather than chase outcomes. The policy-driven nature of the crash means fundamentals offered limited protection—position sizing, risk limits, and emotional discipline became survival tools. Participants confront the psychology of loss aversion as portfolios draw down sharply, learning to distinguish between signal and noise when headlines scream and prices swing wildly. Completing the replay, traders internalize that disciplined frameworks matter more than predictions in volatile, regulation-driven markets.