History rhymes here, and the idea that a simple KS test execution guarantees statistical similarity without proof is a risky deviation. The precedent shows us that the validity of a statistical test always depends on its conditions of application and human interpretation. For example, applying these tests to Chinese market data, where political signals often dictate behavior, could mask fundamental differences rather than reveal them. The playbook reminds us that behavioral factors and local regulatory particularities are paramount. Ignoring this risks erroneous conclusions on sensitive markets.