Jump to content

Welcome to the new Traders Laboratory! Please bear with us as we finish the migration over the next few days. If you find any issues, want to leave feedback, get in touch with us, or offer suggestions please post to the Support forum here.

  • Welcome Guests

    Welcome. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest which does not give you access to all the great features at Traders Laboratory such as interacting with members, access to all forums, downloading attachments, and eligibility to win free giveaways. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free. Create a FREE Traders Laboratory account here.

jackb

Fail Statistics

Recommended Posts

Has anybody ever ran across any definitive studies about speculative trader fail rates (i.e., the net of the trader's career resulting in lost money)? All I've ran across are antecdotal reports. It won't surprise me that the oft mentioned figures of 90-99% are fairly accurate, but I'd love something more concrete to reference.

 

Whatever that number is, what's interesting is how little attention is given to the non-fail (remainder) stat. I get the sense that most newbie traders fixate on that remainder percent figure as the rarefied stratum (a supposed "success" level) they must shoot for. But that's not quite right, is it?

 

That remainder stat is just the beginning of non-fails and, as such, it has its own spectrum of non-failing: beginning with breakeven and topping out at some CAGR that some spec trader has been able to achieve over a significantly long period (minimum of at least 20 years).

 

So take whatever the definitive fail rate is, add to it the percentage points comprised by all the breakeven traders as well as all the other traders that are achieving returns that would not support "making a living" for you given your capital base and lifestyle and isn't that the stat one needs to focus on?

 

If you arbitrarily group those non-fail traders into something like: Breakeven - 5%; Over 5% up to 10%; Over 10% up to 15%; etc., I suspect a disproportionate weighting will be found in the groups below 10% and that a insignificant number will be found in the groups above 20% CAGR.

 

Exactly how small does that stat fall to given that one needs/wants/desires at least 20%?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How is this statistic useful? If you're one of the 'fails' it may reassure you that you're not alone, but it still doesn't show you where you went wrong. If you're one of the others, you don't need to concern yourself with it. I you're not a trader, surely there are better things to do in life :-)

 

Max

Edited by maxr

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont know about the lies lies and damn stats,

but from experience I have seen many traders over the years, make more money for them selves, in bonuses etc; than they did for their clients. Usually as their trading records are something like....

+120%, +30%, +72%,+100%,-10%,+20%, -300%

Its that last one that does the damage.

 

Whilst working for yourself is completely different. There is no one to bail you out.

The successful traders - I do know a few - probably about 1% of all those traders I have known, usually have trading records along the line of

+30%,+10%,+40%,+15%,2%,-5%,+25%.....

given this effort for consistency, after costs, after taxes and after living expenses, growing an account requires a larger base equity amount to start with, otherwise eventually inflation will still get you over the life of the person (20 + yrs).

So the fail rate can still be high even for those who make money.

 

Now you also have to distinguish between those that trade and those that make markets, those that follow indexes, those that operate peoples orders, those that do merger arbs, those that trade order flow for a bank etc.

Not that there is anything wrong with these, but very few traders actually end up taking on risk as such and make a living from "pure" speculative trading. :2c:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good thread and thoughts.

 

I'm with Siuya on the track records he shows. In another life when I did manage some funds it amazed me how often we'd talk in single digit monthly returns and we'd get laughed right on out of there. As if it was an insult if you weren't talking 10%+ monthly returns, 100%+ a year. Of course that tends to be your 98%. With crazy expectations. They want 100%+ a year, with 5% max drawdowns. It just doesn't happen.

 

So I would definitely agree that more than likely the bigger group of successful traders are not the ones making 500% a year -- those are the outliers and exceptions and more than likely to implode anyway the following year. That 10% - 30% range though with modest drawdown I'd say is the bulk of those who are successful.

 

Granted the far reaching majority will never cross the break-even threshold and I'd say one major reason is greed, another is the desire to always be right. Which you're going to get spanked by trading on a daily basis. No matter how hard you work.

 

If I was to guess? I think if you are willing to really work hard and be committed with some good guidance 10% - 20% can definitely succeed. Maybe more. However, most will not work hard so if you look at the macro I'd bet it is 1% - 2%.

 

MMS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A few years ago I saved a link on my "Favorites" menu that dealt with this very issue:

 

Success Rates of Traders

 

The author gives some good advice and has uncovered a couple of probably now well-out-of-date studies. But it is a useful read, and I found more to awaken me in his conclusion: reasons to avoid trading!

 

But even if the true failure rate of traders was known BEFORE they commenced this pathway ... would it have deterred them?

 

I think not.

 

In my own case, I was looking at having to retire in about 10 years, and had nothing on earth to show for it. To keep it short, I was not prepared financially for retirement. I had no option but to "have a go" ... and once on the path, I did not turn back.

 

I am grateful for the persistence and commitment that somehow developed from my early years. Because it is this, and passion for financial instruments, rather than any other other factor, that led me to believe I have passed the test.

 

Those with true passion have a chance.

 

Those with obsession may likely have a very tough time of it.

 

Google brought up other interesting links which you can find yourself, but in the couple I read, there seems to be no research-based study that defines exactly what the true rate is.

 

 

Finally - I think the figure is always going to be elusive because as trading becomes more sophisticated, and as struggling traders seek out education and mentors as useful tools, the figures might swing like a pendulum. But there are ever increasing numbers joining us every day, seeking their fortunes.

 

How many of them know what they are getting themselves in for?

 

I have to agree with Siuya too - even if a trader can make money, the taxes, and living costs will still consume a chunk of it.

 

But it is obviously still an attractive pastime. The numbers do not seem to be dwindling.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you everyone for your replies and thanks for the link MightMouse.

 

MMS, your comments about getting laughed at by others when talking about single digit monthly returns is timely as I recently read through the "The Truth of Trading" thread. I saw that exact thing, where certain members were infuriated that low rates of return were being discussed as realistic. I suspect it's a bit of cognitive dissonance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thank you everyone for your replies and thanks for the link MightMouse.

 

MMS, your comments about getting laughed at by others when talking about single digit monthly returns is timely as I recently read through the "The Truth of Trading" thread. I saw that exact thing, where certain members were infuriated that low rates of return were being discussed as realistic. I suspect it's a bit of cognitive dissonance.

 

The irony is that the low rates of return are not low rates of return at all. Traders who are skilled can make money to the extent that other traders trade irrationally. If everyone were rational, no one would trade. So, technically, traders need for there to be traders who have irrational beliefs about trading.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MightyMouse - totally agree -- we shouldn't completely lament the failure of others. It's the single reason why there will always be some who can profit. We absolutely have to have the continual failure of other traders, and a steady stream of new lambs for the slaughter. Just make sure you're not one of them!

 

MMS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Be careful who you blame.   I can tell you one thing for sure.   Effective traders don’t blame others when things start to go wrong.   You can hang onto your tendency to play the victim, or the martyr… but if you want to achieve in trading, you have to be prepared to take responsibility.   People assign reasons to outcomes, whether based on internal or external factors.   When traders face losses, it's common for them to blame bad luck, poor advice, or other external factors, rather than reflecting on their own personal attributes like arrogance, fear, or greed.   This is a challenging lesson to grasp in your trading journey, but one that holds immense value.   This is called attribution theory. Taking responsibility for your actions is the key to improving your trading skills. Pause and ask yourself - What role did I play in my financial decisions?   After all, you were the one who listened to that source, and decided to act on that trade based on the rumour. Attributing results solely to external circumstances is what is known as having an ‘external locus of control’.   It's a concept coined by psychologist Julian Rotter in 1954. A trader with an external locus of control might say, "I made a profit because the markets are currently favourable."   Instead, strive to develop an "internal locus of control" and take ownership of your actions.   Assume that all trading results are within your realm of responsibility and actively seek ways to improve your own behaviour.   This is the fastest route to enhancing your trading abilities. A trader with an internal locus of control might proudly state, "My equity curve is rising because I am a disciplined trader who faithfully follows my trading plan." Author: Louise Bedford Source: https://www.tradinggame.com.au/
    • SELF IMPROVEMENT.   The whole self-help industry began when Dale Carnegie published How to Win Friends and Influence People in 1936. Then came other classics like Think And Grow Rich by Napoleon Hill, Awaken the Giant Within by Tony Robbins toward the end of the century.   Today, teaching people how to improve themselves is a business. A pure ruthless business where some people sell utter bullshit.   There are broke Instagrammers and YouTubers with literally no solid background teaching men how to be attractive to women, how to begin a start-up, how to become successful — most of these guys speaking nothing more than hollow motivational words and cliche stuff. They waste your time. Some of these people who present themselves as hugely successful also give talks and write books.   There are so many books on financial advice, self-improvement, love, etc and some people actually try to read them. They are a waste of time, mostly.   When you start reading a dozen books on finance you realize that they all say the same stuff.   You are not going to live forever in the learning phase. Don't procrastinate by reading bull-shit or the same good knowledge in 10 books. What we ought to do is choose wisely.   Yes. A good book can change your life, given you do what it asks you to do.   All the books I have named up to now are worthy of reading. Tim Ferriss, Simon Sinek, Robert Greene — these guys are worthy of reading. These guys teach what others don't. Their books are unique and actually, come from relevant and successful people.   When Richard Branson writes a book about entrepreneurship, go read it. Every line in that book is said by one of the greatest entrepreneurs of our time.   When a Chinese millionaire( he claims to be) Youtuber who releases a video titled “Why reading books keeps you broke” and a year later another one “My recommendation of books for grand success” you should be wise to tell him to jump from Victoria Falls.   These self-improvement gurus sell you delusions.   They say they have those little tricks that only they know that if you use, everything in your life will be perfect. Those little tricks. We are just “making of a to-do-list before sleeping” away from becoming the next Bill Gates.   There are no little tricks.   There is no success-mantra.   Self-improvement is a trap for 99% of the people. You can't do that unless you are very, very strong.   If you are looking for easy ways, you will only keep wasting your time forgetting that your time on this planet is limited, as alive humans that is.   Also, I feel that people who claim to read like a book a day or promote it are idiots. You retain nothing. When you do read a good book, you read slow, sometimes a whole paragraph, again and again, dwelling on it, trying to internalize its knowledge. You try to understand. You think. It takes time.   It's better to read a good book 10 times than 1000 stupid ones.   So be choosy. Read from the guys who actually know something, not some wannabe ‘influencers’.   Edit: Think And Grow Rich was written as a result of a project assigned to Napoleon Hill by Andrew Carnegie(the 2nd richest man in recent history). He was asked to study the most successful people on the planet and document which characteristics made them great. He did extensive work in studying hundreds of the most successful people of that time. The result was that little book.   Nowadays some people just study Instagram algorithms and think of themselves as a Dale Carnegie or Anthony Robbins. By Nupur Nishant, Quora Profits from free accurate cryptos signals: https://www.predictmag.com/    
    • there is no avoiding loses to be honest, its just how the market is. you win some and hopefully more, but u do lose some. 
    • $CSCO Cisco Systems stock, nice top of range breakout, from Stocks to Watch at https://stockconsultant.com/?CSCOSEPN Septerna stock watch for a bottom breakout, good upside price gap
    • $CSCO Cisco Systems stock, nice top of range breakout, from Stocks to Watch at https://stockconsultant.com/?CSCOSEPN Septerna stock watch for a bottom breakout, good upside price gap
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.