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.

emg

Why Do More Than 90% of Traders Lose?

how about an informal poll of all those who make their living trading? all forms, day  

64 members have voted

  1. 1. how about an informal poll of all those who make their living trading? all forms, day

    • Yes
      40
    • No
      32
    • I don't make my living entirely from Trading, but it supplements my income.
      41


Recommended Posts

Answering the first question: because it's hard to be a consistently profitable trader.

 

 

The conversations above seem to illustrate part of the reason why: because people seem confused about what is required. For example: discipline is not an edge, it is simply a requirement for most people if they are to repeatedly execute the steps required to deliver their edge(s).

 

At the risk of one of those lists:

 

- You need a combination of setup, entry, trade management and exit that has a positive expectancy (the edge). A purely discretionary trader who wins more than he/she loses has an edge: even if they don't know what exactly they do - they do something right.

 

- A process that you follow to execute your edge reliably and consistently so that the money it can potentially generate is actually generated

 

- Discipline - doing the process over and over with as much consistency and accuracy as your self and your process allow.

 

- Bet sizing (money management) so that you don't blow your account in a bad run whether by a predictable system failure or error and that you earn adequately from the bets that you make.

 

- Physical environment such as quiet, computing power, software, and reliable communciations

 

- Emotional regulation so that when you get a run of losers or winners or exposed to whatever your current hot buttons are you can bring yourself under control and execute your process.

 

- Probably a good record keeping and planning process to adapt when errors occur or the market changes in ways that reduce the efficacy of your current edge.

 

- etc :)

 

 

But you have to have them all. Any gaps reduce your ability to deliver the result you want.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
...The conversations above seem to illustrate part of the reason why: because people seem confused about what is required. For example: discipline is not an edge, it is simply a requirement for most people if they are to repeatedly execute the steps required to deliver their edge(s)...

 

Hi Kiwi,

 

Although you understand that having discipline is important to some traders...I disagree with your view that discipline is not an edge. No matter how you change the word...edge, advantage, requirement or whatever...it will be the same. Thus, if someone can show via their own trading a statistical advantage (profits) in the results via having the discipline in executing their trade method as designed versus not having discipline resulting in not following their trade method...

 

It is an edge, advantage, requirement or whatever you want to call regardless to the play of words. Just a case of semantics.

 

Just the same, one can say having a good trading method is one requirement to deliver profits. Simply, of course discipline and having a good trade method is requirement. Once again, if you can statistically show having such as an advantage in your trading versus not using such...it is an edge, advantage, requirement or whatever you want to call it...it is a critical piece of the puzzle for "some" traders although others say discipline is not important to executing a trade method efficiently and consistently. Therefore, to those others, discipline is not an edge nor requirement.

Edited by wrbtrader

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I want to say "yes discipline is an edge" but it isn't. At least by any definition of edge that would be applied to gambling or trading in the statistical sense. One of the problems here is "what does edge mean?" Damned hard to find even in the dictionary. The nearest I got at dictionary.com was its use as a verb: edge out, to defeat (rivals or opponents) by a small margin: The home team edged out the visitors in an exciting finish.

 

What discipline is though is necessary. But even discipline needs to be defined because its not about flagellation, self or otherwise, but about executing one's edge over and over, despite any inclination to do otherwise.

 

The thing is, if you're hypothetical discretionary trader had great discipline, perfect money management, but no statistically valid edge then he would slowly go broke as the slippage and commission eroded his perfectly executed zero expectancy trades.

 

To make money he must not only execute with his perfect discipline he must be doing something better than 50/50. Maybe he's got a feel for trend, or for support, or exhaustion but just doing a dumb thing with great discipline is still doing a dumb thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Heres my take for anyone who's interested:

 

An edge is simply an observable scenario that repeats over time, and if exploited will yield a positive return over a large sample of outcomes. (Those are my words).

 

A discretionary trader can still have an edge despite his/her entry decision not being strictly defined. e.g. waiting to hit bids and lift offers in an order book when most of the liquidity at that price has been removed could be defined as an edge as the trader assumes that if his/her timing is right the order book will tick up/down in their favour pretty soon afterwards (assuming the liquidity isnt refreshed), giving the trader the ability to scratch the trade at no risk if needed. Another trader may decide entering on a stop is the best idea as he assumes the market momentum is going his way and thus the next tick will also be in his favour, giving again, a risk free trade immediately (good luck on that - these are just examples)

 

These edge examples are therefore in the trade execution point rather than the entry decision raeson.

 

You can have lots of edges - in execution, in risk management, in money management etc.

 

I personally wouldnt say things like discipline (yawn) are an edge because our personalities/emotions/behaviour dont tend to be consistent over the sample of trades.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...but enough of edges.

 

Lets get back to the point of the thread.....

 

 

WHY DO 90% LOSE?

 

Who thinks 90% of traders trade off chart patterns and/or indicators?

 

Didnt Einstein say something like 'the definition of insanity is making the same mistake time and time again and expecting to see different results'?

 

Maybe theres no edge after all in TA?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

.............................I personally wouldnt say things like discipline (yawn) are an edge because our personalities/emotions/behaviour dont tend to be consistent over the sample of trades.................................

 

Well, you seem to have got to the heart of the matter Dude.

 

an inconsistent emotional approach = inconsistent results

 

Perhaps this is the reason that People spend so much time chasing the 'holy grail'

It is not to make a fortune, but to escape the reality of facing themselves... even when consciously they fail to appreciate this situation.

 

'I have met the enemy and the enemy is me' .... this is a very good starting point

Edited by johnw

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
...

 

WHY DO 90% LOSE?

 

Who thinks 90% of traders trade off chart patterns and/or indicators?

 

...Maybe theres no edge after all in TA?

 

There's no single reason why the few are consistently profitable and why so many are consistently losing. Thus, there are many reasons for each individual trader.

 

Also, most traders can't handle the fact that it takes an entire (complete) trading plan (e.g. money management, proper capitalization, proper trading environment, discipline, good trade method and so on) to determine is he/she will be profitable or a loser because on any given trading day one of those things will be more important than the other components in the trading plan.

 

Therefore, most prefer to concentrate on one thing like their trade method instead of ensuring everything else in the trading plan is working smoothly together especially when things go wrong (losses). That's why there are many traders running around saying there's one reason only because they treat their own trading that way...to only get confused when they determine they were wrong and then they start looking again for another primary (number #1) reason.

 

Thus, you need to take with a grain of salt what the thread starter (emg) has been saying at various different trading forums on the internet amongst many different message posts in saying the following...

 

#1 reason why traders lose is because they are under-capitalized

 

Week later he will then say the following...

 

#1 reason why traders lose is because of their broker

 

Week later he saids the following...

 

#1 reason why traders lose is because they're using unregulated vendors

 

Week later he saids the following...

 

#1 reason why traders lose is because they're gambling

 

Week later he saids the following...

 

#1 reason why traders lose is because they use TA

 

There's other #1 reasons but you get my point. :doh:

Edited by wrbtrader

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At the risk of one of those lists:

 

Thanks Kiwi,

 

To structure my thoughts, i have used your list and made it mine by reordering, refining it and adding a point 5.

 

I call the first 4 processsteps back-office and the last 4 front-office.

Point 5 is the strategical roadmap for the statistical edge.

Point 6,7,8 are crucial drivingskills.

 

Peace

 

A overall process as reliable, streamlined, accurate and profitable as I, the process and the environment will support and allow:

 

  1. physical environment: quiet, computing power, software, and reliable and swift communications.
  2. emotional regulation: when sensitive buttons are hit, bring myself under emotional control to the point where i know I can execute the overall process regardless of runs of losers or winners.
  3. risk planning and control: to mitigate downside within planned appetite in bad and in good runs and/or in case of process or system failure.
  4. good record keeping and planning process: to adapt/capitalize anticipated market (enviroment) changes and to mitigate systematic errors, fill process-gaps and minimize brian fry.
  5. segment, value and prioritize forward scenario's.
  6. in the context of the prioritized forward scenario's, timely recognize predefined setups.
  7. set entry levels/launch and manage entry orders.
  8. tactical protection of realized advances.

Edited by neutral

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't believe the 90% lose money because there is no reliable source or independent research or study that has been done that confirms this so I feel it’s a marketing gimmick to put most people off at trading. I remember when I first heard about trading what put me off was I could lose more than my initial deposit then later on I found out something called a stop loss which changed everything for me.

 

I think the main reasons why people fail is they don’t take it as serious as if they opened a new store or starting a new job. Most retail traders are at home and they feel like they’re not working but playing which comes to the mind as a hobby and having fun. Many traders I have read and heard have said I started to be profitable after I took trading away as a hobby and got serious and made a plan.

 

Another big reason is the low quality of education out there. I do think online learning is the way forward but some most of the programs out there work for the vendors who have hundreds of thousands to risk and are using members fees money to trade with and feel more comfortable.

 

There is no way better to learn than someone sitting next to you and telling you how it’s done imo. It takes far too much time to learn on your own reading books, articles, videos and forums.

 

I would advise new traders not to spend too much time in books, forums or chat rooms but look at the charts and look to see how it moves.

 

Good luck and happy 2012.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Read The Futures Game by Teweles. There are several studies in there of brokerage accounts that confirmed 80% fail. Most of these studies were done in the 1960's-80's. ie before day trading.

 

Given the huge rise in day trading, false education and FX bucket shops, I can well believe the number has increased from 80% to 90%.

 

 

BTW, the 80% failure rate was usually within the first 6 months.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There's no single reason why the few are consistently profitable and why so many are consistently losing. Thus, there are many reasons for each individual trader.

 

Also, most traders can't handle the fact that it takes an entire (complete) trading plan (e.g. money management, proper capitalization, proper trading environment, discipline, good trade method and so on) to determine is he/she will be profitable or a loser because on any given trading day one of those things will be more important than the other components in the trading plan.

 

Therefore, most prefer to concentrate on one thing like their trade method instead of ensuring everything else in the trading plan is working smoothly together especially when things go wrong (losses). That's why there are many traders running around saying there's one reason only because they treat their own trading that way...to only get confused when they determine they were wrong and then they start looking again for another primary (number #1) reason.

 

Thus, you need to take with a grain of salt what the thread starter (emg) has been saying at various different trading forums on the internet amongst many different message posts in saying the following...

 

#1 reason why traders lose is because they are under-capitalized

 

Week later he will then say the following...

 

#1 reason why traders lose is because of their broker

 

Week later he saids the following...

 

#1 reason why traders lose is because they're using unregulated vendors

 

Week later he saids the following...

 

#1 reason why traders lose is because they're gambling

 

Week later he saids the following...

 

#1 reason why traders lose is because they use TA

 

There's other #1 reasons but you get my point. :doh:

 

.................u in here???????

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't believe the 90% lose money because there is no reliable source or independent research or study that has been done that confirms this so I feel it’s a marketing gimmick to put most people off at trading...

 

Depending upon which statistical research you're willing to side with...most say the average failure rate of a business is around 80% along with failing within 3 years.

 

Therefore, the failure rate must be higher for traders because most traders are trading with a trade method but without a trading plan let alone a business plan to manage their trading in comparison to most business that do fail while having a business plan.

 

In addition, look at all the trade journals you see online...most don't last beyond a few months and only about 10% of them are profitable during those few months in reference to those that have verification about the daily results. Further, the forum members that say they are full-time trading...most of them are gone within a few years.

 

Simply, only a small percentage of traders are profitable in reference to those that are part-time or full-time and not those that are hobbyist nor those that are drive-by shooters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are no decent stats to determine who wins and who loses. The poll at the top of the page indicates that more people make a living trading than those who don't. The 80 or 90% figures include the one and done traders, the ill advised, etc.

 

The more interesting stat to me would involve only traders who have traded for at least 5 years or perhaps longer. I would like to know what their stats are.What they earned as a percentage of capital, how many were profitable, etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Depending upon which statistical research you're willing to side with...most say the average failure rate of a business is around 80% along with failing within 3 years.

 

Therefore, the failure rate must be higher for traders because most traders are trading with a trade method but without a trading plan let alone a business plan to manage their trading in comparison to most business that do fail while having a business plan.

 

In addition, look at all the trade journals you see online...most don't last beyond a few months and only about 10% of them are profitable during those few months in reference to those that have verification about the daily results. Further, the forum members that say they are full-time trading...most of them are gone within a few years.

 

Simply, only a small percentage of traders are profitable in reference to those that are part-time or full-time and not those that are hobbyist nor those that are drive-by shooters.

 

I agree that most businesses fail within 3 years, but to attribute that to traders this 90-99% figure is wrong as many people including myself would not enter this industry if that were the case. Also, do you understand that a lot of traders stay away from forums and only for the advanced who know how to trade? I have seen many traders on live chat rooms banking in the pips most of them with the odd loser and to say 95% of them are losers is outright wrong. Also, what does it mean by failure rate blowing an account or losing a few dollars here and there?? I am fed up hearing this and will not accept it surely with these forums and help on the net there are more communication and discussions to become successful than unsuccessful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I agree that most businesses fail within 3 years, but to attribute that to traders this 90-99% figure is wrong as many people including myself would not enter this industry if that were the case. Also, do you understand that a lot of traders stay away from forums and only for the advanced who know how to trade? I have seen many traders on live chat rooms banking in the pips most of them with the odd loser and to say 95% of them are losers is outright wrong. Also, what does it mean by failure rate blowing an account or losing a few dollars here and there?? I am fed up hearing this and will not accept it surely with these forums and help on the net there are more communication and discussions to become successful than unsuccessful.

 

I doubt most "potential traders" would run the other way prior to taking the big leap into trading if they read messages by anonymous strangers at forums saying "most traders will fail".

 

I don't know what chat rooms you've been visiting but the chat rooms and forums I've visited have most traders "losing" in regards to the part-time and full-time traders. In contrast, most of the hobbyist traders and drive-by-shooters (traders)...they seem to be profitable but that may be due to the fact its very difficult to keep track of the latter types of traders.

 

I've been visiting free chat rooms consistently since 1999.

 

In addition, there have been brokers that have stated most of their clients are not making money. Further, there have trading competitions where the results of most in trading competitions did not make a profit. Also, as a reminder, most to the trade journals I've read that have verification of the trades...most were not profitable.

 

Regardless to our difference in perspective...it doesn't matter if its 20% or 90% that don't make it beyond the first critical 3 years. Your goal is to not become one of them.

Edited by wrbtrader

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I agree that most businesses fail within 3 years, but to attribute that to traders this 90-99% figure is wrong as many people including myself would not enter this industry if that were the case. .......... I am fed up hearing this and will not accept it surely with these forums and help on the net there are more communication and discussions to become successful than unsuccessful.

 

fine......as wrb says. The percentages are irrelevant your job is to avoid being a loser. period.

 

But as a suggestion.....an attitude/viewpoint like this - "I will not accept it" means come on in. the industry needs people who wont accept things for others that do to suceeed.

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

    • Thx for reminding us... I don't bang that drum often enough anymore Another part for consideration is who that money initially went to...
    • TDUP ThredUp stock, watch for a top of range breakout above 2.94 at https://stockconsultant.com/?TDUP
    • How long does it take to receive HFM's withdrawal via Skrill? less than 24H?
    • My wife Robin just wanted some groceries.   Simple enough.   She parked the car for fifteen minutes, and returned to find a huge scratch on the side.   Someone keyed her car.   To be clear, this isn’t just any car.   It’s a Cybertruck—Elon Musk's stainless-steel spaceship on wheels. She bought it back in 2021, before Musk became everyone's favorite villain or savior.   Someone saw it parked in a grocery lot and felt compelled to carve their hatred directly into the metal.   That's what happens when you stand out.   Nobody keys a beige minivan.   When you're polarizing, you're impossible to ignore. But the irony is: the more attention something has, the harder it is to find the truth about it.   What’s Elon Musk really thinking? What are his plans? What will happen with DOGE? Is he deserving of all of this adoration and hate? Hard to say.   Ideas work the same way.   Take tariffs, for example.   Tariffs have become the Cybertrucks of economic policy. People either love them or hate them. Even if they don’t understand what they are and how they work. (Most don’t.)   That’s why, in my latest podcast (link below), I wanted to explore the “in-between” truth about tariffs.   And like Cybertrucks, I guess my thoughts on tariffs are polarizing.   Greg Gutfield mentioned me on Fox News. Harvard professors hate me now. (I wonder if they also key Cybertrucks?)   But before I show you what I think about tariffs… I have to mention something.   We’re Headed to Austin, Texas This weekend, my team and I are headed to Austin. By now, you should probably know why.   Yes, SXSW is happening. But my team and I are doing something I think is even better.   We’re putting on a FREE event on “Tech’s Turning Point.”   AI, quantum, biotech, crypto, and more—it’s all on the table.   Just now, we posted a special webpage with the agenda.   Click here to check it out and add it to your calendar.   The Truth About Tariffs People love to panic about tariffs causing inflation.   They wave around the ghost of the Smoot-Hawley Tariff from the Great Depression like it’s Exhibit A proving tariffs equal economic collapse.   But let me pop this myth:   Tariffs don’t cause inflation. And no, I'm not crazy (despite what angry professors from Harvard or Stanford might tweet at me).   Here's the deal.   Inflation isn’t when just a couple of things become pricier. It’s when your entire shopping basket—eggs, shirts, Netflix subscriptions, bananas, everything—starts costing more because your money’s worth less.   Inflation means your dollars aren’t stretching as far as they used to.   Take the 1800s.   For nearly a century, 97% of America’s revenue came from tariffs. Income tax? Didn’t exist. And guess what inflation was? Basically zero. Maybe 1% a year.   The economy was booming, and tariffs funded nearly everything. So, why do people suddenly think tariffs cause inflation today?   Tariffs are taxes on imports, yes, but prices are set by supply and demand—not tariffs.   Let me give you a simple example.   Imagine fancy potato chips from Canada cost $10, and a 20% tariff pushes that to $12. Everyone panics—prices rose! Inflation!   Nope.   If I only have $100 to spend and the price of my favorite chips goes up, I either stop buying chips or I buy, say, fewer newspapers.   If everyone stops buying newspapers because they’re overspending on chips, newspapers lower their prices or go out of business.   Overall spending stays the same, and inflation doesn’t budge.   Three quick scenarios:   We buy pricier chips, but fewer other things: Inflation unchanged. Manufacturers shift to the U.S. to avoid tariffs: Inflation unchanged (and more jobs here). We stop buying fancy chips: Prices drop again. Inflation? Still unchanged. The only thing that actually causes inflation is printing money.   Between 2020 and 2022 alone, 40% of all money ever created in history appeared overnight.   That’s why inflation shot up afterward—not because of tariffs.   Back to tariffs today.   Still No Inflation Unlike the infamous Smoot-Hawley blanket tariff (imagine Oprah handing out tariffs: "You get a tariff, and you get a tariff!"), today's tariffs are strategic.   Trump slapped tariffs on chips from Taiwan because we shouldn’t rely on a single foreign supplier for vital tech components—especially if that supplier might get invaded.   Now Taiwan Semiconductor is investing $100 billion in American manufacturing.   Strategic win, no inflation.   Then there’s Canada and Mexico—our friendly neighbors with weirdly huge tariffs on things like milk and butter (299% tariff on butter—really, Canada?).   Trump’s not blanketing everything with tariffs; he’s pressuring trade partners to lower theirs.   If they do, everybody wins. If they don’t, well, then we have a strategic trade chess game—but still no inflation.   In short, tariffs are about strategy, security, and fairness—not inflation.   Yes, blanket tariffs from the Great Depression era were dumb. Obviously. Today's targeted tariffs? Smart.   Listen to the whole podcast to hear why I think this.   And by the way, if you see a Cybertruck, don’t key it. Robin doesn’t care about your politics; she just likes her weird truck.   Maybe read a good book, relax, and leave cars alone.   (And yes, nobody keys Volkswagens, even though they were basically created by Hitler. Strange world we live in.) Source: https://altucherconfidential.com/posts/the-truth-about-tariffs-busting-the-inflation-myth    Profits from free accurate cryptos signals: https://www.predictmag.com/       
    • No, not if you are comparing apples to apples. What we call “poor” is obviously a pretty high bar but if you’re talking about like a total homeless shambling skexie in like San Fran then, no. The U.S.A. in not particularly kind to you. It is not an abuse so much as it is a sad relatively minor consequence of our optimism and industriousness.   What you consider rich changes with circumstances obviously. If you are genuinely poor in the U.S.A., you experience a quirky hodgepodge of unhelpful and/or abstract extreme lavishnesses while also being alienated from your social support network. It’s about the same as being a refugee. For a fraction of the ‘kindness’ available to you in non bio-available form, you could have simply stayed closer to your people and been MUCH better off.   It’s just a quirk of how we run the place and our values; we are more worried about interfering with people’s liberty and natural inclination to do for themselves than we are about no bums left behind. It is a slightly hurtful position and we know it; we are just scared to death of socialism cancer and we’re willing to put our money where our mouth is.   So, if you’re a bum; you got 5G, the ER will spend like $1,000,000 on you over a hangnail but then kick you out as soon as you’re “stabilized”, the logistics are surpremely efficient, you have total unchecked freedom of speech, real-estate, motels, and jobs are all natural healthy markets in perfect competition, you got compulsory three ‘R’’s, your military owns the sky, sea, space, night, information-space, and has the best hairdos, you can fill out paper and get all the stuff up to and including a Ph.D. Pretty much everything a very generous, eager, flawless go-getter with five minutes to spare would think you might need.   It’s worse. Our whole society is competitive and we do NOT value or make any kumbaya exception. The last kumbaya types we had werr the Shakers and they literally went extinct. Pueblo peoples are still around but they kind of don’t count since they were here before us. So basically, if you’re poor in the U.S.A., you are automatically a loser and a deadbeat too. You will be treated as such by anybody not specifically either paid to deal with you or shysters selling bejesus, Amway, and drugs. Plus, it ain’t safe out there. Not everybody uses muhfreedoms to lift their truck, people be thugging and bums are very vulnerable here. The history of a large mobile workforce means nobody has a village to go home to. Source: https://askdaddy.quora.com/Are-the-poor-people-in-the-United-States-the-richest-poor-people-in-the-world-6   Profits from free accurate cryptos signals: https://www.predictmag.com/ 
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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