this is nonsense if you are TOPS in the biz / watch risk / trade everything / buy lo - sell hi / use O R c a M or gnIrTs YrOehT then maybe you have a shot and might even get your own whale to push around oneday
Using the number of posts as a guide, you should be making at least 10 times as much as he, who stops the flow of rivers. Since you aren't, in fact, making more than 10 times as much as he, who stops the flow of rivers, either in % or net $ returns, then we can conclude that your logic is flawed somewhere, somehow. He, who stops the flow of rivers, suspects that the number of posts in ET isn't a good indicator of trading performance., but he understands your need to use anything at hand to justify your own shortcomings.
We are talking about a trader with several years experience and a couple hundred thousand dollar account. Obviously he has a positive expectancy system and the discipline to follow it. Taken in that context, I think a 200% annual return is totally possible and not an unreasonable goal. The typical trader in this scenario is going to be siphoning money from his account for living expenses, taxes and maybe outside investments, so you can't make the retarded argument that he can compound to infinity and be the richest guy in the world. The edge of the small trader is his small size, so forget comparisons to $100M hedge funds and the tired argument of "why doesn't he start a fund and be a mega star"? The argument using the stats taken from Tuco don't hold water either. What % of traders make it to "several years experience and a couple hundred thousand dollar account"? A small margin. Traders at a prop firm are no different than traders anywhere else. Most are undercapitalized, under experienced and have stars in their eyes and probably rocks in their heads. You'll notice that a small % of those stats had well capitalized accounts and were profitable. They are the ones that fit the scenario we're talking about here. Considering the context of the OP's question, yes, it's a completely reasonable expectation.
Instead of speculating, someone please show us the proof that this is possible. If I can see the legitemate account statements for someone that has made >100% per year for 3 years on an account that has more than $100,000 then I will become a believer. I have heard traders tell so many stories of the great trade that doubled their money in a day. But they never talk about the losing trades.
200% for an AVERAGE trader? Not only NOT average, but ludicrous. Not only is it NOT "still" true, it has NEVER been true. (I once had a 5-yr run of averaging 75% per year... not on a little, speculative account play, but on total of investing/trading capital... and was told, "can't be true"... "too good to be believed"...) Make 20% for a few years, then work on improving.
sure gamblers make 200%+ but blow up... End of day 20% - 30% safely. Any one saying they make over 50%+ end of day for years...is lying.