Man get over the obsession with me... so you were wrong... traders learn to live with that or die... stop acting like a 5 year old because you embarrassed yourself with a ridiculous call
Yes, in some STOCK markets we made this growth, even bank funds did that. see http://www.tadawul.com.sa/wps/portal/!ut/p/_s.7_0_A/7_0_49L/.cmd/ad/.c/6_1_9R/.ce/7_1_6L8/.p/5_1_6EV?MutualFundMangersDrop=006+++&SelectedTab=1 the Saudi Market Stocks official wWeb site
I have bought stocks in the past that made me 400% in a few months but to claim that someone can make 10% a month on his whole portfolio consistently is like claiming you are the son of god. Unless of course my poor English prevented me from understanding the poll.
I hate the 95% loser statistic that gets thrown around. there is no other base to figure out what that means. no timeframe, no number of trades, nothing. Also, I would think the 95% "law" would apply to traders in general, and yes, that even means your aunt susie who places a few trades during the late 1990s.
dont know where you get 95% from, but.... there was a poll carried out by brokers, and the findings suggested that 80-90% (cant remember which) of accounts either blew up or threw in the towel after 6-9 months. this is all customers. no distinction between time frame, method etc. besides, such criteria is pointless anyhow. the reasons for failure are 3 fold: not understanding risk, not understanding or following the approach/plan/method, or not understanding the impacts of diversification or hedging (where appropriate). NONE of these have anything to do with the time frame (investment or day trading) or any specific method. i also see it at pointless though. as joe ross once said, statistics only predict. it is up to YOU whether you succeed or fail. as a side note however, i think if we read all the time that 80% fail etc, then this programmes our subconscious to fail if we are not careful. perhaps a reason why some internet sites can do more harm than good?