The logical conclusion to the lack of statistical and even anecdotal evidence of large/moderately and long-term consistently successful retail traders is that they do not exist. The financial markets were never created for them to profit from and recent technological advances have only made their efforts more futile, despite the proliferation of mass-marketed trading education materials which claim to increases the rate of successful retail traders.
this is true. it's even possible that institutional training - finance/econ degree, working at a bank or in a fund, etc is actually an impediment to success in the market. that training gives the illusion of expertise, and that expertise is predicting the future. hence if you go on twitter and listen to the fund wannabees, they all have opinions about the future. this company will do well for these reasons, the economy will do this, it's at this point in the cycle, the market is a weighing machine in the long run, these factors lead to outperformance, etc. they are under the illusion that their job is to have correct opinions about the future. they will say things like "I sold this stock because my opinion of the business changed" or "I doubled down because the stock was cheaper. If you liked it higher you should like it lower." That's true - if you can predict the future. it's almost as if nobody has ever heard of the efficient market hypothesis. They dismiss "losers average losers" and other trading rules because they have correct opinions about the future, which is their area of expertise. Now there may be some people who can predict the future, and with some skill . . . but we don't know that, today. And the odds are against it. Better to game the system (by following time-tested trading rules) than try to beat the system at its own game.
Their backgrounds, education and social standing may not quite be out of the top drawer, collectively, but I wouldn't go quite so far as to call them "common" (not in public, anyway).
$100 million on just one trade? That's a giant, not just large. Putting on $1-2 mln trades, plenty of those around.
That's 5 percent a year on a 10mil acct, 10% on a 5mil, for sure there are many traders who make significantly more than that (as well as carry bigger accounts, or more investable capital at least )
I'm very curious what your definition is for someone to be able to say they are a long term consistently successful retail trader ? Also, you mentioned something else that's interesting. You basically stated via quote that "recent technological advances have only made their efforts more futile". You're now talking about today's (current) market conditions. Hello big guy...it has always been known since the birth of the markets...institutions will always have access to info that us retail traders do not have access to. In addition, it has always been known they have better resources than we do from education to training to technology to networking to equipment to health/dental benefits to bonuses to bigger cars to bigger homes to whatever it is you keep making those comparison. We know, we have always known...its a fact of the markets since its birth...the big boys have an advantage even though they too can lose at the game of trading. For example, even with quants, HFT and so on...many hedge funds close shop, some well known institutional firms go bankrupt or collapse...needing a government bailout. Simply, something went wrong and they were no longer profitable. With that said, why do you keep subscribing to CQG considering CQG isn't exactly cheap (you told me in the recent past you subscribe to CQG) ? Seriously, a few hundred dollars per month can be used for to pay down your debt, put into a retirement fund, improve your health (gym membership)... Why keep that subscription to CQG every month if trading is futile ? I think its time for you to take a long look in the mirror because its possible you're not suitable for trading !!! I say the above because you're new here at this forum and since your arrival...it doesn't seem like trading is going well for you because your messages have become more and more about futile, can't compete, prove to me and so on. Thus, its becoming very obvious that you can't compete although you don't understand you don't need to compete...you just need to follow and understand them. Simply, please stop trading, cancel your data vendor subscription to CQG...I really don't think trading is for you. P.S. If you're not a retail trader...you should be transparent about that as a fact. I say this because someone at this forum is a hedge fund manager (he's open about such) and has made similar like statements as you have about retail traders. You a hedge fund manager or a professional trader working for someone ? I just can't imagine you being a retail trader because your consistent message here is not that of a retail trader.
I would define any year with a negative draw-down as unsuccessful once a trader becomes profitable. The expenses a retail trader has a sole source of income warrant an increasing equity curve not just steady returns, as you mentioned, health insurance, high tax on gains, etc. Trading is becoming even more futile for retail traders, I advise them to abandon this lost cause, due to the recent advancements in technology. You can say you're not competing with institutions but your stops and limit orders are filled or not filled due to their algorithms.