A lot of wild claims get made in our business. You hear of annualized gains of 20%, 40%, 100% 1,000%. But how should we really measure our trading performance? Many seem to suggest you count Points, or Units, "Made 2 points today". Presumably one then multiplies that by however many contracts or shares you actually traded based on your money management strategies. The "points" approach is fine for measuring "trading acumen", but what about return on equity as well? In other words, if I have $200K set aside for the "business" of trading, but only use say $25K of that in a futures margin account, and do a superb job of actually making a nice profit in that futures account, I still might only generate a small return on that $200K - say 20% over one year. Not very good given the risk of trading futures. But I might eventually triple up on my contract size, use the same "trading acument" skill and achieve the same "trading results" then be making a boat load of ROE - say 100% annualized. I know there is a whole world of difference between a trading strategy and money management, but I am asking what you all think should be the "benchmark" for measuring your overall performance. You know, what to say at cocktail parties when someone asks "how are you doing" in the markets. Seems to me most people can relate to an ROE number and that if we have $x in a pot to use in our trading business, we should measure our results by what we generate after expenses and before taxes on that number, even if 80% of it is sitting in T-bills for 60 percent of the year. What do you think? Rob.