Cajun - did you happen to find that report that shows the % of failing traders? I'd like to read it. Thanks!
brownsfan019, The report on the % of failing traders has been in over 5 books that I've read. These books are in my library and I just have not had the time to go searching for the text. I took the passage and wrote them down in my notes (RTF file). If I come across one I'll let you know, or you could do a google. CajunSniper / Puretick.com Administrator-Trader
If there's grass in the field play ball if the playground is closed the dumpster is always working.. Also remember if it smells like cologne leave it alone, if it smells like fish, make it a dish. Hope that helps!
You missed my point from my previous post on this. Just b/c some guy's book or website says that 90% of traders fail doesn't mean squat. Anyone can make a website and put whatever they want on it. What I was asking for is if this stat that you and other vendors like yourself use to sell stuff, has ever been verified by the CME and/or CBOT? They obviously have the info, but I've never seen a report from them detailing how many traders fail. This stat is a joke used by vendors selling stuff to bring newbies and scared people into their services. It's a great marketing ploy since every site like yours does the exact same thing, but the stat has no merit or substance. To me, a 'fact' could be easily proved, yet I doubt that is not possible here. So, in the end, we have a vendor's opinion that 90% of traders fail. Of course they are going to say that!
I'm sure there must be documentation to prove this statement somewhere. I have no doubt it's true. Weather its 88%, 89% or even 95% failure rate. I must of met well over 100 traders since starting out and maybe 10 are profitable. This supports this theory even more. I'm a pretty positive thinker... Why would this be a marketing ploy? If hype was needed. I'd much rather prefer to tell someone only 20% of traders fail and why notg ive it a try. "Your odds are great buddy!" Just depends on how you look at it. If most traders prospered then Elite Trader would not be such a popular place. I'm in direct contact with people who run brokerage firms, in addition Alex has been a broker and seen the trades and P&L placed by your average every day trader and he's confirmed that most of the clients lost money. I'd rather tell people the truth then shelter them from it. If they know how hard it is, they'll work even harder (or so I'd hope). Geoff / Cajun
We had two T&S's up yesterday. One had a cut off at 50 on the ES; the other showed all trades. Color coded. There was a marked change at about the same time the DOM went from four digits to 3 digits and then the 5 level sum went under a 1,000. There were very few people playing the usual games after a while. I'm sure the open took out a lot of small traders who had positions but the pm trading really took a toll for both small and other trypes of traders. The number of traders who finished their trading yesterday looked like a very large # to me. They were facing some poeple who had their best day in history I would imagine. If you want to take some measures look at new accounts established compared to total accounts for a couple of years of data. That way you can get some turn over data and some mean time to failure data. ET has some members. At any time a few are on the site. This shows two lines on a graph over time. You may find a connection between ET traders and accounts traders have over time.
Sad thing is, most traders who scored big on the short size tuesday just gave it back over trading the rest of the week.
Here's the study on day traders done by NASSA. It is worded in "study speak" and I'm not going to take the time to parse it and find out each and every nuance. It does plainly say that of the 26 accounts studied, only 1 evidenced abiltiy to be profitable. In a couple of different ways it says that 70% made money or 65% made money. http://www.nasaa.org/content/Files/NASAA_Day_Trading_Report.pdf