Only 75% of retail traders lose? | Page 2 | Forex Factory

Options

Go to
Permalinks
Print Thread

Similar Threads

This is why 95% of retail traders lose!!! 55 replies

Why you lose money and will always lose 44 replies

Did we Lose any Brokers? Are we going to Lose a few? 1 reply

Script to change EA to long only/ short only at a price level? 1 reply

Real Reasons why Retail Traders lose money 75 replies

Attachments: Only 75% of retail traders lose?
Exit Attachments

Only 75% of retail traders lose?

  • #21
  • Mar 10, 2022 5:56am Mar 10, 2022 5:56am
Why are you so skeptical that the 25% didn't lose money? It's great that traders correctly calculate their money management and make a profit even in losses. Look at the whole business, not just forex.
There are good times and bad times everywhere.
Everywhere there are profits and losses.
But only professionals survive.
  • #22
  • Mar 10, 2022 6:24am Mar 10, 2022 6:24am
Quoting AndAnd
It's great that traders correctly calculate their money management and make a profit even in losses.
How do they make profits when they are making losses?

I want to know how the brokers calculate the figures. I strongly suspect they are fudging them.
  • #23
  • Mar 10, 2022 4:01pm Mar 10, 2022 4:01pm
1. Put in the required tens of thousands of hours staring at charts.
2. Profit.

No amount of technical wizzardry, macro savvy or elite indicators excempts you from item #1.
  • #24
  • Mar 20, 2022 8:11am Mar 20, 2022 8:11am
Quoting mkjenna
1. Put in the required tens of thousands of hours staring at charts. 2. Profit. No amount of technical wizzardry, macro savvy or elite indicators excempts you from item #1.
Yep.

It is basically akin to learning a language.

All those gurus who espouse algorithmic approaches and rigid trading rules around each setup......are fkn cunts selling 'works until it doesn't' red herrings to novices, intermediates, and even advanced level traders.

You just got to know how to speak 'market', with the market being brutally particular on grammatical fine points and intonation, refusing to respond well to anything other than outright fluency. Speakers of 'broken' market, heavily accented market, or otherwise flawed market, are in for a rough time, with many making a retreat to the trading education space to resell all the same red herrings to unsuspecting n00bs, that they got sold, I would dare say.

If I knew what I now know about how much of one's energy and lifeforce this utter bullshit would necessarily consume, prior to getting interested in trading, I would have left it right out the picture.
  • #25
  • Mar 20, 2022 9:40am Mar 20, 2022 9:40am
Can someone code Divergence indicator base on zig zag and fractal indicator to form swing points while using the oscillator to spot the Divergence?

Zig zag using 42,6,3
Fractal default settings .

Anyone doing any research ?

PZ Divergence indicator is best but they Don't give source code of the indicator
  • #26
  • Mar 20, 2022 9:56am Mar 20, 2022 9:56am
Quoting jacryptoking
Can someone code Divergence indicator base on zig zag and fractal indicator to form swing points while using the oscillator to spot the Divergence?
No
  • #27
  • Mar 20, 2022 10:21am Mar 20, 2022 10:21am
Quoting JauntyLoon
When I look at broker adverts (at least for those in the UK/EU, where they are required to tell you that the overwhelming majority of retail traders lose money), what makes me scratch my head in perplexity is not that 75, 80, 85% lose but that 25, 20 or 15% DON'T lose money over the last 12 months. I strongly suspect that brokers/bookies are cooking the books to make the statistic look less than reality, which is probably something like 99.999%. The 25% are probably people who sign up and don't use their accounts, or who trade once or twice - get...
number is quite high in these past 3 months. retail who were huge long equities
  • #28
  • Edited 1:59pm Mar 20, 2022 1:46pm | Edited 1:59pm
Quoting JauntyLoon
When I look at broker adverts (at least for those in the UK/EU, where they are required to tell you that the overwhelming majority of retail traders lose money), what makes me scratch my head in perplexity is not that 75, 80, 85% lose but that 25, 20 or 15% DON'T lose money over the last 12 months. I strongly suspect that brokers/bookies are cooking the books to make the statistic look less than reality, which is probably something like 99.999%. The 25% are probably people who sign up and don't use their accounts, or who trade once or twice - get...

Hi,
I agree, 75% failure rate feels low end and doesn't really indicate the much higher long term failure rate. It is worth thinking about it as trading being a business. In the UK some 60% of new businesses fail within 3 years and you imagine these entrepreneurs are in aggregate rather more prepared and committed than your average punter trying their luck in trading. The problem is that trading has such low barriers to entry - no qualifications required, no experience required, no need to convince a banker to finance you with startup capital, you just open an account in a few minutes and try your luck. In such circumstances of course the failure rate is going to be huge, way too many participants are just dabbling and playing at it, they are not serious participants and will be weeded out. On top of this, trading generates a relatively unique mental/emotional/psychological challenge that other businesses do not. Most people can't handle this and it adds to the failure rate.

Conversely, you also have to note that trading is mostly a zero-sum game (after costs!), i.e. for every losing trade somebody won by taking the other side of that position. So someone, somewhere, must be winning. These winners are the people taking it seriously as a business - mostly the market professionals and the rather small % of retail traders who do treat it properly as a business and act accordingly. These traders have taken the time and trouble to learn the game, to gain experience in small size like an apprenticeship, and manage their risk carefully at all times. How many traders do you know have really done this thoroughly? Not many. There aren't too many successful lawyers, surgeons, engineers, or any other learned expertise profession who just wandered in and tried their luck. Trading is no different.

The success rate is so low because there are too many casual amateur participants who are bound to fail. If you strip them out, the success rate among those traders who genuinely take it seriously is much better. Trading is not impossible, it's just a business. The issue in the raw statistics is that these serious players are so vastly outnumbered by the casual amateurs.
  • #29
  • Mar 20, 2022 3:17pm Mar 20, 2022 3:17pm
I've yet to find any trading 'system' that works when the market isn't strongly trending. When the market is strongly trending, just about any system works (meaning all the indicators and such are about equal in usefulness).

I guess the real 'skill' is in knowing which way the wind is blowing.
  • #30
  • Mar 21, 2022 6:03am Mar 21, 2022 6:03am
Quoting JauntyLoon
I've yet to find any trading 'system' that works when the market isn't strongly trending. When the market is strongly trending, just about any system works (meaning all the indicators and such are about equal in usefulness). I guess the real 'skill' is in knowing which way the wind is blowing.

Hi JauntyLoon,
I'm not too sure I agree with your first statement, there are plenty of methods that work OK in ranging markets, if correctly executed. The second part I do mostly agree with, a high tide floats all boats and a strong trend bails out most trading methods - unless you are trying to countertrend trade or reverse extremes, of course!

The interesting question it raises is why then aren't there way more profitable traders? If it were as easy as waiting for a strong trend (which hardly tends to be that subtle or invisible to detect) and then jumping on board for the ride, trading would be a profitable and simple game indeed. But the evidence doesn't back this up, a huge majority of traders fail at trading.

Presumably there are some other factors in play. I'd say it was mostly down to poor risk management & emotional control, a lack of discipline, patience and consistency on the part of the majority of traders in executing their methods. There have been many lab tests of rigged profitable trading systems given to people to trade and yet the vast majority of them still lose. It suggests the problem is less the precise system being traded (though the trend is indeed your best friend) and more the fallibility of the traders themselves.
  • #31
  • Mar 21, 2022 11:02am Mar 21, 2022 11:02am
I would like to be a successful trader. But first can someone teach me how to start a website and create a trading course? I think $500 per course would be a fair price.
  • #32
  • Mar 21, 2022 6:41pm Mar 21, 2022 6:41pm
Quoting beastwork
I would like to be a successful trader. But first can someone teach me how to start a website and create a trading course? I think $500 per course would be a fair price.
  • #33
  • Last Post: Mar 23, 2022 8:38pm Mar 23, 2022 8:38pm
Quoting JauntyLoon
When I look at broker adverts (at least for those in the UK/EU, where they are required to tell you that the overwhelming majority of retail traders lose money)! Is there any way to get more information from the brokers/bookies on how they come up with the 75% statistic? FOI request?
I ran eFX trading at one of the big retail platforms. The 75 % rate is based on a 3-month average burn rate, but it's 90 % yearly. The regulators require that brokers report a loss rate, so all brokers use the 3-month metric for sugar coating purposes.

As far as B book, the burn rate doesn't generate the bulk of the broker profits, but those stupidly wide spreads are where most of the profits are captured.
0 traders viewing now