
The study is described in Kahneman's latest book "Thinking, fast and slow".Quote from sle:
Could you give me an exact reference, pls? I am trying to recall if I have ever seen this paper. Special undestanding of the trading performance is most certainly nessesary - risk-adjusted returns is the first and foremost source of misunderstanding of the trading performance.
It's on my to-read list, I might get to it soon.Quote from jcl: The study is described in Kahneman's latest book "Thinking, fast and slow".
As I said, I have read a different paper.Quote from jcl: The reason of the misunderstanding you've mentioned is that there are no "risk-adjusted returns". You can not measure risk. Instead, you usually adjust the returns by some proxy of risk, like variance or drawdown. For different reasons, both are poor proxies, thus the result is highly subjective. In my opinion, using "risk-adjusted returns" makes no sense when a scientific study requires objective, reproducible data.
Kahneman did research in the 1990s about the performance of professional traders, using data he got from trading firms he consulted. He found that top traders achieved an average annual return of 3% over market. [/B]
Quote from Ivano:
Hallo Everyone, nice forum.
Can I ask a question? Maybe I did not understand ( i am newbe), but a 3% return per year should not be less convenient than more safe investment instruments? So why people trade and most important, how is possible that there are people that avoid the 9-5 work allegedly living with the trading?
Sorry if I am banal, but it is really important, since I discovered that I love to study the markets, and it looks to me that the fluctuation of the stocks are more rational than one can think(of course value investor in LT are more favorite than day traders).
regards and really thank you for the attention,
Ivano