Want to see the best returns ?
There're many trading competitions in China,
so check it out by yourself
http://qhsz.qhrb.com.cn/Data2/
http://ds.cctvfcn.com/
How do you rank as a trader?
- Thread starter Palindrome
- Start date
Want to see the best returns ?
There're many trading competitions in China,
so check it out by yourself
http://qhsz.qhrb.com.cn/Data2/
http://ds.cctvfcn.com/
What I want is some form of risk-adjusted returns. Huge fast returns are much more subject to wild swings. It's just that if you swing below -50% or more, every successful or breakeven trader know it's much harder to regain those percentages, which is why they think in percentages and not absolute currency numbers. Ie. if you lose 50% (half), you need to win 100% (double) to breakeven, from a much lower account size than before, which makes it that much harder. If you go to 0 or anywhere near 0, you're OUT, as that account cannot be traded anymore. So I want a system that can scale up and down, but also has a safety net to avoid unmanagable drawdowns.
Many focus on currency numbers, but meaningful growth is really measured in compounded interest. Then year-to-year the numbers are likely to range +40% and lower, +40% being in the upper, more unsustainable end. Not talking about pre-IPO here, which can outperform or go bust quicker. Higher compounded percentage wins than that tends to lead to big drawdowns, high swings and associated risks could be not worth it. Indeed, +40% wins may tend to return to mean towards 10-20% range over longer time (20+ years).
Return on initial capital will provide much higher percentages, and can be used too. It's just a different perspective, not accounting previous year's wins as additional capital, so figures become more linear and higher. This draws focus away from risk and scalability though, so may provide more theoretical returns, than actual capital growth, which is what I'd prefer to keep track of continually. Ie. ~+27.10% anually compounded for 10 years is equal to +100% average return on initial investment for 10 years. The compounded returns tend to vary a lot less, so is probably less exciting for those that seek that part of trading.
So maybe I'm not a trader thinking like this, or thinking of the longer-term business? However, this is what suits my personality and aspirations, though it's just unknown how it'll work out, or how the "highest ranked traders" will perform or wether they'll still trade after 3-5 years.
Many focus on currency numbers, but meaningful growth is really measured in compounded interest. Then year-to-year the numbers are likely to range +40% and lower, +40% being in the upper, more unsustainable end. Not talking about pre-IPO here, which can outperform or go bust quicker. Higher compounded percentage wins than that tends to lead to big drawdowns, high swings and associated risks could be not worth it. Indeed, +40% wins may tend to return to mean towards 10-20% range over longer time (20+ years).
Return on initial capital will provide much higher percentages, and can be used too. It's just a different perspective, not accounting previous year's wins as additional capital, so figures become more linear and higher. This draws focus away from risk and scalability though, so may provide more theoretical returns, than actual capital growth, which is what I'd prefer to keep track of continually. Ie. ~+27.10% anually compounded for 10 years is equal to +100% average return on initial investment for 10 years. The compounded returns tend to vary a lot less, so is probably less exciting for those that seek that part of trading.
So maybe I'm not a trader thinking like this, or thinking of the longer-term business? However, this is what suits my personality and aspirations, though it's just unknown how it'll work out, or how the "highest ranked traders" will perform or wether they'll still trade after 3-5 years.
Last edited:
if by the term traders you assume people who make a living only by trading their own money then i doubt such data exists
size of the account definitely will matter, but so are the number of trades and average profit per trade
but all this does not matter much as long as the trader makes a living that meets his standards
unfortunately most (not 95%, but 99.99%) of the people in trading for a living are corpses working in the dark... so effectively what matters is to live long enough to see the light of the day
Years ago when I was doing well in the markets and aspiring to manage money for others, I did some research on "money manager performance". The only criteria were that the results be for 10 years and be independently audited.
The result of that search showed less than 1/10th of 1% of professional managers.... regardless of market vehicle(s)... stocks, bonds, futures, mutual funds, whatever, leveraged or not... averaged 30%/yr. And those were during strong bull market times.
Seems today's results would fall very much short of those in the past.
Of course money managers often have "size" constraints that a little guy with his small poke doesn't experience. Than again, it's a thousand times more likely that small money traded on leverage is going to get wiped out rather than being turned into a fortune.
Last edited:
For a small acct (let's say less than a million)...you should be striving to make 100% or more in a year. You might not do it or you might lose money...but that should be the aim. Yes, zdreg, risk management all comes into it...but at the end of the day, traders are here to make decent amounts of money. If a situation demands that you bet the ranch, you have to do so (or at least half the ranch). Life is too short to grind forever.
I earn 2-10 million playing video black jack everytime. Does that make me a profitable gambler...I would just focus and think about the Top .5% of Traders only,
...Being in the top 2% may sound impressive...but I bet...it's not even that much,
I'll assume being in the Top means the biggest % gain, not $ gain,
That being said, it will generally be a small retail guy with a relatively small acct only,
In a near Perfect Storm scenario of basically going all in, and compounding...it's easy to Surpass everyone's average return,
I have grown paper trading options accounts by more than 1,000% in less than two weeks,
But in the interests of full disclosure, I have blown some too, -- or greatly minimized their value,
Not sure what video blackjack is, but if it gambling with real money, then, yes, on a historic basis, you were a profitable gambler.
I like this statement, as it personally reflects back to a long period of isolation and misery I was entangled into. As gloomy as it sounds, a corpse working in the dark is the reality. You get to a point where you sell your soul with no guarantee of seeing any light at the end of the tunnel. The questions should then become:
Am I wasting my time?
What should I do next?
The uncertainty has led many near the brink, or into insanity, and in many cases suicide. You see the light when you embrace the fact, through trial and error, that you're one of the most well informed traders in this business.
Last edited: