Now that a representative sampling of the "PnLs Are Proofers" have weighed in, I will point out,
AGAIN (click), that this has nothing to do with PnLs (or trading statements or tax returns or whatever) but with trading plans. T-r-a-d-i-n-g P-l-a-n-s. Without the trading plan, the PnL -- as well as anything else alleged to provide "proof" -- is worthless, except perhaps to demonstrate one's facility with photoshopping. And even if it were to do so, what difference would it make? A number tells one nothing about how the result was achieved, and without that, the onlooker is left in the same whatdoIdonow? state that he was in to begin with.
The PnLsAreProofers generate a lot of fog to obscure the fact that they have no trading plans. Rather they wend their way through the trading day by guessing. Not that there's anything wrong with this amongst a group of recreational traders, which, as I said earlier, constitute the bulk of traders who hang out on message boards. But for anyone to take this nonsense seriously is ludicrous.
To become a better trader one must create and develop a trading plan, not just gasp in awe at these alleged PnLs. If one starts from scratch, then, yes, it can take "thousands" of hours (better spent than the thousands of hours one spends hanging out on message boards). But if one is using someone else's plan as a template or starting point for one's own, it need take no more than a few weeks. As far as assessing the rigor of someone else's trading plan, that can be done in an evening. Sometimes five minutes. But the trading plan must exist. And so far, I've seen no evidence that they do, other than those belonging to those who are ironically criticized for not being "real traders".
So to return, again, to the subject of this thread, yes, daytrading is worth it IF one has a thoroughly-tested, consistently-profitable trading plan. If one doesn't, then probably not.
