Poll: After how low are you considering being profitable?

[padutrader]

Really, trading is a highly risky and ludicrously uncertain business

maybe a bit more than other businesses but all business is uncertain, if you do not want to call it risky

 

[rb7]

I wonder if your question genuinely gets to the heart of what it is that you really intend to be asking. If you are ahead for a month, then you are profitable for the month, plain and simple. I'm thinking what you're actually seeking is how long it is before one can regard his or her system as valid and reliable, with an emphasis on reliable. Just a thought...but let me leave it at that.

UPDATE: I just read the post by SimpleMeLike (it appeared while I was still typing my entry) and he kind of implied the same thing. You seem (to me) to be more interested in the question of consistency rather than profitability.

The question was more toward the general definition of profitable trader.
How to we define a profitable trader?
Making money, for sure, but for how long?
If a trader starts to make money, how long does it take for him to start to be defined as profitable.
It doesn't imply that once a trader is deemed profitable that he cannot loses his edge and starts (or restarts) losing money.

If a trader is making money in a month, that month is profitable, but does that define him as a profitable trader? Or does more time is needed in order to define him as profitable?

 

[padutrader]

this is where you can make a lot of money without having a clue -i am not talking short term trading-

and know a hell of a, lot and make no money... here especially in short term trading

 

[padutrader]

How to we define a profitable trader?

how do we define a profitable business?

very few businesses have a profit, year after year ... every year.

 

[murray t turtle]

For practical purposes I would say 3 years of profits, assuming some reasonable cadence and consistency. But there are a lot of qualifiers.

.... Unlike other fields, there is no diploma or certificate on finishing your training, no fixed-term contracts, no pension or severance pay.

%%
Good post on profits.
Strange, some can lose money, all year [non profit501c3], like RobinHood foundation still be in good profitable shape.
Strangely, hedge funds have aVeraged so badly, make sure to find a few funds or fund managers that excelled, supertrends;
like Paul Tudor Jones + Jim Cramer.
Its like Jim Cramer's comment '' I don't even like the question ''are you an investor or trader''
But no pension is true of any business that doesn't plan for that.

 

[Laissez Faire]

I think it's complicated to answer, but anything less than a year seems too short to infer anything meaningful, IMO.

Just as important as time and trading frequency are market conditions.

For example, one year of active trading in a QE fueled bull market (could be that such a trader uses a simple long only BTFD strategy) is very different than one year of trading in say 2021/23 where you'll have both rallies and sell-offs, trending conditions, range bound conditions, different pace/volatility, etc.

 

[schizo]

There’s no such thing as profitable as most traders blow up.

Exactly. It's not how long you can withstand the pain, but how much more money you are willing to flush down the toilet.

Hence the title should be changed to:

How many accounts are you willing to blow up before becoming profitable?

 

[hilmy83]

When you start making money in active trading (not investing), how long do you think it takes to be considered as profitable?

My partial and humble definition of 'profitable' is:
An active trader making more money than losing, and making substantially more than just 'buy and hold' (or any major stock indexes).
And no, paper trading doesn't count!

But this definition is missing the 'for how long' part.

Because until you/we get there (meaning being profitable, whatever it means!) we/you are just struggling and trying to make money.

I think the moment you decide to stop trading altogether will determine if you're profitable or not. If you're net positive at that time, then yes you're profitable.

I've seen documentaries of floor trading making money for decades then when 1987 hit, they lost everything. So nobody gives a shit if you're profitable the last 10 years just to lose it all at the end.

So, the question should be: If you quit right now, are you profitable?

 

[rb7]

I think the moment you decide to stop trading altogether will determine if you're profitable or not. If you're net positive at that time, then yes you're profitable.

I've seen documentaries of floor trading making money for decades then when 1987 hit, they lost everything. So nobody gives a shit if you're profitable the last 10 years just to lose it all at the end.

So, the question should be: If you quit right now, are you profitable?

That's right, but only if you're allocated trading capital equal to all your previous net gains.
In practice, it doesn't shouldn't work like that.

 

[murray t turtle]

I think the moment you decide to stop trading altogether will determine if you're profitable or not. If you're net positive at that time, then yes you're profitable.
I've seen documentaries of floor trading making money for decades then when 1987 hit, they lost everything.

So, the question should be: If you quit right now, are you profitable?

%%
That 's great;
+ the great thing about trading-investing business , we can wait to the end of the month to decide, if we want to. LOL.
So many businesses have profits year after year, year after year \if one lost it all in one year, that could be a blessing in disguise-find a better business or better manager .
YES