If you're talking about capital productivity, alternative investments, and what is possible, I suppose the most important number would be return on invested capital (ROIC), possible risk-adjusted, over time. I agree that it helps to know what is reasonable, as the sports analogy shows. But it is also important to keep in mind that trading involves a lot of chance, probably much more than in sports. Determining how much of a trader's performance is due to chance and how much to skill is very difficult. If it were easy, money managers would have much better records than they do.Quote from logic_man:
Well, when I posted the thread, I was hoping some of the better posters would chime in with their own experience. There's been some food for thought provided and that's about all I expected could happen. I happen to think the question of capital productivity is paramount. If your capital can't earn a return above its opportunity cost, you may as well be doing something else with it, after all.
"Average trade" is a good metric for comparing two similar systems, such as a system with and without optimization. But it is useless for evaluating dissimilar systems. Same with "total profit", the newbies' favorite.