Lol, no you don't. Does Procter and Gamble need to sample each and every single diaper on the manufacturing belt to test quality? No they don't. There are sound sampling techniques and there is the law of large numbers. Google it if you have no idea what I am talking about. Goodness. No wonder the stats of failing traders is so high. Basic statistics, my friend, emphasis on basic.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Study says Daytrading for a living is virtually impossible.
- Thread starter traderslair
- Start date
Can't possibly agree more. Most on this site can't even run a simple hypothesis test I bet.
They absolutely performed this study properly, controlled mostly properly, and even discussed where the study could be improved. RTFA next time.
Neither of you understand statistical significance. Go back to university and take an introductory statistics for scientists course. Until then your hot takes are meaningless until you present contrary data. I'm waiting with bated breath for your study. Another case of "internet shit-talker and alleged successful trader knows more about economic studies than a PhD in economics".
No you did not. You showed what an ignorant idiot you are.
I just debunked the article....maybe you should read it
OMG that is the entire point, failing also means NOT persisting. Most people who attempt to day trade fail because they either don't persist, or don't learn, or can't remove themselves from their emotions, or don't risk manage properly or any for any other reasons, or all the above. Someone who gave up and did not persist also failed.
Sticking at something is persisting. Quitting after 300 days is not persisting, relatively compared to the time profitable traders have put it.
You can persist at something without it being futile as with your example.
Persisting can be becoming better at something by learning from mistakes and improving.
It is a matter of persistence.
Exactly right. As long as the sample set is representative of the population set your conclusion has very high statistical validity. Dummy.
A study researched one million male human beings and found none of them could have a baby.
The study concluded that human beings are not capable of having babies.
Oh, so Brazilian asset prices behave differently than Japanese jgb or American ETFs? Please show how.
+1 As a former corporate statistician for a big-3 automaker, I will say
a) wtf
b) non-representative sample; No inference can be made between uncorrelated markets like brazilian futures vs USA NASDAQ/NYSE stock & etf day trading; apples vs oranges non-valid comparison.. plus its non-usa traders.
c) the results would be useful for people day trading brazilian futures though; but not for usa mkts
also there's stats like '90% of all small-biz startups fail in the first 10 years", but folks still try, to their credit
How are American or European daytraders smarter than Brazilian daytraders? Oh right, CNBC is American lol. If you can demonstrate this other than shitting on an entire nation without any factual reason then you would start to make sense. So far you don't.
Looking at most on this site who dropped out from highschool I totally believe this study equally applies in other countries.
You don't get it.
It is not about people, it is about market.
The point is, market in different countries have different characteristics.
Last edited:
Exactly right. As long as the sample set is representative of the population set your conclusion has very high statistical validity. Dummy.
Did you understand my post?
I bet you did not.
Oh, so Brazilian asset prices behave differently than Japanese jgb or American ETFs? Please show how.
He does not need to show you.
Every one who has trading experiences knows.
If you don't have trading experiences, no point to argue with you.
Lol, no you don't. Does Procter and Gamble need to sample each and every single diaper on the manufacturing belt to test quality? No they don't. There are sound sampling techniques and there is the law of large numbers. Google it if you have no idea what I am talking about. Goodness. No wonder the stats of failing traders is so high. Basic statistics, my friend, emphasis on basic.
You don't know what you are talking about.lol.
Let's say you sample one million people in Brazil, none get Nobel prize,so you conclude there are no people in Brazil who got Nobel prize.You are wrong, there was one in Brazil who got Nobel prize.Your sampling does not work this time.
Now you sample one million people in China , you find none got Nobel prize,and you conclude there are none in China who got Nobel prize,you are deadly wrong. China does have a couple of people who got Nobel prizes, they just don't show up in your sampling. Because China has 14 million million people.The point is you can't use statistics sampling in this situation.And that is what I meant in my post.
I will tell another example here.
Einstein discovered relativity.
Suppose you sample people at the time Einstein is still alive.
If you sample one million people in this world, find none discover relativity,you conclude there are none who can discover relativity. Your conclusion is wrong again, because you can't use sampling in this case.There is only one in this world who discovered relativity.To deny you need to go through every people in this world.
Last edited: