million
No you did not. You showed what an ignorant idiot you are.
I bet you did not understand his post.
His point is, the study samples new traders, but makes conclusion on all traders.
That was also my point in one of my posts.
You did not understand my post either.
My post says a study samples one million MALE human being,then makes conclusion on ALL human being.I meant sarcasm,but you even agreed with this conclusion.LOL.
I wonder how long it takes people to become profitable
About a decade ago, I was in a chat room with a guy called 'vas'. He posted all of his calls a few seconds before he took them, posted his screenshots and stuff. Basically, there was zero doubt that he was somehow lying/cheating. He was legit. These weren't 'hindsight' trades that you often seen on forums and stuff. They were trades, called ion advance, on big stocks, and looking for fairly big intraday moved. Anyway, he told me it took him 27 years to find his edge!! (I think the guy was like 60 and he started trading at like 20ish and had now been making 2-10k per day for like 12 years or so)
Anyway, thought that sounded crazy at the time, but here we are some 10 years later and i'm still not consistently profitable lol
It's the only thing i've ever wanted to do and so I studied trading and practiced etc instead of any other type of study.
My life has always been loading lorries at night for 10 hours, sleeping a few hours, and then trading the majority of the US sessions (which is like 2.30pm in the afternoon here). But to this day, i'm yet to find an 'edge' - it always feels like a coin toss as to whether the break of the trendline i've been monitoring will lead to a good move or whether the 'support line' i've drawn will work, or whether i've read the 'price action' correctly etc.
I've met a handful of traders in person, but none of whom lasted more than 2-3 years before losing their accounts, although i'm convinced there are successful daytraders out there (even though most online seem to be just making money from trying to sell you their courses and systems as opposed to from the markets themselves)
You don't get it.
It is not about people, it is about market.
The point is, market in different countries have different characteristics.
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.
Fair point regarding 1 million males.i misread. Thought you said 1 million human beings. Apologies.
However, the comparison sucks. Here is why: do you agree that all traders regardless of how long they have been in the business started out as inexperienced ones? If yes, then if a study conclusively and credibly argues, with supporting data, that among all beginners only a handful makes it beyond year 1 then that means that the total number of traders that made it beyond that time frame and are profitable are an incredibly small drop in the bucket. This was the point of the study. So, to start with, the number of guys who claim they are profitable is already incredibly small relative to the incredible amount of people who attempt trading and quickly fail. And then a percentage in the multiple dozens of guys who claim to be profitable are lying to themselves and others to justify their existence. It's far from me to question individuals. But the overall picture on this website supports that thought.
In any case, even if one in a million who attempted trading makes it, it will still not deter the rest of the sheeple to try. Just in the exact same way that millions of lottery tickets are bought each week.
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.
I agree the number is small, but they still exist.
The study says they don't exist.
That is my point.
Bullshit, it does not, minor differences and technicalities but overall if you compare Nikkei or Hangseng or Kospi or Es or NQ or eurostoxx futures the differences are negligible.