Australian (ASX) Stock Market Forum

95%/5%

Jump to new
Second part - too long for a single post

Do Day Traders Make Money? (Part 2)
by Unknown Author

In Day trading is a quick road to financial ruin (5/5/99), Humberto Cruz of the Sun Sentinel cites Laura Walsh, a certified financial planner who said she prepared 40 tax returns the prior year for investors doing online trading, and not one made a profit. According to Walsh none of the traders had any idea about the concept of the spread.

A study by Houston-based Momentum Securities Management Co. came to mixed conclusions. The study has not been released to the public but was described in several articles including a comprehensive article in the LATimes by Walter Hamilton, one of the most knowledgeable reporters on the topic. See Study Finds Beginning Day Traders Lose Money and Study Shows Many Day Traders Are Landing in the Loss Column (via SOES.com). The study of 107 traders for several months at six of Momentum's Texas offices found that 6 of 10 newcomers and more than one-third of experienced traders lost money. After a three-to-five-month "learning curve," the study found that profitability of traders improved with 65% making money and 35% losing money. Regulators pointed out that the study covers only a narrow group of traders over a brief period and survivorship bias may be an issue with this study. Additionally it apparently was not compiled by an independent source.

A recent article in the Wall Street Journal (Single-Stock Swappers Trade One Stock and One Stock Only $$ (12/7/99)) about day traders Gary Ratner (who trades CMGI) and Jeff Easton (who trades Yahoo!) suggests that they routinely make more than $2,000 a day. According to the article, Mr. Friedfertig says that through Nov. 30, 67% of Broadway's 400 active traders -- those who trade at least 3,000 shares a day -- were profitable for the year, and 78% of those who've traded for more than a year made money.

Another interesting question that follows along the same lines is whether it is possible to train individuals to become successful traders. The question was asked several times by Jack Schwager in his interviews with successful traders in the best seller Market Wizards. While hardly scientific, the following observations from the book are certainly interesting.
Richard Dennis described an experiment where 40 of 1000 applicants where chosen and 23 were eventually trained. According to Dennis "It’s frightening how well it worked." 3 dropped out, but the successful 20 (known by many as the "turtles") averaged 100% profits per year.
However, others interviewed in the book were apparently less successful in training others and less optimistic about probabilities of success.
Bruce Kovner discussed trying to train perhaps thirty people, and only four or five turned out to be good traders. The other 25 left the business and according to Dennis "it had nothing to do with intelligence."
Marty Schwartz discussed hiring four people but nobody lasted.
According to Brian Gelber five or less out of every 100 people who go to the floor to become traders make at least a million dollars within five years and at least half will end up losing everything they came in with.
Tom Baldwin responded that less than 20 percent of those who come to trade on the floor are still around after five years and one percent are successful to the point of making and keeping at least a couple of million

The percentage of profitable day traders is certainly an important number, especially for those considering day-trading as a potential career opportunity, but another relevant question is whether day traders in aggregate make or lose money. After all, in many industries a small percentage of the players make the majority of the profits. For example, let's hypothetically say that only 10% of day traders make money. Just that information certainly isn't encouraging. But what if we now assume that the average loss for each of the 90% that lose money is $100,000, while the 10% of profitable traders go on to earn an average of $2 million. We could then say that the expected return for all day traders in aggregate is greater than 100%. If 9 lose $100,000, but the one in ten successful traders earns millions, we now have a different picture. In fact, based on those numbers day trading is a better proposition than the lottery or casino gambling, where the house always holds the advantage by any measure. So clearly in analyzing the success of day-traders, we must analyze not only the percentage of day traders that make and lose money, but also the amounts that they win and lose individually and in aggregate. Regardless, it should be obvious to everyone that day trading as a career is only for people in the financial position to sustain the probably losses.

Another important issue for potential day traders to consider is their opportunity costs. For instance, lets say day trader Loren has $125,000 in capital, currently makes $100,000 a year, and quits a job to start day trading. Loren . Loren expects to use $25,000 for living expenses for the next six months and the remaining $100,000 for risk capital. At the end of six moths Loren has lost half the capital and is left with $50,000. How much is Loren out from making the decision to day trade?

The answer is not $50,000. Loren has day trading losses of $50,000 but that’s not all. Loren also gave up $50,000 in income from the job left behind, which brings us to a $100,000 pre-tax difference. And the final cost is the opportunity cost of not investing the $125,000, since that money could have been invested in stocks or bonds. So in reality a decision to day trade can cost you a lot more than the capital you lose trading. The time and opportunity costs should also be considered in evaluating the profitability of day trading for any individual.
Click to expand...
 
Yes, it's a fractal until you get to the last 20 people in your 5/95 measure...and then it can't be a fractal any longer :)
 
Timmy said:
I am just trying to work out what you mean by 'transversely'. Is that something to do with Dracula?
Click to expand...

Now that's interesting isn't it? Wayne used to sleep in a crypt during daylight hours, there's even a picture of him in his favourite cape somewhere here on ASF (lol!), everything is upside down in Australia....but I think he's normal again.

Thanks lesm for that first article by the anonymous trader (the second one was good too)...seems to be a trend follower, he must have created a simple system that's very easy to trade.
 
RichKid said:
Now that's interesting isn't it? Wayne used to sleep in a crypt during daylight hours, there's even a picture of him in his favourite cape somewhere here on ASF (lol!), everything is upside down in Australia....but I think he's normal again.
Click to expand...
Yep, I've packed my cape away in a box, normal now... well, nearly. :D
 
RichKid said:
Thanks lesm for that first article by the anonymous trader (the second one was good too)...seems to be a trend follower, he must have created a simple system that's very easy to trade.
Click to expand...

Keeping it simple, is the way to go. Too often you see people making trading more complex than it needs to be.

Cheers.
 
theasxgorilla said:
BSG fan??? :confused:
Click to expand...

No. lol had to google that.

Seeing as we were destroying the fracing fractal hypothesis, it was just a little word play... but I probably did hear somewhere, maybe second hand from a BSG fan.
 
Thanks lesm for those articles.

I have read a study that was carried out on several thousand accounts by one of the big brokers in the US. The 2 guys that conducted the study did so to try and prove/disprove the 95/5 "Myth" (nobody until this came knew exactly where this stat came from). The figures they came up with weren't far off.

They also examined WHY those that lost money actually did lose by examining their trades. And suprise suprise, it had NOTHING to do with their stock picking "skills", the stocks they bought actually did very well over a period of time, but too often they sold too early. And as for the dogs, well they stayed in them too long.

I don't have a source for this (But i didnt just make it up -- LOL) but if you look on google it can't be too hard to find.

Though I think I got to it from a link from another board.
 
I'll bite.

wayneL said:
* Do the people preaching 95/5, presume themselves to be in the 5%? If so, how do they quantify this? By what measure do we separate the 5% "elite" from the 95% of presumably losers?
Click to expand...
Yes, I believe in the 95/5 rule for active traders. I believe I am currently in the 5%. Reason: I'm trading a backtested positive expectancy plan.
wayneL said:
* I there a fractal at work? Of the 5%, is there a further separation of 95/5? What does that say about the 95% of the 5%? Does this continue up a fractal scale?
Click to expand...
Yes, I believe this is a fractal, and within the 5% who are winning because of money management I believe there are 5% who are the much talked about and mysterious supertraders who seemingly effortlessly extract large sums of money from the markets consistently. You only hear about such traders obliquely as they have no need for fame.

Many aspire to this level. Few achieve, as it requires a true trading edge, something which trend trading does not provide.
 
agro said:
i thought it was the 80/20 rule
Click to expand...

Yes there is the Perato Principal.
Which basically states that you'll spend 80% of anything returning 20% of the result.
And inversley you'll spend 20% of anything returning 80% result.

Richard Koch's "The 80/20 Principal" ISBN:1-85788-168-0 PB
Covers most aspects of this well known rule.

Having applied it in many aspects of life its damned annoying/pleasing how true it is.
 
are we saying that 5% of the people have 95% of the skill

(I'm confident some have more than others btw)

but likewise, maybe some might have more than the average share of luck in any given time period.

i.e. are we talking last month's tipping comp - or next month's ;)
 
The discussion on this subject seems to suggest 5% are absolute geniuses and the 95% are absolute buffoons, How about a scale 1 to 100. I'd suggest I'm not in the 5% because I have no desire to be there. However I expect to be ahead of the 50% point and am happy with my results to date and claim to be around the 80 to 90% mark. I'm still showing a good profit so far this year. Does that count?
 
MichaelD said:
I'll bite.


Yes, I believe in the 95/5 rule for active traders. I believe I am currently in the 5%. Reason: I'm trading a backtested positive expectancy plan.

Yes, I believe this is a fractal, and within the 5% who are winning because of money management I believe there are 5% who are the much talked about and mysterious supertraders who seemingly effortlessly extract large sums of money from the markets consistently. You only hear about such traders obliquely as they have no need for fame.

Many aspire to this level. Few achieve, as it requires a true trading edge, something which trend trading does not provide.
Click to expand...


Hi Micheal good to see you drop in

Super trend traders Richard Dennis, Ed Seykota, Richard Farleigh just to name a few all used methods to catch major trends?

I think few will achieve because of the difficulty psychology wise to apply the methods required not that trend trading cannot achieve large profits.
 
Swing trading is just trend trading in a shorter time frame - betting a reversal in a trend is just temporary. Thus, like trend trading, it does not provide a true edge, but relies on risk and money management to be profitable (not that there's anything wrong with that).
 

Similar threads

R
The American use of War Pretext Incidents
Replies
6
Views
9K
sptrawler
sptrawler
Top