90% Bullshit.

How often do you see the statistic that 90% of traders lose money?  That statistic seems to be thrown around and accepted without question.  Yet, I've never seen a citation for that figure.  I don't see anyone getting scared out of trading by that figure.  To the contrary, it's great marketing. After all if you're a guru and your profitable you must be one of the chosen few. If you sign up to a service and then start making some money, then the service must be fantastic.

The problem is that that 90% failure is not accurate.

Over the years, there have been a number of studies about the profitability of various speculation activities. I've seen several articles referencing surveys that have shown trading may be a losing proposition, but nothing close to a 90% failure rate.

• 70% of day traders lose money. 
• "6 in 10 mom and pop traders lose money

 The 90% figure likely comes from a misinterpretation of the Thomas Hieronymus study.  Thomas Hieronymus took a look at 462 speculative futures trading accounts in the 1960s.   He observed that 92% of the traders who had traded fewer than 10 times over the year (i.e. the dabblers) lost money.  Hieronymus then looked at the regular traders and found that  41% of the regular traders made money against 59% losers.

Do you call the guy who placed 1 trade got his ass handed and went on his way a trader?  I wouldn't.
The 41 /59% split seems more realistic.  The lesson being that studying trading and preparing the odds get a whole lot better.  Now 41% might not be a walk in the park-- but it's not 10% and certain doom.