Positive Skew · the data

How much of retail trading is luck?

Almost everyone thinks they're above average. The research says otherwise — and the numbers are brutal. Here's what large studies of actual retail accounts found.

97%
of people who day-traded persistently lost money
Chague et al., 2019 (Brazil)
~1%
earned more than minimum wage from it
Chague et al., 2019
−700bps
a year: how much the most active traders trailed the market
Barber & Odean, 2000
~1.0
the Sharpe even diversified quant funds run — so a 3.0 over a few months is noise
Ilmanen; industry norms

The pattern: trading more makes it worse

Barber & Odean tracked tens of thousands of household brokerage accounts. The households that traded the most earned the least — the busiest quintile underperformed the market by over seven percentage points a year. The cause they identified was overconfidence: people trade more when they believe they have an edge they don't.

Least active traders~17.5%
Average household~16.4%
Most active traders~11.4%

Annualized returns by trading activity. Source: Barber & Odean (2000).

And there's no "getting good" by grinding

The most sobering finding: the Brazilian day-trading study found no evidence of learning. People who persisted for years didn't develop skill — the survivors were mostly the lucky, not the improving. Beating the market intraday takes an edge that essentially isn't available to retail.

So how do you know if you're the 3%?

You can't tell from a good month, or even a good year — a strong Sharpe over a short window is statistically indistinguishable from luck. You need a long, steady record, and an honest measure of it. That's exactly what our free tool does: drop a screenshot of your P&L and it scores whether your track record is skill or variance.

Are you the 3%?

Screenshot your P&L. Find out if it's skill or luck — free, private, in your browser.

Check your trading →