Traders with no knowledge can loose money in Forex market easily. There is no perfect ratio of loosing in market, because the traders who are earning will never show their earning to others.
I don’t measure that 90% are failing in this business, although mostly are getting loss but only 60-70% are failing but rest of the people are earning huge amount from this business, I found forex lucrative and life changing opportunity.
Sorry - no hostility intended but this really is total nonsense - it’s just [I]completely wrong[/I]. There are many published figures that show it’s unmistakably nonsense.
If someone reads the published figures which put the fraction of accounts being profitable in a given quarter in the 30-40% range, then you might be led to believe what service had to say. As I’ve written before, though, those stats can be really deceptive.
But then you have my findings on the trader success subject. 
Everyone loses money in this business. There is no doubt. We all have losses, I certainly still do and I do not expect that ever to change. The reason for this is that you cannot predict with 100% certainty what will happen next.
There is no problem with losing money, you just have to make sure that you’re losing less than your are winning (money that is). This sounds very easy but in actual fact is very hard. If you are prepared to do what’s necessary, you will get there in the end.
If you mean that 90% of traders lose as in they blow up their account, that’s a different thing. And I would say that sounds about right.
Trading can bring you immense riches, but like with everything, if it was easy, everyone would be doing it.
But no one ever said it was easy to become rich. you just gotta be prepared to do what most aren’t prepared to do. That’s the key IMO.
It is true the majority are losing money in the forex market but many are earning as well, the difference is only of attitude.
You can’t predict with 0.1% certainty - no one can :58:
All about probabilities!
A prediction is the same as an assumption, and as we know assumptions are the mother of all fu*k-ups
Frankly, I’ve never seen any official statistics to support that 90% losing traders claim. That said, the washout rate really is very, very high. Reaching the point where a trader’s consistently profitable requires a lot of time, education, training, effort, energy and money, and few people are able to go through all that and not give up on the idea.
Yeah, I’d love to see some actual stats saying that 90% of traders lose money. Everyone seems to say it as if it is a well known fact but I’ve never seen any real evidence of this. I do expect it to be true as I don’t know that many traders who actually make money
take a look here - it’s in black and white, search away! - I’m pretty sure we can assume futures markets will be akin to spot rate account.
My own guess would be that the proportion of futures traders who are profitable will be [I][U]significantly[/U][/I] higher than the proportion of spot forex traders … when you think about the comparisons between the effective entry-barriers to each, experience-level effectively required for each, etc. etc. So I’d think that far more forex traders will be losing money than futures traders. :33:
I’m not so sure about that, though it depends on how you judge and measure. I’ve seen research on stock market day traders - who in the US are required to have significantly more money - that show very comparable win rates as those for retail forex.
Yes, I see what you mean …
Again, one could say that stock traders are a different group of people, as the overlap with “investing” there is much higher than is the case with futures? I don’t know whether that’s true in America, though …
That’s why I specifically said stock market [I]day[/I] traders. No question of them being investors, really. The broader research on investors is that they underperform market bechmarks. But then so too do most professional money managers.
As for futures, it’s my understanding that the 95% failure rate often cited actually originally came from futures brokers. But you have to define what “failure” means.
One thing that has long worked against futures traders is the large fixed contract sizes. Soooooo easy to be undercapitalized. Yes, that’s gotten better with mini contracts, but those are still large for some traders. You don’t have the likes of OANDA where you can really customize your risk down to the penny.
Not that everyone uses that capacity wisely, of course. 
is it 90% now, during my time it was like 95%? lol and yes what kind of failure are we talking about…
Its around 90-95%, the majority keeps on failing after joining the forex market.
Yes maybe right, but although many trader fail and might losing huge money in forex, in fact they still trade and want to making money with forex business because many trader still having positive mindset if forex as online business to making money
From my understanding of that, it is not as if they are losers all the time, but painting a clear picture of what might result to loosing which affects more persons in forex than expected.
The main reason for the over 90% failure rate in Forex is the absolute deceptive nature of the market.
I traded (invested) stocks for over 10 years before starting Forex. The market does not use leverage, moves slower so losses can be contained quicker and positions are generally held for weekly or monthly periods. Forex is like shares on steroids, much more volatile and therefore larger losses can be generated in a significantly shorter time frame.
Stocks are also ~70% fundamentally driven and ~30% supported by technicals. Forex on the other hand is possibly the exact opposite with Price Action being the most successful strategy.
Price Action in FX is a must due to the absolute deceptive movement (by the insto’s) of the indicators, driving new Forex traders cash straight into their accounts.
When I first started to trade, I could not believe how often the the trades would go instantly negative (80%+) after placing a trade, you feel the need to trade in reverse of the direction that you see. This would also destroy a lot of newbie traders from the get go. Hence the need to learn price action as quickly as possible.
To be successful at FX you have to invest HUGE time to find your edge, strategy or system. Demoing or trading a small live account with micro lots. Most people would quit before they started if they knew how difficult it really can be.
The only real saving grace with FX compared with stocks is a lot less cash is required (leverage) trading FX as opposed to the larger sized positions required for the stock market. Most successful share traders are very dubious of the FX market.
Actually, the numbers I’ve seen suggest that active stock traders have a similar success/failure rate as forex traders. I’m talking here about folks in the short-term time frames. Since there really isn’t long-term investment in forex, it’s not really reasonable to compare it to stocks in that context.
I traded (invested) stocks for over 10 years before starting Forex. The market does not use leverage, moves slower so losses can be contained quicker and positions are generally held for weekly or monthly periods. Forex is like shares on steroids, much more volatile and therefore larger losses can be generated in a significantly shorter time frame.
Be careful characterizing forex as more volatile. Individual stock prices are generally much more volatile than exchange rates. For sure, the leverage used in forex can lead to the [I]performance[/I] of forex traders being much more volatile. And leverage is most certainly used in stocks. Mainly it’s day traders, but margin trading definitely happens. In fact, technically anyone who shorts a stock is using leverage.
Stocks are also ~70% fundamentally driven and ~30% supported by technicals. Forex on the other hand is possibly the exact opposite with Price Action being the most successful strategy.
I have a hard time agreeing with this - and I’ve traded both markets as well. In the long term fundamentals dominate both markets and in the short term fundamentals play a relatively minor role in both markets.