Female traders ... and why so few of us

“a single firm showed”

You almost accidentally got a fact right. it was ONE firm, Fidelity, only one of the largest trading houses on the planet and their results were backed up by the other trading firms (though they refused to give exact stats only said that it seemed “about right” in interviews following).

The problem is that the results were confirmed by another “firm” which is a trading app, only one of the most globally used trading mobile trading apps with trillions of dollars in processed trades and they came up with numbers that were very similar to Fidelity’s. So not exactly “one firm” you can’t even accidentally get your facts straight.

And yes, you’re right, individually we can (and do) deviate from “norms” … but that wasn’t the question I posed in the OP now was it. The question I posed is that given that women are IN GENERAL better traders than men, why aren’t there more female traders.

The question had nothing to do with a specific individual. Sheesh.

I answered your question, and you ignored it. I explained why every single one of your resources was garbage, and you consistently misrepresented my responses. You are either being deliberately obtuse or you are so utterly convinced of your conclusion ahead of time that you are literally blind to any words that contradict it. You are fooling nobody but yourself; anyone else reading this thread is witness to your poor reading comprehension and/or dishonesty.

I have even given you a chance to save yourself a smidgen of embarrassment by hinting that all you have to say is that you simply don’t think the facts I posted regarding intelligence and profession preference between the sexes (that “yammering” you willfully ignore because you don’t like reality) explains why there are so few female traders. I suppose another explanation is they see someone like you and think that’s not someone they want to be. Good day, madam.

Yes _bob, though I like to think if Mark Twain had the Internet, he would have rethought his position. :wink:

[quote=“NorseBoric, post:42, topic:106247, full:true”]
I answered your question, and you ignored it.[/quote]

The answer you provided was so horrible that I was hoping to give you a chance to reconsider an inane answer.

Your explanations sucked and made no sense. The data, not by a single firm because every other firm has confirmed the results, says that women are better traders (admittedly at only .2% to .3% it’s only marginally better … but still better)

lol … what’s dishonest is insisting there’s no data supporting the fact that women are better traders when in fact it is all but considered a GIVEN on wall street that women will be better traders.

I have even given you a chance to save yourself a smidgen of embarrassment[/quote]

Start worrying a little more about saving yourself embarrassment. Facts are facts, the data says what it says, I’m sorry you don’t like the facts, I’m sorry you don’t like the obvious conclusions of the data.

That doesn’t change the truth. Women are in general better traders than men.

And I suppose some women could look at the overly mysoginistic male morons in this field and decide they don’t want to have to deal with your kind of nonsense. That might be a good reason for so few female traders as well.

Good day to you as well sir.

This pretty much sums it up for me. Home-based female trader right here.

I’ve been at this game for so long and I do check out forums quite often, but I hardly participate in them mostly because of the misogynistic vibe. And I’ve previously worked in a prop firm where this kind of “culture” is magnified by a hundredfold.

I would venture to say that there are more female traders than it appears these days (maybe close to an even split?) likely in part to the traits that give us a bit of an edge and the convenience of home-based trading. It’s just that men are so much noisier about it.

1 Like

Hey ya, I am a female (beginner) trader. I don’t focus too much on gender in all aspects on life, but yes it’s obvious there are way more male traders than female. I have no idea if that means I’ll have more of an edge, time will tell. Fingers crossed :grinning:

Hey guys and dolls. I apologise for interrupting and deviating from the topic.
I wanted to sing out to any women who might be out there in ForexTown.
If you feel courageous enough to share your own personal trading tales or simply want to have a read, take a look here…bookmark it…or pin it…so it doesn’t get lost and forgotten:

(Why we need more (good) female traders)

It’s the long running thread from PipMeHappy, a considerate contributor, always respectful - towards everyone - and a great supporter of women.
Just in case you missed it the first time, here’s the link again :grin:

(Why we need more (good) female traders)


I can never tke somebody seriously who doesn’t know that data is the plural of datum - male, female


I am also a female trader but I never feel that there are not so many females in this business. There is nothing discuss female and male in this work.

Gender is not important here, your brain and ability to control emotion count

1 Like

Don’t forget focus, work ethic and perseverance! :slight_smile:

Thanks for sharing those links!

I believe the OP was just curious to find out why there are fewer female traders, and I do agree that this career option is marketed more heavily towards the male demographic (and I think Hollywood is partly to blame, haha) so that may be one good explanation.

I’m not too sold on the idea that males or females have a strong advantage over the other in terms of trading skills. That may be more of a function of personalities and traits developed over time (nature vs. nurture?) plus diligence, grit, deliberate practice, etc rather than stereotypes that no longer exist in this day and age.

Of course there will always be studies and statistics but these hardly seem conclusive enough to reach a generalization. There are just too many variables to consider.

Just my two pips! Glad to see ladies and gents sharing their thoughts on this topic :slight_smile:

Yeah, because all the trading legends interviewed in Jack Schwager’s books are female, excepting Linda Raschke, she was a male. Oh wait, no, it’s the other way around.

@Verystronggirl, don’t you mean “who doesn’t know that data are the plural of datum”? :wink:

1 Like

@happypip. Please don’t you get suxed in. The OP was curious about nothing other that to promote herself and use BPs to run a scam over its members.

A spade is a spade where I come from. Lets not promote a thread when the subject matter is prominent elsewhere within the forum.

Maybe they can’t stand the boredom… :slight_smile:



Verystronggirl’s grammar is correct.

In her sentence, she is not referring to data (as in statistics).

She is referring to the word data.

That being said, there is an a in take.


Touché @Clint

As always, a voice of reason :laughing:

1 Like

Hmmm… so the agenda are for this discussion.

Or is it the agendum is…

The Romans kept it simple, datum is singular, data is plural - but most those guys have left the stage.

1 Like

No I dont. data is a word the same as any other word. Its meaning happens to be a plural so when it is in use it declines as a plural – data are…as a word it is a word. Singular.

1 Like