Why 99% of Traders Fail – The Truth No One Tells You

Hello, fellow traders,

My name is Michael, and I’m a six-figure trader with many of the popular prop firms. While I could provide screenshots and statements, those can be easily faked—so instead, I’ll let my writing reflect my experience.

This guide is written for my younger self—more specifically, the version of me from ten years ago who had just started trading and found everything confusing and overwhelming. These are the lessons I wish someone had shared with me. Had I known them earlier, I would have saved a significant amount of money on blown accounts (both personal and prop), avoided frustration, and drastically reduced the time it took to become profitable. If I had read what you’re about to read, I could have reached consistency with just 10% of the effort.

I could write endlessly about this topic, but I’ll keep it concise while ensuring every point is clearly explained.

1. 99% of trading education is garbage.

Almost all the content you’ve encountered—books, courses, and mentorship programs—is useless. The trading industry is saturated with scammers, fake gurus, and misleading information.

I often meet traders at coffee shops or events who tell me they’ve read 20 trading books and completed 30 courses, yet they still aren’t profitable. When I ask them basic questions—such as where they conduct their NASDAQ technical analysis—they show me a CFD contract on an M15 chart.

I don’t want to sound harsh, but if you’re conducting technical analysis for a futures contract on a CFD basis using a low timeframe, you deserve to lose. That chart isn’t real—it’s meant to replicate the actual chart, but it has different wicks, gaps, closes, and fair value gaps (FVGs). Despite years of studying, many traders never even learn this simple yet critical distinction.

Some will argue, “But my mentor is profitable using this method.” Reality check: 99% of trading mentors are fake. They aren’t successful traders—they’re just skilled public speakers who make their material sound valuable. They use words that resonate with you, but they aren’t actually making money from trading. I’ve joined chatrooms and live sessions with tens of thousands of viewers, and within three minutes, I can tell when the so-called expert doesn’t truly understand the market.

There are very few legitimate traders who teach purely to share knowledge—Tom Hougaard and Michael Huddleston are among them. However, you’ll never be able to fully replicate their approach. They aren’t widely recognized because they aren’t polished public speakers, and in today’s world, charismatic speakers often receive more recognition than true specialists.

Key takeaway:

Most trading books and mentors are fake—no matter how convincing they seem. The truly profitable traders remain private and avoid unnecessary attention. Stop reading generic trading books and following self-proclaimed gurus. Instead, study Tom Hougaard and Michael Huddleston—they provide everything you need for free on YouTube and Telegram. But be prepared to put in the work. If you expect to build an above-average income with minimal effort in just a month, you’ll become another victim of the 90-90-90 rule (90% of traders lose 90% of their capital within 90 days).

2. The market is rigged.

I’ll prove it in a few sentences.

Next time there’s a FED meeting, watch the market during the first five seconds when Jerome Powell says, “Good morning.” Instantly, price can shoot up or drop 1,000 points. Do you really think “Good morning” caused that? Think about it.

Now, consider exchange rates. Do you honestly believe the U.S. or EU allows their currency to free-float? Here’s an example:
The U.S. military needs to buy $1 billion worth of equipment from Asia today. Would they allow private traders or banks to weaken the dollar to the point where the transaction becomes significantly more expensive? Of course not. Exchange rates are critical for economic stability and national security—they can’t be left to fluctuate randomly.

If you think currency manipulation is unethical, understand that it’s not—it’s a necessity. Uncontrolled exchange rate fluctuations would pose serious risks to financial stability. This has always happened throughout history, and it will continue.

Now, let’s talk about financial news. There’s no such thing. What we see are merely “justifications” for market moves.

Example: After a sharp drop in equities, the financial press will publish headlines like:
“Markets plunged today as [X event] sparked fear among investors.”

But here’s the truth: The market operates on pre-set algorithms dictating where price will move each day. When price needs to reach a level quickly, high-impact news (red-folder events) serves as a cover for manual intervention.

Key takeaway:

There is no such thing as “buying pressure” or “selling pressure.” The market isn’t free. You will never fully understand the automation behind price movements—nor should you try, as manual intervention constantly alters it.

Instead, focus on risk management. There is no such thing as a 100% success rate in trading. Never risk your account on a single trade, as you never know when manipulation will occur.

3. There is no fair chance.

Traders often assume price can only move up or down, meaning they have a 50% chance of winning.

Wrong.

If trading were truly a 50/50 game, how do 90% of traders still lose? Think about it.

Your Take Profit (TP) always counts for less, while your Stop Loss (SL) always counts for more due to spreads, commissions, and execution costs.

Example:
You enter EUR/USD long with a 200-point TP and 200-point SL.
Because of fees and spread, your TP is slightly smaller, and your SL is slightly larger—so your real win rate isn’t 50/50. It’s more like 48% TP vs. 52% SL.

Now, let’s discuss risk-reward ratios.

Most online trading advice promotes positive asymmetric risk-reward, like risking $100 to make $500 (1:5 RR). It sounds great—until you realize this is exactly how casinos operate.

If you trade with tight stop losses, you’re doing the same thing as a gambler betting on a low-probability jackpot.

Example:
You go long on EUR/USD with a 100-point SL and 200-point TP.
Even if you correctly predict the direction, the price might hit your SL first and then go your way. You were right, but you still lost. Sound familiar?

When you use a tight SL, you aren’t just predicting direction—you’re also predicting that price will move in your favor immediately without any retracement. Your win rate drops from 50% to around 5%.

Key takeaway:

Don’t sabotage yourself with tiny stop losses and extreme risk-reward ratios. Beginners should start with a 1:1 RR before exploring more advanced methods.

4. The solution to emotional trading: A daily limit.

The market is designed to exploit human psychology.

Ever feel like the price targets your stop loss, reverses right after you enter, and then moves in your original direction? That’s not a coincidence—it’s how algorithms are programmed.

To combat emotional trading, set strict daily rules:

  1. Trade only four times per week, with a maximum of one trade per day.
  2. Use pending orders only. Let the price come to you—never chase.
  3. Never interfere with a trade. No closing early, no reversing, no moving SL/TP.

Key takeaway:

Limit yourself to one trade per day, focus on two charts maximum, use pending orders only, and never modify trades once placed.


the
Please do me a favor: Buy a small challenge or start on a demo account and apply these rules. Then come back and comment if you have any questions.

I could go on and on about these topics and trading in general, but I promised to keep it brief.

And before you ask—I don’t offer mentorship. I don’t teach. But I’ll answer what I can here for free.

5 Likes

Why would you say that 99% are losers? did you read it somewhere or what?

99% might be overkill
More liek 90 90 90 rule

It’s not really an “obscure statistic,” Franziska: among other very reliable and objective sources, it’s what the Director of the FCA said, when giving evidence to the UK’s Parliament, last year (he said the proportion of long-term profitable retail traders of spot forex is “under 1%”).

And the FCA are supervising probably the world’s best-regulated accounts (hundreds of thousands of them, because they’re not limited to either UK-residents or British citizens), so that figure can surely only be even lower anywhere else, and among brokers offering higher leverage.

So it’s pretty much factual, really, unless one thinks he was perjuring himself for some unknown reason! :smiley:

I think the reason for all the misunderstandings about this issue relates to the way that brokerages publish the winning/losing numbers of accounts they have. They publish it the way the law tells them to (in jurisdictions that have laws about this) but it’s a dreadfully misleading way. They give the proportions of winning/losing accounts measured over a 3-month period. What they don’t tell you is that most of the 15-20% of “profitable accounts” belong to investors who have done “about 1” trade during the period concerned. In other words, they’re not really “traders” at all, as you and I would understand the word.

As the FCA guy explained, in his evidence, if you look at active traders and take a 1-year period instead, the number of profitable accounts is very tiny!

Hope this helps to clarify it. :slightly_smiling_face:

1 Like

I know the statistics from prop, but I did not know it was actually 1%.
good response

2 Likes

Interesting!

Prop-firm traders must be “above average,” too, in the overall scheme of things?

If you look at the companies like FTMO, there are people among their customers making quite decent livings. (A minority, obviously, but I even know a couple of them, myself, and there are certainly far more than just the ones I know?)

1 Like



According to what I can find in the internet what you say is purely misleading; would you please respectfully note where exactly you get that information Theodore? because I cannot find a single place that confirms this information

I did so, just above , where I quoted what I’d heard.

(I’ve certainly seen other online discussion about it, over the last few months, but haven’t bothered saving links to mere chat about something so unsurprising. It was also a news story on the BBC News website at the time, also unsurprisingly, but good luck finding anything on that horrible site - I certainly can’t!! :roll_eyes: )

I think the essential point, here, is that because spot forex/CFDs are decentralised, without any way for anyone to compile or collate any information available, any “internet information” about this can clearly only ever really be “guesses”, and it’s only when you get someone like the Director of the FCA giving evidence to a parliamentary committee, that you’re going to get anything approaching “objectivity” or, in this case, “statistical significance”, and the latter arising only because they have such an enormous “sample size”.

4 Likes

@TheodoreThring made the point that most profitable traders move to futures, and that probably explains why CFD is so low.

I’m a little gutted, because I intended to move to futures so checked that cTrader was compatible to move my strategies across. That same AI overview that you’re basing your number on told me it was used for futures. Turns out it very much isn’t and I’m in the position now of not being able to easily switch as a result.

1 Like

Almost all, I’d think.

People who can trade profitably naturally want (as I’m sure you do?) to combine decent leverage with proper, safe regulation and fund-security, have their broker on their side, and so on…

Easy enough to use something like Tradovate, surely, John?

Not that what they said is ever going to surprise anyone who’s ever worked in the industry (or probably even anyone who just knows anyone who’s ever worked in the industry): it’s not like it’s exactly a “closely-guarded secret”? :wink:

1 Like

You can trade futures with MT5 (if you really want to), too.

It’s absolutely horrible to use, compared with C-Trader, though!!

Nope, MT sucks and the whole reason I don’t want to move is that I have algos I’ve written that are pretty complicated. Converting them is a pain in the backside.

1 Like

“Ain’t nobody gonna argue with that!”

At some point you’ll have to bite the bullet and attend to that. What a pain. But Metatrader won’t be supported for ever, etc. etc. As you already know. :frowning_with_open_mouth:

“When you use a tight SL , you aren’t just predicting direction—you’re also predicting that price will move in your favor immediately without any retracement. Your win rate drops from 50% to around 5%.”- This is brutal and true !

Good takeaway

Bro what?! then what are Cryptocurrencies if there were decentralized assets before? most of the information you have mentioned so far are absolutely wrong!

You are now acting like like young Mary claiming God said Jesus is his son! It is like saying Donald Trump said I will give away 10 millions to each citizen but where the hell did I get this idea that someone said that!