INteresting selection of statistics there @PipMeHappy.
The title is “DO? women make better traders than men” - yet the address line is " /women-make-better-traders-men/ " - possible revealing a bias in the intention of the blog, which is then belied by the adjustment of the title headline ?
Then there is this ; - [quote] There’s a growing body of evidence that proves that women not only excel in day trading, traditionally regarded as a man’s job, but also routinely outperform their male counterparts. [/quote]
A bald statement made before any such evidence was even presented - thereby swaying the judgement of any reader of the subsequent “evidence”, before the evidence is even presented.
ie again the revelation that the “investigator” may be biased since the statistics “prove” nothing - they are simply statistics which indicate that of 35,000 households men traded 45% more frequently, without even considering whether there may be underlying reasons such as “men were more interested” or "men were doing more research and testing their beliefs more frequently ? "
and this ;
a practice that lowered their net returns by 2.65% per year, compared to 1.72% per year by women, nearly a whole percentage point worse. [/quote]
Hard as I look at that particular wording, I cannot make sense of it - unless it refers to costs due to commisisons and spreads ? in which case both groups were making phenomenal “returns” and we would need to know the gross returns made by each group, for that statement to have any meaning at all.
The Blog then goes on to say ;
[quote] Trading website FinTrader recently announced that the percentage of women engaged in trading and spread betting has been on the rise. The firm says that 25% of its clients are now women, up from virtually zero, two decades ago. And, judging from the company’s data, women are, on average, better traders than men.
FinTrader has posited five reasons why women make better traders than men:[/quote]
Now if we look at that other article you posted where of 20 males and 20 females, the females were seemingly significantly less likely to back their own ability by taking on the competitive route, perhaps the lack of females could mean that less than a half of the females who were available to be “traders” decided to do so and that the ones who did, were more confident of their own judgement and ability than those who did not. (perhaps then they “self selected” so that only the brightest section decided to “compete” ?
The junior traders, both men and women, lost money in their first year of trading, which is pretty standard for first-year investment bankers. But, women traders lost significantly less money than their male counterparts.
Men vs. Women First-Year Trading Returns
women1Source: eFinancialCareers [/quote]
So the women on average lost $50,000 in their first year - but did only 2/3 of the number of trades that men did. Men lost around $68,000 in their first year, meaning that on average their loss per trade was smaller than the women.
The blog does demonstrate that women are generally more compliant than men, and more frightened to break “rules”, which is postulated as a good thing. Whereas it could also be presented as “men are more able to think critically and to make their own decisions” - Something which may well stand them in far better stead in later years of trading - for when they potentially become …
Far from avoiding risks, older traders tend to take just as many risks as younger folks. The difference is that they take the right risks, are highly organized and are very results-oriented. The result is that the over-55 set enjoys 40% better returns than their younger counterparts.[/quote]