Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Because it would represent an extremely narrow slice of traders. It's possible traders of these equities find it quite hard to make a living but a larger number of other day traders do just fine.

Also it says "impossible" but the article actually shows it's difficult and rare.



Glancing at the abstract it looks like 97% lose money, what larger number in a more suitable sample size would make a difference?

I've heard low single digits of traders and investors deliver Alpha. Impossible? no. Highly efficent? Yes


The paper's claim is "virtually impossible".

The post's title is click bait.


lots of things are virtually impossible to do for a living and people still manage it though.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: