The loss numbers
The figures exist — published by regulators and full-market studies. They are just never assembled where a beginner decides.
Facts checked on October 22, 2026
Ask the question plainly and search returns decoration: a statistic quoted to sell a course, a robot, or a challenge. The numbers themselves are public, measured, and — read together, with their denominators — the single most useful page a pre-trader can read. Here they are, each with who measured it, over what population, and what it does and does not say.
| Source | The figure | The denominator |
|---|---|---|
| ESMA (EU regulator, Decision 2018/796, restated since) | 74–89% of retail CFD accounts lose money; average loss €1,600–€29,000 per client | Retail CFD accounts at EU firms |
| ASIC Report 828 (Australia) | 68% made a net loss after fees in FY2023–24 | Australian retail CFD clients |
| CFTC (US) retail forex disclosures | About two in three lose money in a typical quarter | US retail forex accounts, per quarter |
| Barber, Lee, Liu, Odean (Taiwan, full market) | Fewer than 20% profit net of costs over six months; about 5% profit consistently | All day traders in a national market |
| Chague & De Losso (Brazil, full market) | 3% made money over a year; 1.1% earned more than minimum wage | 1,600+ day traders who persisted 300+ sessions |
| FPFX Technology dataset (prop firms) | 14% reach funded; about 7% of all buyers ever receive a payout; average payout about 4% of account size | 300,000+ prop-firm challenge accounts |
Three questions, always. Who counted? (A regulator with account-level data beats a platform's marketing survey.) Over what population? (All accounts, funded traders only, or 'traders who persisted 300 sessions' are different denominators telling different stories — the prop industry's 51.8% 'passed at least once' and the beginner-relevant 'about 7% ever paid' describe the same industry.) Over what period? (A quarter in a calm market is not a year.) A percentage without its denominator is a decoration, whoever is quoting it — including us, which is why ours are printed.
They are population rates, not personal sentences. A minority in every study does profit, and its members share measurable traits — adequate capital, controlled costs, records, time. But notice the mirror-image error: every account inside every denominator belonged to someone who believed the rate described other people. The correct use of a base rate is not despair and not dismissal; it is sizing — choosing a market whose minimum you clear and an education budget whose total loss you have accepted in writing, before the market starts teaching.
Run the checker with your numbers
The verdict gives you the arithmetic for your market and your capital. The Start-or-Wait Kit gives you the complete workbook: the demo-record audit (the 50-trade review grid), the staged capital plan up to your market's minimum viable capital, the 90-day learning plan week by week, and the real-cost tracker — the spreadsheet experienced traders build by hand, ready to fill in.
Included in the $39 Start-or-Wait Kit
Sources: FINRA Regulatory Notice 26-10 (April 20, 2026) and the brokers' own pages for the PDT tracker; ESMA Decision (EU) 2018/796 and the AMF restatement for European CFD loss figures; ASIC Report 828 (FY2023–24) for Australia; CFTC retail forex materials for the United States; Barber, Lee, Liu & Odean (Taiwan market data) and Chague & De Losso (Brazil) for day-trading outcomes; the FPFX Technology dataset of 300,000+ prop-firm accounts, reported by Finance Magnates (2024); broker-published minimum deposits and margin schedules as dated on the dataset page. If a figure has moved since our check date, the issuer's own publication wins — and write to help@doogex.com so we can correct ours.