The top traders are THE top traders, that is clear. The tops, the best and certainly active and informative members of the inkling community.

However, without meaning to take any gloss from their shine, they do appear – PLEASE PUT ME RIGHT ON THIS – to have an ‘early starters’ advantage, in the whole.
They could ‘rest on their laurels’ a tad, a little, and never really suffer for it.

Without time on your side a newbie (ahem – such as myself – no bias here though…) is unlikely to ever make it to that hallowed list.
An old hand will continue to grow just because they are so large in proportion to a new trader when the new trader starts.

But how efficient are these top traders, how much are they generating for their inkles in the bank???
Comments such as ‘got in early’ etc are included as competitive advantages in user profiles, these advantages are going to be very difficult to breakdown (not insurmountable, just difficult…).

SO MY QUESTION IS?
So who really is the best? Is earlyness really what should be promoted as Tops?

SUGGESTION i
How would a more generic moving average performance; (weekly or monthly or annual gain) to (net worth) ratio sound?(possibly with proportioning up or minimum periods)

Something that can level the field a little. A ‘larger’ trader should be able to compete better in the long run as they can spread/take more risk. But individuals with fair ability (amongst the hundreds) may a least register, albeit briefly.

SUGGESTION ii
Break the traders into cohorts, the cohort of quarter ending 31st March 2007, 30th June 2007 etc and allow competitive stats from these ‘fairer’ groups. Breaking the traders up would also give the traders an idea of what progression in a peer group looks like. Then you can also have the cohorts competing, e.g.best performance after 3 active quarters.
Would the liquidity and number of users in the early markets come into play here – what do you think?

These are just suggestions and I am sure that there are better ideas. We don’t want to clutter the site with ratios, benchmarks etc, it is the markets that are the important part…Just with a net worth ratio of say 5k:165k for weekly starting net worth or 1:33, I see it unlikely that a newbie could increase their net worth fast enough to catch up. It is afterall net worth that generates a yield or weekly balance.

ho hum

back to trading

rant’n’rave over

So what do you think???

Comments por favor…..

p.d. We DONT want to get rid of the top traders list. This would be Additional.

Gracias

Yep, we wouldn’t want to get rid of the top traders list. ;)

But how about a ranking by growth percentage over the past quarter (perhaps limited to traders with at least 50,000 inkles in the bank to weed out lucky beginners).

How long do you reckon it should take to get to 50,000??? Howse about 15,000?
Is that another measure – speed to key milestones?