What in the world?! > The average payout was just $51.62 (a gain of just 3.2%), which is statistically indistinguishable from breaking even. Yeah, it's not st

What in the world?! > The average payout was just $51.62 (a gain of just 3.2%), which is statistically indistinguishable from breaking even. Yeah, it's not statistically significant because (1) the experiment was stupid small: "118 young adults" And (2) the participants didn't have to care: "each participant $50". With (3) no choice of instruments "trading the S&P 500 stock market index and a 30-year US Treasury bond futures contract". And (4) randomly chosen 15 days. Still furthermore the experiment was made stupid tough: (5) the participants are students and (6) had to allocate bets for 15 events and up to 50 times leverage - and that is very difficult to do equally for newcomers and established investors who have not deliberately worked on the issue of bet size and allocation. (See The missing billionaires - A guide to better financial decisions, Victor Haghani and James White, 2023 - excellent book on that topic) What in the world?? That's a lot of trouble to go to for one cheap marketing headline. With zero applicability to the real world (except as cheap marketing headline and also: studying bet size / allocation is good advice for would be investor.) Indeed, they themselves recognize the thing in their conclusion: more thoughtful and experienced people did great - although perhaps still not significant because they managed to ask only 5 of them...