SEBI F&O report: 93% traders lost money FY22-24

Why the “3.5% traders earned” claim is trending

A widely shared social-media line frames SEBI’s data as if a small slice of traders “earned” meaningful money. The actual 3.5% figure in the SEBI discussion refers to the top 3.5% of loss-makers, not top earners. In the FY22 to FY24 SEBI update released in September 2024, that group was described as about 4 lakh traders. Their average loss was cited at around ₹28 lakh per person over three years, including transaction costs. That statistic has become a shorthand online for how extreme tail-risk can be in options trading. It is also being used to warn newer participants who may not see full costs in broker dashboards. The same SEBI material also notes that less than 1% of individual traders earned more than ₹1 lakh in net annual profit. Put simply, the “3.5% earned” framing does not match the regulatory wording being shared.

What SEBI’s studies say about win-loss rates

SEBI’s January 2023 study for FY22 reported that 89% of individual F&O traders lost money. SEBI’s updated study in September 2024, covering FY22 to FY24, reported that 93% of individual traders incurred net losses over the three-year period. That update also reported aggregate losses exceeding ₹1.8 lakh crore across FY22 to FY24. For FY24 alone, the same update cited that 91.1% of individual traders lost money after accounting for transaction costs. The social discussion often focuses on the percentage, but SEBI also points to the imbalance between small average profits and larger average losses. Commentators also highlight an important classification detail mentioned in the discussion: a trader making even Re 1 in profit can be counted as “profitable” in the per-year number. That makes the headline loss percentage a useful signal, but not a complete picture of outcomes.

FY25 update: losses widened despite tighter rules

SEBI’s July 2025 study for FY25 covered about 9.6 million participants. It reported that 91% of individual traders in equity F&O were net loss-making in that year. Net losses crossed ₹1,05,603 crore in FY25, and the social posts cite this as a roughly 41% year-on-year rise versus FY24. The average per-person loss in FY25 was stated at about ₹1.1 lakh. These figures are central to the online argument that the scale of losses has grown even if the loss rate remains near 9 out of 10. The same threads often interpret this as evidence that participation increased and risk-taking intensified. Others point to the compounding effect of frequent trading and transaction costs. SEBI’s findings are being used as a reference point in debates on investor protection and suitability.

Key numbers in one table (as cited online)

The following table consolidates the specific figures repeatedly quoted from SEBI’s studies in the shared context. Where the context does not provide a value, it is marked as not stated. This avoids mixing different report periods into a single series. It also reflects that some values are described as approximate in posts.

The income profile: most traders are low-income

A repeated policy concern in the discussions is the income mix of retail derivatives traders. The context notes that about three-fourths of individual derivatives traders have annual income below ₹5 lakh. A separate table in the shared posts cites 76% of F&O traders as being under ₹5 lakh annual income, with a 92.2% loss rate in that bracket. It also cites 94% of traders under ₹10 lakh income with about a 91% loss rate. Traders above ₹10 lakh are shown as 6% of the base, with about an 85% loss rate. Social commentary frequently translates ₹5 lakh a year into roughly ₹41,667 per month to illustrate affordability. It also compares the FY25 average loss of ₹1.1 lakh to this income level, calling it close to three months of total income. The point being made is not that higher income guarantees profit, but that losses may be harder to absorb for most participants.

New traders vs regular traders: what FY24 suggests

The shared context highlights a split between new and regular participants for FY24. It states that 92.1% of new traders lost money, with an average loss of ₹46,000 each. It also states that 88% of regular traders lost money, averaging ₹1.5 lakh each. Online readers interpret this as a sign that some newcomers start with smaller position sizes, while frequent or continuing traders can accumulate larger losses. Others read it as evidence that experience alone does not remove structural disadvantages. The data points are frequently used to push back against claims that losses are mainly a “beginner problem.” The numbers also sit alongside the observation that a large majority of the base continues trading despite past losses. In the context provided, more than 75% of loss-making traders reportedly continued trading after losses in the previous two consecutive years. That behavioural detail is a major driver of today’s viral debate.

The 3.5% tail: extreme losses are part of the story

SEBI’s September 2024 update is cited as showing heavy concentration of losses among the worst outcomes. The top 3.5% of loss-makers, about 4 lakh traders, reportedly lost an average of ₹28 lakh each over three years. This statistic travels widely because it is easy to visualise and difficult to dismiss. It is also used to argue that risk management failures can be catastrophic in leveraged products like options. In several threads, this is contrasted with the small share of traders who earn substantial net profits. The same context says less than 1% of individuals earned more than ₹1 lakh in net annual profit. Another point repeated online is that even the per-year “profit” label can include very small gains. Together, these figures explain why the 3.5% number is more about downside tails than upside success.

Costs and reporting: why your broker P&L may differ

A practical takeaway circulating alongside the statistics is that transaction costs matter. The shared posts advise traders to pull an actual P&L statement from the broker console, using Zerodha Console as an example path. They also warn that broker P&L screens can exclude some costs like STT and GST from the headline number. SEBI’s studies referenced in the context explicitly discuss outcomes after accounting for transaction costs. That detail matters because options strategies often involve high turnover. High turnover can make the gap between gross and net outcomes material even when trades look “nearly breakeven.” This is also why the online summaries emphasise net losses and net profits rather than only win rates. The strongest version of the caution is simple: if net results are negative, the trading system is not working regardless of how many trades “won.”

What the statistic means for retail risk discussions

The combined picture in the shared context is consistent across report updates: about 9 out of 10 individual F&O traders lose money. The September 2024 update adds the three-year lens, with 93% losing and losses exceeding ₹1.8 lakh crore over FY22 to FY24. The July 2025 FY25 study adds scale, with net losses of ₹1,05,603 crore in a single year and an average loss of about ₹1.1 lakh. Social-media debates focus on who is participating, particularly that roughly three-fourths of traders are under ₹5 lakh annual income. They also focus on persistence, with more than 75% of loss-makers reportedly continuing after consecutive losing years. Finally, they focus on distribution, with the 3.5% tail suffering very large average losses. These are the data points driving calls for clearer risk disclosures and tighter suitability checks. For retail participants, the takeaway being repeated is to treat F&O as high-risk and to look at net, cost-adjusted outcomes.