There are only two ways to judge our trading performance which go hand in hand, the first one is the money in our pockets, if at the end of our trading session we have more money than when we begun then this is a good sign, as people should trade for only one reason and that is to make money.
The second criteria we need to use is the process which allowed to get those profits, after all if those profits come from a fortunate movement of the markets that saved us from losing money then we did something wrong and as such those results are not repeatable, however if those profits came from a deep analysis of the markets and we have backtested our strategy many times and those results fit what we can expect out of it, then we are doing things the right way and can expect more sessions like that on the future.
I don't know how each and one of you judge your "trading performance", but I'm very confident that if your data is merely one year or two years or even also 3 years, it might not be large enough to "judge" how profitable you are in trading. There's a reason why professional traders back-test their trading strategy to 10 years.
Plus my post was for plebs like me who might be doing under-capitalized trading and believing that they could out-trade the market consistently. It's like gambling in my opinion.
When it comes on trying out to assess your trading capability then 1 year should really be enough or even on 6 months on doing trading.
I'm a mere pleb, and I'm also just learning but I'm sorry, ser. I'm very VERY confident that isn't true. If you don't believe it, you can ask those traders and investors who have been in it long enough for their thoughts and opinions to matter.
It's also just common-sense. Having just one year of good performance is not indicative of that person having a consistent winning career as an investor or a trader. There might be exceptions, but it isn't the usual.