Profit Surge Trader Member Survey

Headline

Members are broadly satisfied with Profit Surge Trader (69.1% gave 4-5 stars, n=94) and want more of it — 83% want the 4-day Nate training (n=94) — but a recurring cluster of complaints about trade-exit clarity, audio quality, and unanswered chat questions suggests specific, fixable friction points rather than a satisfaction problem.

What the numbers say

• Most rate the service positively: 69.1% gave 4 or 5 stars, but 26.6% landed at a lukewarm 3 stars and 4.3% gave 1-2 stars (all n=94).
• Strong appetite for more content: 83% want the 4-day earnings training with Nate (78/94); 90.4% find weekly livestreams helpful (85/94).
• Trade volume is not the complaint: 84% say PST does NOT send too many trades (79/94) — so "too many alerts" isn't the friction point, despite some individual comments to the contrary.
• Willingness to publicly vouch is much lower than satisfaction would suggest: only 41.4% would post a TrustPilot review (36/87; 7 of 94 skipped this final question).
• Open-text engagement drops off sharply on the second long-text question: 74/94 answered "how could we improve" (20 skipped) vs. only 59/94 answered "what do you like" (35 skipped, 37.2%) — a notably lopsided gap between the two open-ends.

In their own words

• Exit/risk-management confusion: "I still don't know when to give up on a trade that is going down. I know you do closing alerts, but what is signal, system or reason telling you when to close."
• Win/loss transparency requests: "Post profitable trades. Publish your complete trade history with true percentage success and R score."
• Audio quality complaint: "Nate Bear definitely need a major improvement for his microphone. I can only pick up about 30% of what he says and every time he turns to his left I can't hear him."
• Chat/support access frustration: "Allow for enough staff while online to answer each question. Mine are never spoken to by Nate or anyone else. It seems that he answers only questions from ppl whose names he recognizes."
• What members value: "Not being overwhelmed with too many trades as I am retired and not desiring to watch charts all day. The professional guidance from Nate - highly value his expertise and his calm demeanor and humor even in crazy markets."

What to do about it

• Fix Nate's microphone/audio setup on livestreams — this is a named, specific, solvable complaint, not a vague preference.
• Publish a real win/loss record with worthless expirations counted as losses — multiple respondents flagged this exact accounting gap and asked for it directly; this is a credibility issue that likely explains the soft 41.4% TrustPilot willingness despite decent star ratings.
• Add a short explainer (video or one-pager) on exit criteria — several respondents said they don't understand when/why Nate closes a position; this is a recurring, specific training gap, not generic "more education."
• Route the review ask only to 4-5 star raters going forward — asking the full list get 41.4% yes; segmenting by satisfaction score in-app or in a follow-up email is likely to lift conversion.
• Flag the member who reported missing trade alerts and unresponsive customer service to support/success team directly — this respondent left contact info in the open text (should be handled outside the report, not just noted as a stat) and represents a live churn risk.
• Investigate the DPL/PST overlap complaint - at least one respondent explicitly questioned whether PST should be "rolled over into DPL" — worth checking if this is a one-off or a positioning problem across other feedback channels.

Caveats

• 94 completed responses (87.9% completion of 107 started) — reasonable size, not flagged as "small," but still a self-selected group of engaged members, not a random sample of all subscribers.
• The two open-text questions have very different skip rates (20 skipped vs. 35 skipped) — the "what do you like" question lost over a third of respondents, likely due to survey fatigue or question placement near the end; treat volume of positive open-text themes as under-representative relative to the improve-question themes.
• Several verbatim answers were cut off mid-sentence in the raw data (e.g., references to "For exampl…", "…show up as "Monu") — these are quoted only where complete enough to preserve meaning; some nuance from truncated responses is lost.
• One open-text response is in Slovenian and was not translated for this summary.
• The final TrustPilot question had its own skip pattern (7 of 94 didn't answer) — worth noting this was the last question in the survey, so may reflect end-of-survey drop-off rather than reluctance specifically.