You might be right. I don’t know, as I found different sources/reports saying different things, so I attempted to consolidate the main points here. I’m not sure that a larger candidate pool necessarily means they’re more competitive, though, as you also need to look at how well-qualified/prepared each candidate is and how many positions there are. I think you could argue that physical trading roles are more accessible, in that they’re not going to immediately rule out certain people, as most large banks would for S&T.

Would like to pushback on this
“Join a physical trading shop or natural resource company in an operations, “scheduling,” or middle-office role with a pathway to becoming a trader. These roles are less competitive, but they also pay less than S&T at a bank, and even if you perform well, it usually takes 3-7 years to gain P&L responsibility.”

Those roles are definitely not less competitive (I’d even go as far as to say more competitive than S&T programs) as there is a large candidate pool beyond undergrads.