Skip to main content

Paul Eichwald Comment On Regulatory Notice 22-08

As a former financial advisor of 44 years (now retired), I would like to strongly protest additional regulatory restrictions on the use of leveraged or inversed funds, beyond the regulations that are currently in place. The new proposed regulations are an example of regulatory over-reach and are not needed.
I am pleased and proud of the fact that I never experienced any client complaints during my wonderful and successful advisor.

Justin Blalock Comment On Regulatory Notice 22-08

I oppose restrictions and barriers of entry to investments such as leveraged and inverse funds. I utilize leveraged funds in particular as a part of broader strategy both as a hedge and to enhance returns. Investors such as myself are capable of understanding and weighing the risks and potential rewards. Unnecessary restrictions do not help us and are a waste of time and effort for investors, brokers and regulators.

Jonathan Hughes Comment On Regulatory Notice 22-08

I not regulators should be able to choose the public
investments that are right for me. Public investments should be available to all of the public, not just the privileged. I shouldn't have to go through any special process like passing a test before I can invest in public securities, like leveraged and inverse funds. I am capable of understanding leveraged and inverse funds and their risks. I don't need any measures imposed on me.

Clay Modisette Comment On Regulatory Notice 22-08

I am strongly opposed to any regulation that would exclude anyone with a cash account from investing in complex financial instruments. This could lead to biases based on education level, race, beliefs, net worth, etc.
I believe that margin access could benefit from further scrutiny when used to purchase any financial instrument.
I am supportive of increasing awareness and additional education, but not testing.