Skip to main content

David Cartier Comment On Regulatory Notice 22-08

I understand the risks of using leveraged and inverse funds and do not need the government to tell me how to invest. They play an important hedge for my investments.

The elimination of these types of investments would only serve the most wealthy, large investment firms and hedge funds. They have the ability and funds to create their own vehicles for protection. These groups already have a disproportionate advantage over the individual investor.

I sincerely hope you consider more than the highest income investors.

Chris Myers Comment On Regulatory Notice 22-08

This notice and action is extremely unamerican and unlawful. You are dictating how a person is able to make an income and by doing so you're in direct violation of the US Constitution as to where you cannot infringe upon a person's ability to make an income. I plan to have my legal counsel file a lawsuit against FINRA, if you take away my ability to trade proshares inverse positions that I have been holding at an unrealized loss since 2021.

Jeffrey Reisner Comment On Regulatory Notice 22-08

I can certainly understand the agency's desire to protect the public but if you are inclined to invest, then you should take it upon yourself to become educated about what it is you are investing in. Limitations on leverage funds such DGAZY and TZA might have some benefit. However, limiting inverse funds is going to far. Leveraged funds which could be used to protect gains are far easier to use than put options. It doesn't seem quite fair that limiting inverse and leverage funds to the institutional investor is reasonable either.