Skip to main content

Mark Emanuel Comment On Regulatory Notice 22-08

I am, in general, opposed to the need for additional barriers of entry to use leveraged and inverse funds. The existing regulations require stockbrokers to monitor age and balances of accounts, and already quiz traders on their experience using such investment tools. There is always a risk no matter what the investment, and there's no real difference between leveraged/inverse funds and other mechanisms like speculative stocks or options trades. The barrier of entry would keep younger investors from potential gains early in their trading years.

Steven Shrader Comment On Regulatory Notice 22-08

Are we still living in a free country, or will the government just take over and tell us how we will live our lives? Managing risk is the responsibility of the investor and their relationship manager. When regulators will guarantee me a specific return "every" year then they can tell me how to invest, if they can't and they know they can't then they should regulate not dictate. Sincerely, Steve Shrader [REDACTED]

Chase Palfreyman Comment On Regulatory Notice 22-08

To whom it may concern.
I feel it important to inform you that I believe we should be able to choose our investments and what is appropriate for our families. Working on the industry we have a good understanding of leveraged, and inversed leveraged ETFs and should not have to take examinations to demonstrate that knowledge. Due to regulations we have limited investments we can use in a bearish or volital market to hedge. Inversed ETFs and leveraged inverse ETFs are one of the tools we can currently use to hedge and should not be restricted. Thank you for your time in this matter.