Skip to main content

Marc Sharman Comment On Regulatory Notice 22-08

Investors should be free to make their own decisions in where they would like to invest their money, short or long term, however risky it may be, so long as the fund is honest. Small caps or OTC is just as volatile and risky if not more. Options trading is way more risky than leveraged ETFs as well. You limit retail's tools to hedge or make large gains by stopping us from using these. Anyone who feels like they are not to blame for losing money with these funds should not be investing at all.

Joel Spaulding Comment On Regulatory Notice 22-08

Sirs: I oppose the restrictions and measures FINRA is considering regarding who may purchase "complex products". I support all investors' right to freely access the entirety of the public securities markets without arbitrary restrictions. Do not discriminate among "classes" of investors. Do not "hand pick" and "judge" those among us who are "allowed" to invest. Upward mobility should be protected and encouraged, not discouraged and limited only to the "qualified" in a free capitalistic system.

Robert Aebersold Comment On Regulatory Notice 22-08

To Whom It may concern:

I have successfully been investing in ProShares leveraged funds since 2012, over 10 years. Investing in the leveraged funds has enabled me to achieve an above average annual return. The wealth generated from these investments has largely been in a tax deffered Profit Sharing Plan and an IRA.
They provide me with a greater sense of mental well being, which carries over to my physical well being.

I believe this Federal Government overreach. It is a SOLUTION FOR A NON-EXISTING PROBLEM THAT CREATES A PROBLEM.

Anthony Ficorilli Comment On Regulatory Notice 22-08

I'm just a lower-middle class investor. For the most part, the general public should be allowed to invest in inverse and leveraged funds as long as the companies providing them aren't out to scam the public with unreasonable and/or suspicious tricks. If there is something unusual about a fund, a brief-to-the-point and clear explanation, avoiding double-negative language, should be mandatory (egs. information about excessive costs/fees/commissions; other unusual risky characteristics about a fund).