The funds in question are a big part of my investing strategies.

Leveraged and inverse ETF's are a very practical hedging tool that I have been using for many years. I am an experienced (over 40 years) professional investor that understands the mechanics of how and when these tools work, their shortcomings and their costs. Absent these cheap and very liquid tools, the cost to hedge an equity (or bond) portfolio can be very costly and time consuming. I agree that these investment products may be dangerous in the hands of an inexperienced investor, but that is not an argument to ban them.

Id like to offer that further restrictions or changes to what qualifies an investor to use leveraged and or inverse products are not needed and can cause damage to the portfolio of investors beyond the governments tools that already cause damage, add unneeded complexity and detriment to retail investors. It is disengenuine and presumptive to allow the fed and various lending facilities to manage the bond market , currency and interest rates and then make it so our access as investors no longer have access to meager tools to manage risk.

A plan like this will cost me tens of thousands of dollars as it will tank my current investment.

I have a BA in economics and I'm an accredited investor.

With leveraged products unskilled and uneducated investors are disposed of quickly by the market.

i oppose restrictions to my right to invest

The risks of investing are inherent in any fund or security. That is something made known when beginning to invest and heavily emphasized in literature to those considering investing. It's my responsibility as a investor to vet and understand the products I'm investing in. As part of that vetting process, I use leverage to manage my downside risk. It also constitutes a very small (less than 5-10%) portion of my overall portfolio. The open market should decide who can invest and in what capacity.

You want to prevent me from trading products that are too "complex" for me unless I pass a regulator-imposed test? This seems a lot like when blacks were prevented from voting unless they passed a regulator-imposed "literacy test". My response is simple: this is despicable. You should be ashamed of yourselves. Really.

Aloha, as a small retail investor I would definitely NOT be in favor of any of any restrictions on my ability to buy and sell publicly-traded ETF's and similar common financial products, so long as the already well-known risks are plainly and honestly disclosed by issuers and brokers in any promotional materials. Trying to accurately determine who is and isn't capable of trading ANYTHING on the stock market would be a fruitless and disruptive nightmare for all concerned.

Please do not interfere in my ability to chose what I invest in. If you want to stress or emphasize investor education on the various risks of different products then so be it but to try and interfere or prohibit everyone except the wealthiest individuals from investing in them is completely wrong and unacceptable. Leveraged and inverse funds are important to different peoples investment strategies and a blanket ban or prohibition across the board is not reasonable or appropriate.

I should be able to choose the public investments that are right for me and my family. Public investments should be available to all of the public, not just the privileged.

Leveraged and inverse funds are important to my
investment strategies. I use leverage and inverse funds to
protect (hedge) my investments or seek enhanced
returns, and for a limited part of my overall portfolio.