I use leveraged funds. They are important to me. No change should be made in the requirements.

As a retail investor, I am rather capable of making my own decisions in what I want to invest in. I do not need hand holding. Please do not restrict investors from investing in inverse funds. Nor should we have to jump through hoops to get permission.

I, not regulators or anyone else should be able to choose the public investments that are right for me and my family. It's my money and I and only I should decide what I can pursue with it. Public investments should be available to all of the public, not just the already rich or privileged. With every trade there is an inherent risk and this should be decided by me, not someone or some entity that does not know me, my goals, my risk level and so on!

We should be able to choose the public investments that are right for you and your family.

It is unconstitutional to restrict what I can and cant buy and how much Id like to buy. This rule seems to only seems to hamper smart retail investors. NO RESTRICTIONS WHATSOEVER!

These leveraged funds are a cheap way for retail investors to access leverage and don't require you to take a margin loan that can be called during a market crash. Using leverage judiciously may be wise for the younger investor to spread out risk over a lifetime. https://www.bogleheads.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=274390 Greater regulation for ETN's would be appropriate but not for leveraged ETFs

This rule, being arbitrary and capricious, appears to be an attempt to limit the retail trader from benefitting from falling equities. Essentially limiting their ability to hedge the market. It's a misguided attempt to prevent a collapse of US equities which is unavoidable. A blatant attempt to stifle the retail trader from prospering in a highly manipulated market while securing the profits of large 401k institutions that don't provide any hedge against falling markets.

I am totally opposed to this proposed rule. I use this products and very much educated about its risks. We as investors should have the right to choose which investments to trade on.

Leverage etfs do not represent any more risk than the basic inherent nature of stock market. How does a market pricing of NFLX at 600 and going down to $180 in a short order ( or price of AMC going up and down without rhyme and reason) present less risk than a leverage ETF. The whole premise of SEC is wrong. Stock market is a manipulated market and a by product of so many countervailing forces. That is what the investor needs to understand

Leveraged and inverse funds are important to my investment strategies. They are no different than other basic public stock investments. They further allow me to hedge the risks associated with individual stock purchases. I am fully capable of understanding leveraged and inverse funds and their risks. Once again it appears such rulings are meant to intrude on my ability to freely trade and invest as I deem necessary. There is no reason a special process should be necessary for accessing public securities.