Dear SEC I am appalled by your recent proposal to restrict investment in leveraged and inverse ETFs to investors with a high net worth. Particularly inverse ETFs are one the few convenient ways that smaller investors presently have to hedge their risk against a bear market. By restricting these funds to the very wealthy, your rule's primary outcome will be that high net worth investors can make fat gains during bear markets, while the general public will at best be stagnant, if they sold in time that is.

I am financially literate after being a mortgage backed security credit analyst for 35 Years. Who are you to direct my investment choices and trading abilities? And I only use levered funds when no unlevered option is available such as YCS. YOU KNOW NOTHING! STOP IT! STOP IT! STOP IT!

Do not handcuff our abilities to compete with the hedge funds, let us be responsible for our own decisions.

FINRA - I understand that you feel a need to protect investors from some of the potential pitfalls of leveraged ETFs. I urge you to approach this topic with caution, however. Face it, risk is the foundation of investing and the entire field is fraught with potential pitfalls, interpretation, influence and missteps. There are no guarantees and, effectively, no real reliable sources of information. The only thing "real" in investing is price action. The use of leveraged and inverse funds are very important to my own investment strategy, particularly for use in hedging.

Dear Regulators, As an investor, I, not regulators, 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. I agree that there should be warning agreements that need to be checked that an investor understands what they are getting into and the risks, JUST AS ALREADY EXISTS. NO FURTHER CUMBERSOME AND RESTRICTING REGULATION IS NECESSARY.

I find the inverse funds etfs are a convenient way to trade market trends. The prospectuses and notices to investors have made me aware of the potential for financial loss in using these investment instruments so I am careful and vigilant in my use thereof. I don't feel further regulation is warranted and I believe it would serve to put undo restrictions on investors.

Most [REDACTED] things you guys have done. Its almost like you want people to not be able yo hedge the downturn so everyone becomes poor. Meanwhile you also create a barrier for poorer individuals to miss good opportunities by requiring kyc and accredited investors to to continue earning.. Honestly i think yall should just quit lol obviously not doing anything to protect investors at all today and seem like you guys want them to be hurt

Leveraged and inverse funds are important part of risk management. These funds make it possible to use a small percentage of capital to risk manage the other side of a trade. There are plenty of SEC / FINRA regulation as well as documentation on investments to understand the risk. Should investors ignore reading the documents of any and all investments that is the investors choice.

I should be able to choose the public investment that is right for me and my family. Public investment should not just for privileged few. FINRA interest shows private few to get benefit out of PUBLIC fund. I object the restrictions or any measure introduce by FINRA on publicly traded fund.

I vehemently disagree with a government entity telling/restricting how I invest my capital. Investing shouldn't be a privilege for the rich only, and that is what this ridiculous consideration is. You will allow banks to get back into business with insider traders like Bill Hwang (how'd that workout by the way?) but want to restrict how the average person invests. Absurd. If your objective is to "protect the average person" from losing money in risky investments then it makes no sense.