Making sure a person is informed is one thing and you should be checking on that. Making a choice you enter these deals is on the investor and unless it's a scheme of some kind it's our choice where we put our cash.

This sounds like another misguided attempt to save people from themselves.

I am a novice investor. I have several friends who are also novice investors. We're responsible, upstanding people with day jobs who have earned our money and have made a conscious decision about the kind of risks we'd like to take with that money. We understand the risks we're taking. We understand the securities we're trading.

I don't want my ability to invest in public funds to be limited by regulation.

Leveraged and inverse funds are an important part of my investment strategy. I'm reluctant to be a short seller given the risk, however, with an inverse fund, I can still grow my portfolio in an overall downtrend.

To whom it may concern:
I do not think additional regulations on leveraged or inverse investments are necessary. We are capable of understanding the risks ourselves and do not need help in this area.
Leveraged and inverse funds are important to our investment strategies by optimizing gains and protecting against loss as part of our portfolio. These tools should be available to all, not just the privileged.

Thanks,
Marvin

How can you possibly think that leveraged ETFs are more risky than options trading? Leveraged ETFs are easy to understand and can be understood just by reading the prospectus. Options on the other hand have various factors that need to be accounted for, the majority of which common investors do not understand. As it stands today, investors must already acknowledge the risk of leveraged etf investing before being allowed to. There is no need for a regulatory body to place additional restrictions on investing in them

FINRA, taking such action by instructing ordinary investors that "we are not sufficiently sharp" to comprehend our investment portofolio, opportunities and our planning is a "bridge too far". FINRA, stay out, it is not needed and if this is part of the ESG movement, focus on yourselves. Let us be!! We are free to chose our own course and our own investment opportunities! Please, no special process. And, if you don't like what I have written, take it to the new "Ministry of Speech" in DHS. You are way out of bounds!

I have full and complete understanding in the risks involved in the investments that I purchase. I want freedom of choice. I do not need a regulator to limit my investment choices.

It is an absolute outrage that a group of people who happen to have jobs regulating how people can invest their own hard working money who are now only allowing those elites who have a higher net worth than the rest of hard working middle class people is completely wrong and against Americas whole foundation of freedom and sovereignty. You dont work your whole life and build wealth because youre stupid and want the Government to control your decisions. Stop the proposed rule #22-08. Keep your government over paid position out of our pockets.

Comments: I do believe having transparency is important. Regulators have done great things in the past to clarify concepts that a layman does not interact with regularly. Thanks to regulators, banks have to disclose APR's with clients, ensuring that the risks are fully understood. However, I feel that this level of scrutiny is unwarranted, biased, exclusionary, and has an unfair impact on the retail investor. Every investment product has risk. It is made abundantly clear. Leveraged products are no different. It should be expected that an investor understands what they are buying into.