Schwab has a detailed descriptions of these funds that you have to read and agree to, and I fully understand the risks. For this reason, they should not be restricted.

Not agree with the proposed action .it's unnecessary. Nothing is wrong with the current system.

I oppose restrictions on my right to choose which public investments such as LEVERAGED AND INVERSE FUNDS I choose to invest in, This is one of many investments that I use for enhanced returns and to help hedge my investments.

As an investor who has made use of inverse funds, including leveraged funds, over a period of approximately 20 years, I strongly oppose the restrictions and regulation described in this rule with respect to such funds. I am a seasoned investor and am fully capable of evaluating the characteristics, risks, advantages and disadvantages of inverse funds, leveraged or otherwise. I do need a nanny state to decide what investments I should be allowed to purchase.

Stop protecting the big banks. You dont care about the common investor shame on you.

Dear Sir or Madam, I do believe that double or triple leveraged ETFs are a good alternative to more sophisticated equity option spreads or futures Products. I know and numerous amateur investors utilizing these class of assets with great success. I would hope that they remain accessible to such investors.

All investors should have the freedom to choose any investment type that matches they're outlook on markets.

Please do not implement your proposed rule! Not fair!

Let the public choose the funds they want to buy

I want to maintain my current freedom to invest in public securities of my choosing !!!