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.

I OPPOSE RESTRICTIONS TO MY RIGHT TO INVEST. I, not regulators should be able to choose the public investments that are right for me. Public investments should be available to all of the public, not just the privileged.

I oppose limitations on my ability to buy investments. I know what I want to invest in, and what is best, for me & my family - not regulators. I should not have to jump through any hoops, or go through any special process before investing MY money into PUBLIC securities. I am capable of understanding risks - regulators do not need to impose on me.

I am totally opposed to any regulations on how I trade anything in the markets. It is up to individuals to learn what they are doing. I am against any crony controls by lobbyist. Sincerely, Victor Harrell

To whom it may concern, I am writing to inform you, as an investor that 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 don't want to go through any special process like passing a test before I can invest in public securities, like leveraged and inverse funds. I am capable of understanding leveraged and inverse funds. I do not need these measures imposed on me. These restrictions on my right to invest should not be put in place.

Leveraged and inverse ETFs are no more dangerous that buying high volatility stocks and options. They have a significant advantage over other options to increase return volatility. They keep consistent leverage (unlike options/futures) and they consist of a broad market portfolio (unlike individual stocks). By restricting the purchase of leveraged/inverse ETFs, people who wish to pursue more aggressive investment strategies will have to use worse products, causing them to take more risk than if the products were available.