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

Inverse funds are an important investment vehicle for me to offset downturns and hedge against certain market conditions. I am very concerned this type of investing vehicle would be restricted or taken away from an average investor like me. Inverse funds have allowed me to attack inflationary impacts head-on without using more complex put & call techniques, which are more difficult to manage with my portfolio style. In closing, inverse funds are an important tool for me to protect my overall portfolio in up and down markets.

To FINRA: The last thing we need in America is another NGO telling me I can or can't do what anyone outside the U.S. can do - purchase shares of companies or funds that meet my investment strategy. Yes, there is enhanced risk with leveraged and inverse strategies, but it is an important and lucrative (if I've done my study accurately) part of building my portfolio. If you want some sort of regulation or law, do what we individual investors have to do - write your Congressmen and request a law be enacted!

Why make it harder or prevent intelligent folks making their own decisions with their own money? Do you want people to stay poor?

I dont feel its up to regulators to decide which investments I choose to invest in and which ones are right for myself and my family. The fact that I do not currently carry an investment advisor license I once did and I understand what I am investing in quite clearly. Trying to make me jump through hoops just to invest in a publicly traded stock is government control. We have enough of that already.

My husband and I are nearing retirement and enjoy the use of inverse funds to protect and grow our hard-earned investments, especially during turbulent times like this. I urge regulators to keep these options in place.

I wish to object to the actions that FINRA is in the process of adopting. I have been trading this type of vehicle for the last 15 years or more and have found no reason that your requirements are meaningful. I request that you make no changes to the current trading rules!

FINRA regulators: Please do not add additional regulation to leveraged and inverse funds as proposed in rule #S7-24-15: Why? 1. These are ALREADY public products APPROVED by the SEC and INCLUDE clear risk warnings. Why impose higher hurdles that would PRECLUDE my ability to use these products. I am specifically concerned about the condition to demonstrate high net worth as I am a small investor. 2. As a small investor, I use these products to HEDGE and protect my position during bear markets or during periods of high volatility.

I oppose any need for extra education to trade securities. Ive done well and the risk I take is well acknowledged.

Finra, thanks for giving us a way to input our thoughts on 22-08. Leveraged etfs offer the retail investor opportunities to take positions, both long and short, that in the past were only available to large asset managers. While warning labels are justified, we should be able to make up our own decisions on when and if to use leverage and or inverse etfs. Taking a monetary loss on a losing trade is all the education a retail investor needs.