These products help me hedge against volatility. Why would you remove them?

I do not think this is fair for low networth investor who may not have opportunity to earn high return vs high networth investors. It is discrimination because public investment should be available to everyone without restriction or requirement to obtain any special training. You can give notice of high risk speculation but cannot regulate public investments.

It's my money, I would like to invest however I see fit. Who [REDACTED] are you to tell me what I am capable of understanding, or demand that I have a certain net worth to buy publicly traded securities?!

Public investments should be available to all of the public, not just the privileged, and I am capable of understanding leveraged and inverse funds and their risks, and I use leverage and inverse funds to hedge investments.

It is my belief that any individual should retain the right to make investments as he/she sees fit without the imposition of restrictions if they deem a particular investment to be in their best interest. With particular regard towards leveraged and inverse funds, such an investment helps to create a balanced investment strategy that allows for individuals to hedge their investments. Ample information is made available to understand how such investment vehicles operate and the risks that they entail.

It is not within the providence of the government and invasion of Constitutional rights to restrict the prospective buyers. There can be required disclosures and laws as to when sellers have liabilitry or immunity. But imposing limitations on individuals becomes an invasion of personal rights.

Respected Regulators, Leveraged and inverse ETFs help me hedge my portfolio and I would really appreciate if you don't impose any rules such as passing a test before investing in such ETFs. Investors understand the risks these risks since the information is widely available. I would really appreciate if you let investors choose what works best for them. Thank you!

It is the responsibility of the investor, not the regulators to evaluate market risk. Predetermining these risk and who is qualified to take such risk is a slippery slope. Shall we regulate risk for public companies with historically high PE ratios? it is the investors responsibility to way risk and loss. Investors are not children, they need to take responsibility to for their actions. The regulation of or restriction of trading a public asset will not negate irresponsibility, it will just allow for such irresponsibility to occur under a different context or asset.

The use of leveraged and inverse funds are no riskier than any other investment vehicle. It is all about asset allocation. Leveraged and inverse funds also help to balance and protect my portfolio. As a retail investor, trading options and utilizing leveraged and inverse funds are virtually the only ways to protect my portfolio from market declines or a bear market. This proposed regulation appears to be another tool used to prevent poor and middle class citizens from participating and benefiting from the markets allowing only the wealthy to get wealthier.

I shouldn't have 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 and their risks. I do not need these measures imposed on you.