How much money is the average American losing each year on "sports betting?" How many jobs does that money flow produce each year? Wouldn't that money be better utilized as an investment in the stock market? Doesn't retail investing produce more jobs? If you agree with the simple premise that a $1 invested in the market is better for America than $1 gambled on sports betting then it's a question of how best to invest that money. Leveraged ETF's play a vital role in hedge investing. That is the safest way for the average American to invest. Recently AMZN plunged but the stock still costs over $2400/sh. Regulators should make fractional share purchases open to all investors without any hurdles. The average American should be able to invest $2.40 to purchase 1/1000th of a share of AMZN right now. Unfortunately they can't so the next best thing they can do is purchase a 5500 call that expires in 2024. Still that costs over $300. Regulators should make smaller call option trades open to all investors without any hurdles. A 2024 5500 call option on just 1 sh of AMZN would cost less than $4 right now. Unfortunately, the current market landscape for retail investors is to spend $2400 on a share of AMZN or a little over $300 on a 2024 5500 call option for 100 sh. Enter FNGU & FNGD. These are the 3x ETF for FANG (Facebook, Amzn, Netflix, & Google). FNGU is about $12.44/sh & FNGD $62.06. So for less than $13 Americans can purchase 1 share of FNGU. At least 10% of FNGU contains AMZN. It's a savings of over $220 for 1/10th of a sh of AMZN stock. Options wise, they can spend about $30 to purchase a future call on FNGU controlling 100 shs. That's a savings of over $2350 for a right to purchase 1 sh of AMZN a fixed future price. Over that time any position in FNGU is sure to grow faster than one in AMZN. But that's strictly a bullish view on the future of AMZN. The real beauty of leveraged ETF trading is the hedge. Right now a minimal investment in FNGD puts costs less than one in FNGD calls. Buying an FNGD put is equivalent to taking a bullish position in these stocks. So an American can risk even less than $30 right now to purchase a bullish position in these goliath internet co's. Instead of making access to leveraged ETFs more difficult for the average American, regulators should be making it easier. The average American likely can not handle the complexities of options trades but they can certainly understand fractional share purchases. For $2.4 then they can own 1/1000th of a sh of AMZN. To better diversify over more goliath internet stocks than just AMZN they can purchase 1/10th of a sh of FNGU for about $1.25. Which is better for Americans? Spending this money on terrible odds with lotteries or investing it in the market? That answer should be obvious. Regulators need to make access to the market more easier for Americans & fractional share purchases is the best way to do that. Assuming this would produce a great inflow of cash into the market, it should come with hedge links on every page. When an American looks up AMZN & FNGU at say TDAmeritrade they should see a hedge link. With both AMZN & FNGU the hedge is FNGD. With hedge links on pages, Americans would understand that investing in the market is like a see-saw. On one side is the bear investment & the other the bull. When the bear is on the bottom it's time to invest in it to protect profits on the bull side. With a simple hedge link on every page, Americans would understand that every bullish investment should accompany a bearish insurance purchase in case the market quickly declines. Leveraged ETFs make that simple with funds like FNGU & FNGD.
John Hanley Comment On Regulatory Notice 22-08
How much money is the average American losing each year on "sports betting?" How many jobs does that money flow produce each year? Wouldn't that money be better utilized as an investment in the stock market? Doesn't retail investing produce more jobs? If you agree with the simple premise that a $1 invested in the market is better for America than $1 gambled on sports betting then it's a question of how best to invest that money. Leveraged ETF's play a vital role in hedge investing. That is the safest way for the average American to invest. Recently AMZN plunged but the stock still costs over $2400/sh. Regulators should make fractional share purchases open to all investors without any hurdles. The average American should be able to invest $2.40 to purchase 1/1000th of a share of AMZN right now. Unfortunately they can't so the next best thing they can do is purchase a 5500 call that expires in 2024. Still that costs over $300. Regulators should make smaller call option trades open to all investors without any hurdles. A 2024 5500 call option on just 1 sh of AMZN would cost less than $4 right now. Unfortunately, the current market landscape for retail investors is to spend $2400 on a share of AMZN or a little over $300 on a 2024 5500 call option for 100 sh. Enter FNGU & FNGD. These are the 3x ETF for FANG (Facebook, Amzn, Netflix, & Google). FNGU is about $12.44/sh & FNGD $62.06. So for less than $13 Americans can purchase 1 share of FNGU. At least 10% of FNGU contains AMZN. It's a savings of over $220 for 1/10th of a sh of AMZN stock. Options wise, they can spend about $30 to purchase a future call on FNGU controlling 100 shs. That's a savings of over $2350 for a right to purchase 1 sh of AMZN a fixed future price. Over that time any position in FNGU is sure to grow faster than one in AMZN. But that's strictly a bullish view on the future of AMZN. The real beauty of leveraged ETF trading is the hedge. Right now a minimal investment in FNGD puts costs less than one in FNGD calls. Buying an FNGD put is equivalent to taking a bullish position in these stocks. So an American can risk even less than $30 right now to purchase a bullish position in these goliath internet co's. Instead of making access to leveraged ETFs more difficult for the average American, regulators should be making it easier. The average American likely can not handle the complexities of options trades but they can certainly understand fractional share purchases. For $2.4 then they can own 1/1000th of a sh of AMZN. To better diversify over more goliath internet stocks than just AMZN they can purchase 1/10th of a sh of FNGU for about $1.25. Which is better for Americans? Spending this money on terrible odds with lotteries or investing it in the market? That answer should be obvious. Regulators need to make access to the market more easier for Americans & fractional share purchases is the best way to do that. Assuming this would produce a great inflow of cash into the market, it should come with hedge links on every page. When an American looks up AMZN & FNGU at say TDAmeritrade they should see a hedge link. With both AMZN & FNGU the hedge is FNGD. With hedge links on pages, Americans would understand that investing in the market is like a see-saw. On one side is the bear investment & the other the bull. When the bear is on the bottom it's time to invest in it to protect profits on the bull side. With a simple hedge link on every page, Americans would understand that every bullish investment should accompany a bearish insurance purchase in case the market quickly declines. Leveraged ETFs make that simple with funds like FNGU & FNGD.