SUGGESTED ROUTING
Legal & Compliance
Options
Trading
Executive Summary
On April 20, 1995, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) approved an NASD® proposal to amend Section 33(b)(3) of the NASD Rules of Fair Practice to increase the position and exercise limits for certain equity securities that are not subject to standardized options trading.1 Specifically, with
My investment strategy uses a systematic rebalancing of ETFs, some of which are leveraged ETFs. I fully understand the risks of these leveraged ETFs, but with a disciplined quarterly plan of selling when gains have exceeded a threshold and buying when losses have exceeded a threshold, the greater volatility of these leveraged ETFs produce better performance over the long term.
I am not a Day
Regarding your considered regulation, I strongly oppose having index and reverse index ETFs having anything to do with it.
While I see some merit in making sure retail investors fully understand risks before directly trading on margin or shorting a stock, the proposal to restrict index/reverse index ETF investors is completely meritless; theres no specialized knowledge required to let the ETFs
The ability to invest or trade using Inverse and Leveraged ETFs is critical to my ability to make gains. Especially when the government has the ability to completely destroy gains in the stock market through the Fed's money printing schemes, we individual investors need some way to go short on the market when it is prudent to do so. Just going to cash won't cut it either, since the
The proposed regulatory changes are embarrassing - to FINRA and the SEC, and an insult to investors. I should be able to make investments in the targeted public securities that I believe are in my (and my family's) best interests without going through a special process. Further, given all the extreme movements in individual stocks recently (Gamestop exemplifies), why limit the initiative to
I am totally opposed to the Proposed Rule #S7-24-15 for the following reasons: 1. I am a small investor that has invested in leverage funds for greater than 20 years and am quite capable of understanding the risks of using leverage funds. In fact, I find it offensive that a regulator would question my knowledge of the market by using some gimmick like passing a special test related to my
Leveraged and inverse funds allow me to gain exposure to leveraged and short positions without having to take on leverage myself. I use inverse ETFs to hedge my long positions and to express a bearish view on the market. QQQ is down roughly 20% YTD, but I have been able to hedge my long stock positions and profit from this decline through the PSQ, the inverse of QQQ. I do not want to take on
Dark pool shouldn't be used to manipulate the share price. There also should be a limit of how much the hedgefunds can put in there. When dark pool is being used illegally. Not the way it was intende, there should be severe fines and punishments. Imagine of everyday people could manipulate and cheat every day .....it would be chaos. They get to do all these tricks to get out of being
The problem is not the rules... Rules are there already and you know as well as everyone else that the issue is that the rules are for thee and not for me. Enforce the rules that are on the books and stop not only the naked short selling but also the political hacks working for your agency and all throughout the financial industry regulatory authorities. Tell me... How much again did Pelosi make
Dear Regulators, Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this proposed regulation. We didn’t choose unprecedented debt or rising inflation. It’s a matter of human rights to allow individuals to choose their positions in the market with intelligence, education, and any capital that could offset the problems that have been created for us. We are trading with depreciating dollars that have
