I have been investing for many years and it is just un-american to try to stop normal up standing American citizens from the right to make their own investment decisions. It is important that each individual have the right to choose the best investments for their family. All investments should be available to all of the public, not just the privileged super-rich who then take advantage of the
I use inverse bond funds as a speculative tool to profit from a rise in interest rates just like someone who would sell bond futures short. Trading bond futures is more leveraged and riskier than what I am doing so why would you limit what I am doing but not restrict bond futures trading as well. There is no logic to that. I am asking you to NOT take my right to buy and hold inverse and leveraged
I am opposed to new rules regarding leveraged and inverse ETFs. I am a seasoned investor and conduct my own research. You should not be babysitting myself or my portfolio. There is plenty of information available already for the public to read and decide for themselves. You are stepping over the line in making this judgement that individuals need monitoring.
The cost of any bureaucracy to
As a retail investor, I find it insulting and disrespectful that FINRA could think that leveraged and inverse ETFs and other products are too complex for the retail investor to use and that you need to protect us from these products. I have used various leveraged and inverse products for many years and had made significant amounts of money trading with these important tools. If you remove these
Dear FINRA Regulators,
I understand that you are AGAIN considering to limit my capability to invest in leveraged and inverse funds. This the the second time in about 5 or 6 years you have attempted to do this. Please DO NOT impose your proposed limitations because this would hurt small investors, such as myself, to utilize such tools for investments and protection against major market swings.
We want T-0 settlement. We want transparency. We want jail time and not fines for breaking rules. We want a fair stock market.
I use double and triple leveraged long and short index funds as one of multiple tools to implement my investment objectives. I invest a small percentage of my investment portfolio in leveraged assets. These leveraged investments achieve a small dumbbell portfolio distribution in what is predominantly a conservative porfolio.
I am a high net worth investor and require special permission to
This is really not going to help individual retail investors. Lots of retail investors would be losing valuable hedging and speculating tools in terms of leveraged and inverse ETF's. Many of these investors may utilize cash accounts and have no other way to go short in the market without buying put options, which is another layer of approval. As such, ETF's are the most accessible and
While leveraged and inverse funds have different levels of risk than non-leveraged finds, the public should have access to these publicly traded investments, not just high net worth individuals. Inverse funds are an important means of hedging without selling a security or ETF short, which is (relatively) lower risk for an investor and an important part of my personal investment strategy.
High net worth requirements are a horrible restriction to place on leveraged securities. A regulator imposed test , and attesting to reading certain materials is fine because anyone has the capabilities to do this, many individuals have been investing their entire lives and have a plethora of knowledge and would not be able to meet this high net worth requirement. Leverage and inverse securities
