I should be able to choose investments that I deem appropriate for me. I primarily use inverse funds to hedge my fixed income portfolio. This enables me to collect interest on my investments while limiting downside exposure to my principal in a rising rate environment. Not having the ability to do so would unnecessarily cost me loss of principal. In addition, I also use inverse treasury funds as
Leveraged ETFs is the way for us to capture the upside of the market on small investment amount that we own. We can not be satisfied with risk less or 5% investment return product which may not be sufficient for our need. Also at the time of lows of the market it would be major blow to our strategies.
Since we own small amount and we completely rely on our constant monthly income our risk is more
FINRA correctly recognizes the rise of retail trading of complex products. However, this is characteristic of financial bubbles and euphorias. The problem is the systemic issues that led to this bubble in the first place (irresponsible monetary policy) - not the retail traders themselves
I use non-leveraged inverse ETFs from ProShares to hedge market risk. I have read the prospectus from
Comments:
Leveraged and Inverse funds provide me with a unique capability to both hedge market risks and provide a balanced portfolio. As an individual investor, I understand the risks associated with these and other products.
The market is currently stacked against a small investor because the entry is regulated by experience and wealth (not behavior). For example, the day trade rule takes a
I am a retail investor and I invest in what might be considered "complex" products such as volatility ETFs and leveraged ETFs. I could simply trade futures contracts and replicate these strategies, however investing in ETFs that maintain those positions is easier. I am aware of the risks of these funds and investigate their strategies carefully before investing. In many cases,
Generally, complex products as described in this notice should be available to individual investors ('retail') with some obligation on the brokerage to ensure the individual investor understands the structure and risks associated with the complex product. Some brokers do a very good job of this and others seem to just 'check the box'. I think it's
The current regulations on "complex securities" is adequate. FINRA and SEC doesn't need any further new regulations in complex securities. These complex securities have the same risk and volatility as buying a individual stock. Geared ETF and Inverse are for advance investor and trader. The current agreement with brokers is adequate. I studied geared and crypto trust for hundreds
I, not regulators, should be able to choose the public investments that are right for me and my family. Public investments should be available to all the public, not just the privileged. I am capable of understanding leveraged and inverse funds and their risks. Leveraged and inverse funds are important to my investment strategies. I cannot buy puts in all my investment accounts. Inverse funds are
The availability of complex products and options can potentially expand the investment opportunities for retail investors and, if properly understood, offer favorable investment outcomes (e.g., enhancing returns, limiting losses or improving diversification). However, important regulatory concerns arise when investors trade complex products without understanding their unique characteristics and
I'm retired, and I've been investing successfully for over40 years now and in that process have used both leveraged and inverse funds in the stock markets, as well as options and futures, in addition to investing in bonds. I take great exception to the FINRA requirements described in Notice #22-08 now being considered which would limit my ability to access some of these
