I want to have freedom to choose my investments, there is disclosure of risk already before any "risky" asset can be purchased.
I do NOT support further requirements to trade these securities, I should be the one making decisions about risk I am willing to take.
Leveraged and inverse funds play significant role in my trading strategy and investment strategy and can not be
It is my belief that it is my right as an American to choose the public investments that are right for me. I should not have to go through a special process to invest in leveraged or inverse funds. I am an adult and capable of deciding what risks are appropriate for me. I do not need to pass a test to prove to a third party that I can do this, instead I ask: what makes regulators think they
<p>Applicability of Rule 3040 to investment advisory activities of an individual who is dually registered as a registered representative and a registered investment advisor.</p>
Over the past 6 months I have been investing a relatively small portion of my portfolio in leveraged inverse funds to hedge other portfolio positions.
It is difficult to understand how regulators would presume to require a 'test' or other special requirement to invest in these tools.
Certainly, leverage has risks. Certainly, stocks have risks. If you can't accept that
Summary
FINRA reminds firms to evaluate their exposure to LIBOR (formerly, the London Interbank Offered Rate), and review their preparedness to manage LIBOR’s phase-out. To understand how firms are preparing for that phase-out, FINRA surveyed a representative cross-section of member firms, including some firms with significant trading volume or positions in LIBOR-linked securities. This Notice
As a 'retail investor' I support these measures. I have investments with professional financial advisors/brokers as well as my own self guided investments. I can honestly say if I were to get into complex products such as options, leveraged funds, etc I would not understand the true risks I was taking. I trust my financial advisor/broker to understand and manage these risks, so I would
Hi SEC, I am a regular investor, investing myself for my money growth to help my family. The 2x and 3x leveraged ETF's give me a brilliant way to carefully craft my strategies for investment needs. I use it very carefully with proper hedging and fully aware of the risks of the downside. It would be pain to see these products go-away from the marked for individual investors like me who is
Hi, I'm writing with concern that my ability to hedge my portfolio volatility via inverse ETFs is under consideration of being limited or taken away. My only comment is that the ability to hedge downside risk via inverse ETF is one of the few ways other than outright selling to cash that I have to reduce risk in certain environments. In a rising rate environment in particular bonds are
I totally disagree with the proposal to regulate leveraged and inverse ETF's. They should be available to everyone, not just high net worth individuals. I understand the risks and use them strategically as a small fraction of my overall portfolio. I do not need anyone telling me what to do, or having to prove myself capable. I also totally disagree with the current regulations that restrict
Wait!!! Youll let hedge funds and other large investors take risks- that is basically bet against the market but you want to restrict that to investors who dont have the money clout but have the smarts. What a scam. Protect the wealthy tax ball out folks but dont protect the investors trying to fund retirement and college funding. Yes its risky, but without taking risk we are then stuck with
