Dear FINRA, I am dismayed to hear of your plans to impose restrictions on the types of public investments that I can invest in. I am an adult and you are not my parents. I am capable of making my own decisions about what I buy and understanding what I buy. Even if I weren't, it is still wrong for regulators to try and decide who is able to participate and who is not. I urge you to
Dear Regulators: Should you limit my ability to hedge my long positions with INVERSIONS, it is tantamount to taking away my health insurance! Over the years I have effectively, and conservatively, used inverse equity positions as insurance against falling markets. In the markets TODAY, without the use of INVERSIONS I would be ruined, or out of the market. It is unwise to drive small and medium
I have managed my portfolio myself and have outperformed the market for 2022 I have done this in no small part to the downside protection offered by inverse ETFs. They allow the average investor to take short action in the market without the necessary headache of a margin account. Attempts to restrict this are misguided and will only hurt the smaller investors they intend to help. Inverse ETFs
I'm offended by the arrogant supposition that investors are somehow incapable of managing their investment risk and trading, investment, and hedging strategies. Leveraged and inverse funds are valuable and innovative tools that actually allow prudent investors to decrease/manage risk and improve tax efficiency. Any regulatory attempts to restrict the availability and utility of these
Sirs: I oppose the restrictions and measures FINRA is considering regarding who may purchase "complex products". I support all investors' right to freely access the entirety of the public securities markets without arbitrary restrictions. Do not discriminate among "classes" of investors. Do not "hand pick" and "judge
I do not consent what you regulation team is traying to do, impose different ruls for a sertan group of investors.
I do believe in equality and fairness and a plain field for everyone more when it come to investing.
I do use and need this instrument as a part of my portfolio strategies.
This type initiative magnficate the miss trust in the system in place.
Please reconsider you action before its
To whom it may concern: FINRA Regulatory Notice #22-08 comment. Why is it that these attempts to regulate retail investors on the investments noted in the notice only seem to occur when the retail investor that is prudent is being rewarded with market returns? Where were the regulators when the Federal Reserve so interfered with the markets as to cause retail investors significant losses for the
I don't think there should be limited access to inverse or leveraged funds. These investments allowed protection from the recent market down turn and increased inflation and energy prices by affording me the opportunity as a smaller investor to take positions in the market for protection that normally would only be available to institutional investors thru the futures or options market. All
When companies are fined millions for breaking rules that netted them billions, there is no reason to not break those rules. Naked Shorting is predatory upon companies and investors alike. Make the penalty greater than the theft. Along with potential criminal referrals. This is only way to clean up the marketplace. It's gone on far too long. While 70 million to average people sounds extreme
NASD Regulation, Inc., has filed with the SEC a proposed rule change to amend NASD Code of Procedure Rule 9216 and NASD Code of Procedure Rule 9270. The purpose of the proposed rule change is to substitute for Office of General Counsel review of proposed Acceptance, Waivers and Consents (AWCs) and proposed violation letters under the minor rule violation plan pursuant to SEC Rule 19d-1(c)(2)
