It is our rights to buy or sell all the public traded funds. Every stock or fund traded publicly has its risks and we understand it well. We as small investors shouldn't be discriminated by this restrictions. We need the freedom to decide which stocks or funds we want to buy as they are very important tools to achieve our long-term financial goals.
It is well within my rights to be able to determine the risk I'm willing to entertain with MY money.
I use leveraged/inverse ETFs to hedge my portfolio. I don't need to partake in any special process or pass any tests to do so, and I don't appreciate the nanny state trying to limit my access to ANY investment, wise or not.
Educate, yes.. Limit, No..
This is an assault on the public securities markets. These special ETFs are important public investment vehicles for the public on various accounts. Liquidity, time interval money management allocations, diversification, as well as speed of execution. First step to socialistic overreach insulting the investing public's freedom to buy liquid fund investments traded on exchanges , with
I regularly maintain positions in 2x leveled ets for the purpose of hedging and to maximize my upside without the use of margin debt or options with expiration dates. Products like SSO and QLD allow me to be patient, as well as invest less cash to achieve the same or similar performance as spy and qqq; each of which require putting up double the cash at risk.
Personalized financial risk should not regulated or decided by a 3rd party. Individuals should be allowed under a freestanding republic to partake in behavior that is deemed by others as risky if it does not harm nor impose on others freedoms. This is such a case. individuals should be allowed to decide their own personal fate, not be dictated/FORCED by others no matter how well intentioned....
Dear FINRA,
As an informed and educated investor I use inverse indexes as a hedge for market downturns. We all know market trends fluctuate to the upside as well as the downside and this is a part of my investment strategy. By continuing to allow consumer investors like myself to use inverse indexes levels the playing field and allows all investors access to 'free' markets.
If you are going put restrictions on investment strategies, ban those investments on ALL. Why should large investors have an advantage over small? Was Lehmann Bros. large or small? In the last melt down who did the Government bail out? Wells Fargo stealing identity of account holders for unauthorized credit cards. Same regs on all.
Comments: I have been in this business for over 50 years and one of my primary functions is to educated my client on what they are considering to invest in. It is time well spent so as not to have a customer say you did not tell me this or that. For someone else making the determination that this process was not achieved I am truly disappointed that an investment opportunity I recommended would
Im a financial advisor and only invest in these products for myself and have extensive knowledge in these securities and have been incredibly crucial to my investment strategy and DI NOT WANT TO LOSE ACCESS TO INVEST IN LEVERAGED ETFs. I am aware of the risks and the brokerage firms also make me well aware of the risks. Please do not take away access to invest in these securities!
I oppose limitations to block or restrict my investing activities. All stocks have risk and if measures are sought to restrict a certain commodity then i say stop the whole global market trading as well. This is a gross overreach of FINRA to assume this is in the best interest of the investor. Tsla, amzn, nflz, fb, etc are significantly riskier than a leveraed etf based on the broad market.
