Although these funds may come with increased risk, I believe individual investors should be allowed to decide for themselves, if inverse and leverage funds are suitable for their investment strategy. They already come with warnings of the risk and individual investors should be responsible, not regulatory agencies, for making investment choices.
You have no right to tell people what they can and cannot invest in. The understanding of the risks in leveraged and inverse indexes is known at the time of purchase. Each person is solely responsible for their own investments and risks. With each of these suggestions you erode any faith in a free market.
KEEP YOUR HANDS OFF MY CHOICE OF INVESTMENTS. I CHOOSE THE RISK AND ACCEPT THE CONSEQUENCES. I DON'T NEED YOUR REGULATIONS. I LEARNED WHEN I HAD LOSSES OF WHAT NOT TO DO. MY EXPERIENCES HAVE HELPED ME TO INCREASE MY GAINS. PROSHARES WARNED ME BY MAIL ABOUT THE RISKS INVOLVED WITH TQQQ AND SQQQ.
It is not anybody's responsibility to choose public investments except the investor. It is enough to provide a general warning that all investments involve risk. Many, if not all, trading platforms already require investors to acknowledge that there is additional risk involved with leveraged and inverse funds. No additional regulation is required or wanted.
This is an outrage. This is the cheapest form of leverage available to the little guy and you want to take it away from us. Leveraged investing is supported by Modern Portfolio Theory for those of us with higher risk tolerances. We understand the risks. Dont punish us for the irresponsible actions of a few.
I oppose restrictions to my right to invest.
I should be able to choose the public investments that are right for you and your family. Public investments should be available to all of the public, not just the privileged.
I am capable of understanding the leveraged and inverse funds and their risks and I know how to manage the risk.
Leveraged ETFs are among the safest and least complex ways for a small personal investor to hedge and/or take on more risk; other options, such as investing in particular individual stocks to micromanage the risk in your positions is much more error prone for the average small investor in comparison.
What is the purpose of this change? It seems that this change is to benefit institutional investors by restricting retail investors access to complex products. Leveraged and inverse ETFs are incredibly important to my trading strategy and would be detrimental to my portfolio to remove or limit my access to these products. These are important protections and funds available to continue growing my
I should be able to invest my money how I see fit without proving to the government that I know what I am doing. I know the risks mean that I can lose my money and I am willing to let that happen based on the rewards I might receive for taking those risks.
Restricting trading strategies is fundamentally unfair. There is no legitimate reason to restrict leveraged or inverse funds. Investors always must assume the risks of their investment choices. Unsophisticated investors may not understand systemic risks, but it does not mean investors should be entirely prohibited from investing altogether.
