Comments: I have been using these type of accounts for awhile now. If used sparingly and watch closely they can enhance your porfolio. There is inherent risk, but that is with everything. These don't really move any different than any index funds. They allow you the flexibility and protection at times of turbulence in the markets. I would never suggest anyone putting a large percentage into
WoW! Last I understood, capitalism and the right to individually flourish in the U.S.A. was available to everyone. My mother came here legally for this reason, and so I can benefit from my own efforts here as well. If my funds disappear due to my lack understanding or misjudgment, THAT is my decision to make and no one else's. This proposed rule is highly elitist. Public trading should be
These investment options are critical to managing portfolio risk for many individuals. They should be available to all, and not just the elite. Implementing a rule such as this would allow the rich to continue to grow wealth while not providing the same opportunities for less wealthy individuals. Everyone deserves the right to decide what instruments they want to invest in. It should be for
I should be able to choose public investments that are right for me, and these investments should be available to all of the public. I should not have to go through a special process or test to invest in inverse and leveraged funds. I understand their risks well - information on them is widely available. Leveraged and inverse funds are an important part of my investing approach, allowing me to
I use both bullish and bearish inverse funds to hedge as well as speculate on upcoming trends in the market. I am able to control my positions and don't need anyone looking out for my best intrests as I'm always 100% engaged when I have these types of funds in my portfolio. If other investors don't take their time to fully understand what they are purchasing that should be neither
I oppose restrictions to my right to invest. I, not regulators, should be able to choose the public investment(s) that are right for me. I should not have to go through any special process, like passing a test, before I can invest in public securities. I am 100% capable of understanding leveraged and inverse funds, as well as the risks that come with investing in them. I do not need a regulator
Dear Regulators, I oppose restrictions to my right to invest. I should be able to choose the public investments that are right for me and my family. Public investments should be available to all of the public. Leveraged and inverse funds are important to my investment strategies. I use those funds to protect my investments. Inverse funds help me to protect investment in case of price of
I believe in more significant penalties and stricter timeliness for FTDs. The rules are so tight for retail investors but the market makers, brokers, large funds, etc. receive so much leeway. A retail trader should have even opportunities as it pertains to data as well. I believe these rule changes will assist with bringing better information to all. Thank you.
Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc. (“FINRA”) is filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC” or “Commission”) a proposed rule change to amend Section 4 of Schedule A to the FINRA By-Laws to: (1) revise the fee for the Regulatory Element of continuing education (“CE”); (2) establish the fee for individuals who elect to maintain their qualification following the termination
FINRA -should not limit my choose to invest in leveraged and inverse funds. With inverse funds I can still manage to potentially make gains in an IRA account as I cant short in this type of account. If you limit this I can only go down. I have a collage degree and understand the risk associated with any type of trading or investment. I have gone to school for trading and am doing what I love to
