I used leveraged funds as a very small part of my investment portfolio. I understand the risk associated with them, have talked with financial advisors and explored the risk on my own and use it as part of a diversified approach. I do not need government or regulatory oversite to make a financial decision. Public options should be available to the public, not just those who a select group can
What makes the American Financial Markets so exceptional is they are the most innovative markets on earth. What this means is anyone with sound knowledge about a product is willing to take the risk only because such products are available and they trust the provider of those products to do the right thing to closely mirror the benchmark index as much as possible. If you take out access to these
It is my understanding that you are considering restrictions to leveraged and/or inverse investments... I sincerely disagree with this proposed policy. As a retired Naval Officer (pilot) with 2 Engineering degrees and an MBA -- I think I'm capable of evaluating risks within my investment portfolio. Moreover, all investment involves risk and every investor knows it and Public investments
Independent investors see that markets go up and markets go down and need to have the ability to invest in inverse funds without the cost of expensive advisors and with the same freedoms as large institutions. We do not need the nanny state protecting us from our own assessment of risk. This is a basic freedom versus big-state control issue. I am capable of understanding leveraged and inverse
I should be able to invest based on what I am able to invest and where I choose to invest it. There is no need for a special process for this. I can make my own risk assessment based on my earnings etc. Many of the funds I use as a hedge against a market crash in order to protect my earnings. It makes no sense to remove these types of investments. When used within your individual risk profile
Leveraged and inverse funds are important to my investment strategies. They are no different than other basic public stock investments. They further allow me to hedge the risks associated with individual stock purchases. I am fully capable of understanding leveraged and inverse funds and their risks. Once again it appears such rulings are meant to intrude on my ability to freely trade and invest
This is an unconscionable infringement on my rights as a free person and an unwarranted and irresponsible interference in the marketplace. Learning to manage risk is the first lesson learned by an investor. Those techniques are just as effective for 'complex' trades as for 'non-complex' trades. This is an attempt to create a distinction where there is no significant difference
While I agree there is increased risk to leveraged ETF's, I do not think they should be removed for investment by regulators. ETf's are a great way to make money in bear markets, and on certain sectors of the financial markets. I do believe in educating investors and warning them as much as possible about the increased risks and time decay of ETFs. Also any financial institution
I want to express that I oppose any additional regulation on my ability to invest in leveraged ETFs. My investment company, Fidelity Investments, already has a screen to limit investors options in investing based on their investment experience. I also had to sign additional documents with them stating I knew the risk of leveraged funds. I have invested in leveraged funds for over 10 years. I
I oppose putting restrictions on investing in inverse or leveraged ETFs. Just like any stock investment, I clearly understand the the risks involved and under certain market conditions, I need a hedge to decrease my risk. I am the best person to be making my own investment decisions and not relying on others to be making choices for me that are not in my best interest. You should also not be
