We really need robust oversight if we are going to allow these reckless gamblers making the very markets. Selling something that doesn't exist. Creating fraudulent property. selling the same property to multiple investors. Shorting stocks that don't exist. Selling stocks that don't exist. This damages the faith of the people that markets are fair and safe. This hurts people. We
If it’s one thing that Melvin capital, citadel, point 72, Susquehanna and Virtu have taught me, in conjunction with the ongoing short selling sagas of certain meme stocks, is that if something isn’t done quickly an entire generation of investors will abandon the US stock market. We are very clearly an oligarchy, which is not only an insult to our founding fathers, but a travesty enacted upon
I guess the idea of more far-reaching regulations is to protect some some investors from losing money. But what about those who might make money? Why should policy be based on one group, and not the other? But even if it would save all investors money, I would still opposed to it -- because it is not the role of government to effectively be making investment decisions for its citizens. The whole
Hi, These detailed changes are very important for a lot of people. They would leave the market as a much more transparent way to invest as there would be less reliance on rumour surrounding primarily short interest and synthetic shares. The companies involved in these large amounts of share borrowing would be much more open to legal action as illegal activity would be more obvious. These changes
This Written Supervisory Procedures Checklist (“WSP Checklist”) outlines selected key topics as a reference tool to assist funding portal members (“FP members”) in fulfilling their compliance obligations.
I am AGAINST passage of FINRA’s Regulatory Notice 22-08 taking effect.
I use leveraged indexed ETF's actively trading them over short time horizons under steady participation in a long time horizon (25+ years) to smooth out inconsequential market fluctuations, even as much as 50%+, as part of my overall portfolio strategy. The financial services providers servicing these funds have been
Risk and reward go together in Free Enterprise. The responsibility to understand risk and then willingness to engage are an individual's prerogative. Those of us who are educated, responsible, and recognize the downside should be allowed to invest in leveraged funds. I am somewhat offended that people who don't understand the risk "cry foul" when they don
To The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority,
I'm disappointed to learn you are considering measures to prevent or restrict my choice to purchase complex products. Even though they are a small piece of my portfolio, they are very important. They provide a hedge to balance my portfolio and reduce risk. They also outperform most of my portfolio on a short term allowing me to increase
I use inverse bond funds as a speculative tool to profit from a rise in interest rates just like someone who would sell bond futures short. Trading bond futures is more leveraged and riskier than what I am doing so why would you limit what I am doing but not restrict bond futures trading as well. There is no logic to that. I am asking you to NOT take my right to buy and hold inverse and leveraged
As a retail investor, I find it insulting and disrespectful that FINRA could think that leveraged and inverse ETFs and other products are too complex for the retail investor to use and that you need to protect us from these products. I have used various leveraged and inverse products for many years and had made significant amounts of money trading with these important tools. If you remove these
