Dear FINRA, Thank you in advance for hearing me out. I oppose regulation that would require testing, verification of net worth, broker approvals, paused trading periods, and other burdens that would inhibit my ability to control my investments and financial future. Hedge funds and inverse funds are an important part of my portfolio and allow me to protect my retirement portfolio. Additional
I am an individual investor who essentially manages my own portfolio. I use individual stocks, mutual funds, ETFs and KNOW THAT IT IS MY OWN RESPONSIBILITY to do my OWN homework and KNOW my investment choices including the risks and potential rewards. I also use leveraged ETFs where I CONSIDER APPROPIATE and DO NOT WANT ANY ADDITIONAL REGULATIONS AND EXTRA STEPS IN THE BUYING AND SELLING PROCESS
I oppose restrictions to my right to invest in Proshares. Investing in any stocks should be allowed to for our future ,with Inverse funds to invest for the public levels the playing field. If you all wanted to get rid of our oppertunity to invest in Proshares, you should of placed restrictions on them in 2008 when you all new the market would be going up for 14 years and Proshares were going down
Dear FINRA Regulators,
I would like to oppose the restrictions on certain investments deemed as "Complex". As part of my investment strategy I would like to continue to invest in public securities such as leveraged and inverse funds without going through any special process. These investments are important for my future financial goals.
I use systematic investment strategies to
As an individual investor, I will OBJECT too much regulatory requirements on investors. It will NOT protect small investors, instead of creates confusion and overhead (which will be added to investors in some way). Most stocks aren't less risky than leveraged and inverse funds are.
Any proposal that testing specialized investment knowledge, demonstrate a high net worth and go though a
I am against restrictions on individuals who want to invest in leveraged ETFS for the following reasons:
1. Certain diversified leveraged ETFs really aren't that much riskier then picking a single stock and have a place in certain portfolios
2. This puts the retail investor at a huge disadvantage and funnels more profit into investment managers pockets.
3. As a retail investor I should
I have researched various different leveraged funds (and strategies) and believe that in my 20s being able to apply leverage to my investment strategy and to deleverage as I get older will allow me to maximize my returns while reducing my risk given my long investment timeline. Specifically I plan on using a combination of leveraged broad stock market funds and bond funds and maintaining a set
Regarding leveraged ETFs: It would be so unfair to make investors go through even more hoops to invest our money. It is my choice what to do. It is mot like I'm passing my debt to other taxpayers like lazy liberals transferring student debt they said they would pay back. Do you regulators not know what a leveraged ETF actually is? You allow penny stock purchases (rightfully so). You
There are dozens of vehicles in which people can choose to make investments. Individual stocks are very likely, if not managed correctly, to lead to substantial investment losses. This is also true with options, futures, FX, etc...
The key factor in all investment decisions is managing things the right way. Having different tools to help improve investment results are important. We should not
I oppose the proposed rule changes from FINRA that may prevent or restrict investors from buying a broad range of public securities designated as complex products.
I believe that while consumer protection is key, the overarching trend of the past 20 years has been towards greater consumer choice in their investment options. Although this has at times led to deviations from what one may argue is
