1. As a member of the investing public, I should be allowed to choose which investments are suitable for myself and my family.
2. There should be no process by which I'm evaluated to invest in publicly traded securities.
3. Leveraged and inverse funds are important for me to meet my investment goals and invest in opportunities that develop as identified by my own research and analysis.
Dear Sir or Madam,
Leveraged and inverse funds have a place in the equity market. Mostly used short term they can be an effective method of investing in certain types of markets. Although they are higher risk, long term they have proven to have an excellent
rate of return. An investor should not be controlled on how to invest any portion of their assets. These types of etfs are based on stocks.
I believe I should be allowed to make my own informed decisions about investing in any public security. There are ample warnings and notifications in place and to segregate and make one class that is useful in hedging my portfolio harder to access only adds unnecessary and burdensome complications. While it is only a small part of my portfolio,over the past 10 years it is my second best
ProShares ETFs have provided me a simple mechanism to hedge some assets to my best expectation of market behavior. In the 3 years Ive used them they have accurately tracked what they are supposed to, and Ive been able to make adjustments as needed. There are far more complicated and risky choices that I would take if these werent available. Please dont limit my access to these in the effort to
Imposing a ban on holding the funds included in this notice casts too wide a net. For sure investors need to understand what products they are purchasing, but this is true with all asset classes and I for one believe that this is an overreach on the part of regulators. Having already signed an attestation as to the increased risk associated with leveraged funds, I am fully aware of my risks and
I wish to maintain my current freedom to invest in public securities of my choosing. Though the notice means to reduce the risk for investors, it will have an echoing effect across asset classes that may not be fully realized. America is a land where we grant greater freedom than most. This freedom has allowed us to create one of the greatest economies of all time. The reduction of risk exposure
Investment restrictions on leveraged products should not have significant restrictions. A simple age-based (e.g. 25 0r 30 years old) and/or small investable assets requirement (e.g. $25,000) along with attesting to reading a warning statement regarding possible losses should be the MAXIMUM restriction. Please do NOT limit to "high net worth" (this does not necessarily potend an
I strongly oppose this rule of banning the 3x leverage ETF. Its so unfair to take away our normal peoples limited resources away from us. The big institutes and the rich have all resources to do their investments. The stock market is the most important way for us to grow our assets and 3x ETFs are an very important component or it. I strongly oppose the ban of 3x ETF. Its not fair for us.
investment advisor with decades of experience across the spectrum of investments. As i believe we are now in a bear market, i want the flexibility of protecting my clients assets. In most cases selling positions not a good option as i have large unrealized gains. Not allowing me to use VXX and/or SH is preventing me from protecting their portfolios. I resent bureaucrats thinking they know as much
We, the US investing public, need the ability to "short" stock market indices, equity sectors, currencies & commodities, just as the institutions do, to hedge our portfolios and protect the downside in our investment accounts. To not be able to do so would punish the "little guy" and provide all the benefit to the big institutions. We individual investors are acutely
