Please stop meddling in the small investors arena. You have so ineptly and corruptly tilted the scales for the large investors that you should let market participants decide. Your efforts in the name of safeguarding investors is nothing more than an attempt to shelter large investors and institutions. These funds our one of the few ways we can invest in short positions in a readily available
This is the most rediculous proposal I've heard in a long time. Inverse funds allows investors to stay in turbulent markets. Does FINRA believe passing a test makes you a better investor? Answer: NO. Without these products, individual investor choices become; exit the market, short stocks/ETFs, or options. If FINRA takes the proposed action, they will make lemmings out of the average
Inverse funds are an important investment vehicle that should be made and kept available to the average investor. They offer investors the ability to hedge other investments and protect themselves from adverse market moves. To remove this tool from investors would be short sighted and negatively impact the average investor by not allowing this tool for them but to continue to allow it for high
I'm retired State Service living on Social Security with little long term security! I've been a investor in Celsius since 2019 and as of April 15th informed that I can no longer receive interest benefits when investing in the future because I'm not financially influent! But I can go to Vegas at
Anytime! Eliminate this barrier!
Markets move quickly and have become more volatile than ever. I believe its critical that investors retain the ability to quickly and cost effectively invest in interest rate moves, stock market and volatility moves. This cannot be a right reserved only for rich "qualified investors". This should be the right of every investor. Thank you.
I - not FINRA or Wall Street interests - should have the right to decide how to invest my money. If FINRA eliminates the ability to hedge portfolio volatility by restricting or eliminating access to leveraged and inverse funds, that is yet another example of having one rule for Main Street and another rule for Wall Street. Do not make this mistake.
First I oppose the restrictions that you are considering on the ability for me to invest at my discretion. I do my research and make decisions with my broker on my investments. There are times I just want to put my money (that I saved from working-again my money) into a fund or corporation that I have interest in supporting and believe in their success. No more regulations.
It should be the investor's choice to invest in leveraged and inverse funds. These are important investment vehicles that should be researched by the investor just as any other investment choice they consider. Limiting or restricting an investor's investment options restricts their ability to do what is in their best interest. Many everyday investors use these investment options
I have been investing in these ETFs for years. They allow me to diversity and to reduce my risk as I grow older. They also allow me to simplify my investment strategy. Restricting them would greatly dimmish my ability to invest, which I would consider a denial of my freedom to act in my own best interest.
Executive Summary
The Government Securities Act Amendments of 1993 (GSAA) eliminated the statutory limitations on NASD® authority to apply sales-practice rules to transactions in exempted securities, including government securities, other than municipals. On August 20, 1996, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) approved amendments implementing the expanded sales-practice authority
