I find it disturbing that your agency wants to take away my ability to pick investments based on my research and ability to decide how much or little to risk in very common market instruments. Why should I have to take a test to prove to you - unnamed bureaucrats - that I understand the risks and potential rewards of these instruments and what I do with my money.+ What tests can predict the
Leveraged ETF/ETNs pose risks that some retail investors do not understand. As such, broker-dealers should conduct due diligence before allowing customers to purchase Leveraged ETFs. However, such due diligence should be similar to that of mid-level options trading authority. My advisory firm is in the process of launching a hedge fund which utilizes Leveraged ETFs as a part of a risk-managed
What is the purpose of this change? It seems that this change is to benefit institutional investors by restricting retail investors access to complex products. Leveraged and inverse ETFs are incredibly important to my trading strategy and would be detrimental to my portfolio to remove or limit my access to these products. These are important protections and funds available to continue growing my
Any restrictions on the investment opportunities of retail investors are fundamentally misguided. Though an increase in due diligence might be helpful in guaranteeing brokers do not offer inappropriate investment advice to their under-informed clients (which is already disallowed), anyone who is willing to read the prospectuses and understand the products they are investing in should be
The proposals put forward are a solution in search of a problem. Leave Retail Investors alone. Retail Investors do not want, nor do we need, your "protection". Government regulation already restricts the general public from certain investments with the accredited investor rules, we do not need additional prohibitions placed upon us. It is difficult for me to believe that there
I am strongly opposed any additional regulations to leveraged and inverse securities. All investments have an element of risk; by requiring a list of pre-requisites to trading these securities, you decrease the investor base with access which could add to increased volatility as well as making the acquisition and disposition of said securities much more difficult. Additionally, further
To Whom It May Concern, I am greatly concerned about any additional cost further regulation and compliance will have on complex trading products, particularly leveraged ETFs. I am concerned about additional regulations which may increase the time it takes to get approval for trading complex products. I purchased leveraged ETFs on market indices, however there was five years of research in search
Hello, As a retail investor, I oppose any and all limits on what I am allowed to choose to invest in. I understand the risk of highly-leveraged and inverse ETFs and other derivatives, and I invest in them and trade them with full knowledge of what I'm getting into. I do so at my own risk and for my own self-determined reasons, and I strongly object to any limits being placed on my ability to
Gentlemen, I am a fully accredited investor who selects from wide body of publicly available investments, including currencies, commodities, equities, and fixed income, both long and inverse, predominantly through ETF's. I fully understand the risks inherent in investing, especially the ramifications of investing in inverse funds, which reset daily. I use inverse ETF's to hedge and
Taking away investor rights to risk management assets like leveraged and inverse funds is robbing investors of income and simple tools which can only be emulated with complex options transactions if at all. Such regulation Hurts Investors: It could potentially deny us the freedom to choose investments that could help us achieve long-term financial security. Is Arbitrary and Unworkable: FINRAs
