I understand there are plans underway to limit the availability of certain funds deemed too complex for the average investor. As an average investor I say, "how dare you!" To decide what is right for me and restrict MY access to products like leveraged an inverse funds while allowing wealthy individuals to use these same tactics is just wrong. The playing field is already uneven. You
The idea of a "fair" market is completely a figment of peoples imagination at this point. The corruption and "loop holes" that exist to allow the Rich to continue to get rich off the backs of the working average citizen is sickening. The stock market and corruption is rampant amongst banks, hedge funds, market makers, and politicians and government departments. The "
The proposed regulatory changes are embarrassing - to FINRA and the SEC, and an insult to investors. I should be able to make investments in the targeted public securities that I believe are in my (and my family's) best interests without going through a special process. Further, given all the extreme movements in individual stocks recently (Gamestop exemplifies), why limit the initiative to
I am totally opposed to the Proposed Rule #S7-24-15 for the following reasons: 1. I am a small investor that has invested in leverage funds for greater than 20 years and am quite capable of understanding the risks of using leverage funds. In fact, I find it offensive that a regulator would question my knowledge of the market by using some gimmick like passing a special test related to my
The last several years have seen a growth in funds that help individual investors seek targeted exposure to investments and strategies previously only accessible to high net worth individuals. Use of funds including leveraged funds, inverse funds, commodities funds, real-estate funds including global real estate, high-yield bonds, currency strategies, emerging markets stock, bond and currency
Regarding your considered regulation, I strongly oppose having index and reverse index ETFs having anything to do with it.
While I see some merit in making sure retail investors fully understand risks before directly trading on margin or shorting a stock, the proposal to restrict index/reverse index ETF investors is completely meritless; theres no specialized knowledge required to let the ETFs
The ability to invest or trade using Inverse and Leveraged ETFs is critical to my ability to make gains. Especially when the government has the ability to completely destroy gains in the stock market through the Fed's money printing schemes, we individual investors need some way to go short on the market when it is prudent to do so. Just going to cash won't cut it either, since the
Leveraged and inverse funds allow me to gain exposure to leveraged and short positions without having to take on leverage myself. I use inverse ETFs to hedge my long positions and to express a bearish view on the market. QQQ is down roughly 20% YTD, but I have been able to hedge my long stock positions and profit from this decline through the PSQ, the inverse of QQQ. I do not want to take on
This rule is absolutely unfair and limits the ability for average retail investors to earn outsized gains in the stock market. It makes it an un-level playing field with these products available to only large institutions and wealth managers, who in turn will charge extra fees to access these products. Putting a small allocation on my portfolio in an Leveraged and Inverse ETFs has personally
Inverse and leveraged funds are a valuable tool for an investor. Some brokerage firms have already refused to trade these in order to "protect the investor". I am a 76 year old retired teacher/mathematician/programmer. I have enough fixed income to retire comfortably. But I have lots of savings that can not earn a reasonable income in the current market and low interest rates. Over my
