Leveraged index ETFs such as QLD and QID are an important part of my portfolio. Unlike regular stocks, one has to only track market level for buying and selling these funds and therefore do not need a lot of analysis before investing in them in order to achieve enhanced returns. I believe they should be freely available for trading to the investing public without unnecessary regulations. Thank
I oppose any restrictions on my ability to trade leveraged and inverse funds. These products are an important part of my self directed portfolio and I understand their purpose and limitations. Having these investment options allows me to execute my own investment strategies rather than pay a fee to an investment manager who will still have access to these funds if this regulation is implemented.
Dear FINRA
Do not take away our ability to invest/trade leveraged and inverse ETFs. I understand the risk and I use it for hedging. Also remember, long term returns of DIA:TNA, SPY:UPRO, QQQ:TQQQ are approximately 1:3 as expected.
At least do not take away the rights to trade these. Broad Index based leveraged and inverse ETFs in due course are not risky. Please look at the data.
Investments such as TQQQ are especially usefull to average, non-professional investors such as me.
I have made good profits from this high quality ETF.
Instead of implementing restraining regulations to diminish trades in high quality ETFs, FINRA should help spread the word about these great funds and allow more people to use them.
Please don't use tunnel vision to be short sighted.
Adding additional regulation in advisors and ETFs seems misguided and misplaced. Regulators should be focused on what is creating the real wealth destruction for individual investors which is options trading done by novice investors. By regulating ETFs in this manner it is placing a barrier to using an effective hedging tool that has been in existence long enough for advisors and BDs to know
SUGGESTED ROUTING
Senior Management
Institutional
Legal & Compliance
Mutual Fund
Operations
Systems
Trading
Executive Summary
On March 17, 1995, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) approved the NASD's amendments to Sections 5, 6, 12,46, and 64 of the Uniform Practice Code (the UPC) and Sections 1 and 26 of the Rules of Fair Practice (the RFP) to conform the NASD
It poses a severe threat towards market fairness. It's like preventing people from skiing because it's dangerous, but except the rich ones. Retail traders or investors should be able to freely choose whatever products that fit their trading strategies. Finance is NOT only for the rich or the privileged. We know what leveraged funds are. Also, the liquidity will be severely
Please leave it to individual investors to make investment decisions for themselves.
What I would suggest is the following: You may require that a prominent warning for LEVERAGED funds like SPXU, TMV, etc. be displayed that they their value decays with time and therefore they are suitable only for short term trades. The current common warning that they are suitable for EXPERIENCED day traders is
Leverage ETF is like a high growth stock. It makes no sense to require investment to pass a test to trade or even hold the leverage ETF.
Netflix (NFLX) is a good example of a high growth stock. It was one of the best performing stocks for over 2 decades, but in just 5 short months, it drops from $700.99 on 11/7/2021 to $199.87 today's closing (5/3/2022) or down over 70%.
Sirs,
It is not clear what regulations you plan that would limit leveraged/inverse EFT and similar inventments. However, I would like to strongly suggest that anyone with several years experience in stocks/options be allowed to trade them unless their account is in the "savings" category v.s. "investment" category. Restricting experienced individual investors
