I haven't read the material yet, but at first blush this is quite an overreach. Not everyone can win - yet those that lose run to elected officials & want a refund for their poor risk management. Day trading "rules" changed nothing but the amount that could be lost to a greater amount. Time would be well spent helping the gamblers buying 0 DTE puts &
I strongly oppose to limit my choice of investment. The restriction poses a severe threat towards market fairness. It's like locking people in home because of Flu, but except rich people. 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,
June 13, 2006
On March 15, 2006, NASD published an OATS Report entitled NASDAQ Exchange Registration – OATS Reporting Changes. This article discussed several OATS issues relating to NASDAQ’s operation as an exchange, including NASD’s pending rule filing proposing to establish rules for the trade reporting of transactions otherwise than on an exchange through a new NASD facility, called the Trade
Dear Mr./Mrs.,
It would be a grave mistake to limit leveraged funds to only a select few. Such practice would simply push individuals to trade on margin in a more risky/less controlled manner. By only allowing leveraged funds for professional traders or wealthy individuals you take financial tools out of the hands of the common person. This will make it even more difficult to provide
To whom it may concern:
I am appalled that FINRA would attempt to place additional roadblocks and restrictions on leveraged and inverse Exchange Traded Funds. These are very valuable tools that have enabled me to make money in almost any environment for several years. The ability to hedge nearly any market without selling something short is a tremendous advantage. Leverage is a very useful tool
This is a wildly inappropriate overreach by regulators.
I'm already unable to participate in IPOs that I would otherwise be very comfortable investing in because I'm not an "accredited investor." What happened to these "accredited investors" when they lost everyone's money in 2008? Did they go to jail? Did they lose their right to
Comments: I oppose any further rule-making to limit access to so-called "complex products" (e.g. leveraged / inverse funds or ETFs). There are already plenty of warnings provided regarding the risky nature of these products. At my broker's website, for example, I receive a notification every time I attempt to purchase these products indicating their risky nature and
We should be able to risk our funds in whatever manner we choose, so long as we aren't risking money we don't have. I am strongly opposed to any restrictions of pro shares. I should be able to trade additional levels of risk, as any public investment, without additional requirements or restrictions. This is my freedom, and my right to choose to do with my money as I deem fit.
I have a strong understanding of Leveraged and Inverse ETFs: Three keys to ongoing successful use: Short term trades only Position appropriately sized. Continuous monitoring of position. My contention is we do not need additional government regulation / guidance as it relates to these products. I do not have any financial interest other than being able to use these products as I consider
I don't believe FINRA should restrict 'complex' products from average or retail investors. All trading has risks and where does FINRA stop in regards to restricting retail traders, this is a very slippery slope. Sure it makes sense to have brokers post messages on some products, but this feels like a ploy to hurt retail investors not protect them. This should not be
