The additional rules proposed by FINRA does not protect the public as whole, rather only protects a small few that wants additional control on the free market. We are currently able to trade knowing the risks and rewards - the people do not need high net worth, special classes / tests, or additional government regulations imposed on us.
Dear FINRA, I oppose any attempt on your part to limit restrict or eliminate my ability to invest in inverse or reverse or leveraged ETFs. I use these instruments to hedge my portfolio position from time to time. I have already acknowledged with Fidelity, my broker, that I understand the risks inherent with these instruments, that is enough. Craig Watel
I am a Registered Nurse with no formal financial/stock education. I however can do my own due diligence when it comes to what stocks I decide to buy and invest in. The inverse/leveraged ETFs allow me to easily diversify and lower my overall risks. STAY OUT OF MY ACCOUNTS AND FOCUSE YOUR TIME ON SOMETHING USEFUL!
I shouldn't have to go through any special process like passing a test before I can invest in public securities, like leveraged and inverse funds. Myself and the public are capable of understanding leveraged and inverse funds and their risks. Leveraged and inverse funds are important to my investment strategies. I do not need these measures imposed on me.
I shouldn't have to go through any special process
like passing a test before you can invest in public securities,
like leveraged and inverse funds. I am
capable of understanding leveraged and inverse funds
and their risks. I do not
need these measures imposed on me. Also, Leveraged and inverse funds are important to your
investment strategies.
I'm a financial professional fully licensed with a Series 7 and 24. I utilize leveraged funds not only in my retirement account but also in my retail account. I utilize leveraged inverse bond funds, biotech funds and QQQ etfs. There should be no limit on these funds, with the exception of 300+ % leveraged funds. That's when risk becomes unmanageable in my opinion.
I should be able to choose the public investments that are right for me and my family.
I should not have to go through any special process before I can invest in public securities, like leveraged and inverse funds. I am completely capable of understanding leveraged and inverse funds and their risks.
I do not need regulators to impose these measures upon me.
Thank you for considering my comments on Proposed Rule #22-08. I oppose Proposed Rule #22-08 because these restrictions discourage smaller individual investors seeking a level playing field with larger "players" in the markets. The risks associated with these securities are not difficult to understand or evaluate for responsible individuals. Investors should have the
I want to express my comment that ProShares are an essential method for me to reduce exposure to down side risk and would force me use more time consuming and risker methods to accomplish similar results. Without proshares, I would be forced to use more options instead of an ETF. The management cost is more than worth it for the use of an ETF.
As long as the prospectus of the ETF is documented and the fund manager is able to maintain the daily tracking detailed, there should not be additional regulation upon public securities. Having access to specialized products allows knowledgeable investors to properly allocate to their portfolios outside of options or futures, which require higher risk management capacities in comparison to
