It is well within my rights to be able to determine the risk I'm willing to entertain with MY money.
I use leveraged/inverse ETFs to hedge my portfolio. I don't need to partake in any special process or pass any tests to do so, and I don't appreciate the nanny state trying to limit my access to ANY investment, wise or not.
Educate, yes.. Limit, No..
I have my rights to choose what investment I want to make, whether I have $10 or $10 millions dollars to spare. It should be available to all, not just the privileged. I understand the leveraged and inverse funds and their risks because I do research on them before making the investment. I don't want to take and pass a test to invest in anything. My money, my problem!
1. I not regulators should be able to choose the public investments that are right for you and your family. Public investments should be available to all of the public, not just the privileged 2. 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 understanding leveraged and inverse
I regularly maintain positions in 2x leveled ets for the purpose of hedging and to maximize my upside without the use of margin debt or options with expiration dates. Products like SSO and QLD allow me to be patient, as well as invest less cash to achieve the same or similar performance as spy and qqq; each of which require putting up double the cash at risk.
I not regulators should be able to choose the public investments that are right for me and my family. Public investments should be available to all of the public, not just the privileged.
I have invested in leveraged and inverse funds for years, and am fully capable of understanding these funds and their risks. I do not need these measures imposed on me.
The proposed restrictions on my right
Personalized financial risk should not regulated or decided by a 3rd party. Individuals should be allowed under a freestanding republic to partake in behavior that is deemed by others as risky if it does not harm nor impose on others freedoms. This is such a case. individuals should be allowed to decide their own personal fate, not be dictated/FORCED by others no matter how well intentioned....
I believe I should be able to invest in these leveraged and inversed funds.
I should not be restricted to do my investments since the brockerage unit already makes its due diligence to see if I am able or not to do such investme3nts, as it happens with options, currencies, etc.
These investments are important to me as it makes me able to balance my portfolio and actually minimize risk
Greetings,
The FINRA legislation as proposed is very unfair and biased. The investing public in a free market system should be able to buy securities as they choose, as long as they understand the risk associated with it. FINRA legislation his biased against investors with small amounts to invest and gives advantages to institutional investors and high net-worth individuals. The investing game is
I oppose this proposed regulation because it is over reaching, limiting investors ability, is over reacting to a very small minority of people and does not reflect the vast majority of investors. If the mandate is to protect the public, then require wording and risks for leveraged or inverse funds. There is a place for inverse funds, particularly when markets are declining. and investors should
I should be able to make my own decisions when choosing the public investments for me and my family without the regulators' interference in any way, not to mention to go through any process like passing a test before I can invest in public securities, like leveraged and inverse funds. I am totally capable of understanding the risks involved in those funds.
