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
Dear friends at FINRA. I've put up with some of your absolutely ridiculous decisions over the years. As a retired Investment Advisor with Merrill Lynch and Wells Fargo, I say, as long as the investment makeup and risks are clearly stated, then its buyer beware. Leveraged and inverse funds present a great opportunity for intelligent investors. All others, stay away. And FINRA, stay away.
I am a 50 year old woman that manages my own investments. I am opposed to the restrictions that could be placed on leveraged/inverse ETF's. They are my investment vehicle of choice. I am well aware of the risks involved, and still choose to buy/sell these ETF's. They have proven to be an excellent tool to hedge my portfolio. The decision to invest in these ETF's should
I support this regulation as a step towards decreasing the systemic risk and opportunities for market manipulation created by the current, insufficient standards for reporting short position activity.
Leveraged ETFs have become a very important part of my portfolio and retirement plan. They provide cheap, accessible leverage for normal investors like me, and without them I would be unable to utilize leverage in my situation. I fully understand the risks and use them as part of a larger, unleveraged, diversified portfolio, and Im sure many others do the same.
I 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 shouldn't have to go through any special process like passing a test before I can invest in public securities. I am capable of understanding my investments and their risks. I do not need
these measures imposed on me
We shouldn't have to go through any special process
like passing a test before we can invest in public securities,
like leveraged and inverse funds. We are capable of
understanding leveraged and inverse funds
and their risks. We do not need these measures
imposed on us.
Please note that leveraged and inverse funds help
protect our investments.
Being able to invest in an inverse bond fund has allowed me to mitigate risk that I would be unable to achieve on my own. Without the freedom to invest a small part of my portfolio in an inverse bond fund I would have suffered significant losses, and I lack the bandwidth to buy and sell options directly. The 1% overhead cost of the fund is well worth it.
Dear Regulators,
These leveraged and inverse funds are important part of my investment strategies. It helps me hedge my portfolio during market downtimes. I am aware of the risks involved. Any restriction around buying and selling will significantly harm my existing positions in these funds.
In fact, what we need is better supervision to eliminate any manipulations.
