FINRA,
I strongly appose proposed restrictions on inverse and leveraged Exchange Traded Funds. I have used both of these to very effectively hedge long fixed income and equity positions over short exposure periods. Removing access to these funds will force me into the listed options market to construct similar hedges that more complicated, expensive, entail more basis risk and require more
I run a systematic quarterly rebalancing plan that is powered by leveraged ETFs. I know what I am doing. The proper use of these leveraged products is a key part of my financial plan.
These funds are important to me. They improve my performance over the long term. I am not engaged in reckless trading, I understand the effect of daily magnification of an indexs price movement, and I use this
I am writing to express my objection on restrictions on investment for the working class people. The idea that I should not have the right to invest in ways that I so chose is something I would expect from Russia not the USA. Regulations such as these only serve the rich at the expense of the middle class. Our country has seen too many politicians taking rights away from its citizens. Everyone
Please do not do this. You may believe youre helping the average investor but youre in fact harming them. This action would take away yet another investment/trading option available to the commoner. The wealthy have a multitude of investments options available to them that lower networth people simply cannot access. Leveraged funds specifically allow the clean utilization of highly technical
I would like to comment on the rule to limit access for retail investors to "complex" instruments. As an infrequent trader, I understand the risk involved in investing. Those were clearly explained by online brokers I use and reinforced by all the research I've done and many years of trading I have. That said, leveraged and inverse funds are important tools that help hedge risks
To Whom It May Concern,
I am opposed to any restrictions on my rights to invest in public investments such as leveraged or inverse funds.
I should have the right to choose the investments that are appropriate for our family.
These are investments that should be available to the public and not solely for the benefit of the elite.
I refuse to take any test or qualification exam to determine if I
I dont understand the need for this regulation.
I understand the risk of EVERY investment I make, whether it be real estate, art, stocks, ETFs, etc. Furthermore, I understand leveraged risk, and I gladly risk what I can afford to lose. I dont know why FINRA feels the need to impose restrictions on such public securities. Baffles me.
Furthermore, leveraged and inverse funds are vital to my
I strongly oppose restricting trading. Everyone has the right to pursuit of happiness per the law. Public investments are public and not private/for privileged/rich that can be assessed with a simple test that some people design who themselves may fail when assessed by people with different mindset. Similar to an education degree does not guarantee that they will become Einstein's or
As is often the case in government policy, the motivations of this seem good. However, limiting investments until someone has a liquid net worth of 1M or other limit has proven suboptimal. These specialized products are risk management tools - perhaps used to hedge a portfolio without selling and realizing gains, or taking advantage of markets that would otherwise be unavailable without a large
The stock market should be open, transparent, and only minimally regulated to prevent predatory or scam-like investments. People should be generally free to invest in whatever they choose whether that be bitcoin, inverse funds, "traditional" funds, individual stocks and bonds etc... etc... Why don't you spend more time investigating, or regulating, why and how nearly
