Investing in a publicly offered security is my choice. I should not have limitations on what I can choose to invest in just because something is considered leveraged. Reducing the availability of publicly offered securities is pointless. I understand the risks with buying a leveraged fund as anyone should when buying into an investment vehicle. Do not handicap me because of your assumption
I am an investor in leveraged etf funds for the higher potential returns. I accept the risks and volatility associated with these funds. I make informed decisions and set limits on how much exposure I assume. The funds provide a vehicle for me to explore leverage investments that is managed by professionals. It is unlikely that I can do better on as a individual. I think that restricting or
There is no need for this regulatory idea. Leveraged and inverse funds are not hard to understand. You buy them with the known factor that the risk can be accentuated. Fine, do your homework and learn. Do not penalize those of us that do. I had a leveraged S&P 500 fund for well over a year and did quite nicely by it. You do have to monitor leveraged and inverse funds. .
1. People work hard to avoid risk they don't understand.
2. The ability to buy contra ETFs is vitally important when
markets fall.
3. Where in law does it give you the right to tell investors what
they should/should not invest their money?
4. We, the people of the US do not trust you to serve the best
interests of the common citizen as you have proven
I strongly believe that the current requirements in place for trading leveraged and inverse ETFs are sufficient for investor protection. Please do not restrict access to trading these, because that would severely limit investment opportunities in these popular instruments. Instead, I would recommend that brokers be urged to provide additional education on both risks and benefits if these
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 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
Comments: Instead of restricting investments in leveraged or inverse products, a focus should be on education. Explanation of risks and scenarios will help investors decide what they want. Certain automation steps may be helpful. Example- Limiting the investment in complex products in accounts that trade a lot, and/or limiting the amount of complex products as a percentage of total portfolio.
I understand the risks of investing in leveraged and inverse funds so I only invest a limited part of my overall portfolio in those funds. I do not like to go through any special process like passing a test before I can invest in public securities, like leveraged and inverse funds. I do not like any restrictions on my right to invest in those funds.
I oppose to additional restrictions to invest in leveraged and inverse funds. I am capable of understanding the risks and limit my exposure accordingly, and believe others investing in such funds do too. It is in fact easier to use these funds than trying to achieve the same results by myself.
If anything I'd be in favor of funds providing easier to understand educational resources to
I value the freedom to access a broad range of investment products that help me buffer the swings of the market in my portfolio. I want to maintain my current freedom to invest in public securities which I choose. I do not need regulators to help me decide what to invest in. I am capable of understanding the risk and reward of my investments and do not need additional measures imposed on me.
