I oppose having restrictions placed on leveraged ETF;s for the following reasons: 1. There are many individual securities (stocks and funds) that are more volatile than leveraged ETFs 2, Volatility is not risk and more meaningful is the trend of its moving average. e. Volatility provide investors an opportunity to achieve their objective in a shorter time period. Rather than impose restrictions
Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc. (“FINRA”) is filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC” or “Commission”) a proposed rule change to amend Section 4 of Schedule A to the FINRA By-Laws to: (1) revise the fee for the Regulatory Element of continuing education (“CE”); (2) establish the fee for individuals who elect to maintain their qualification following the termination
Visualize yourself as one of our 3,600 smart, dedicated and passionate employees – what do you see? Watch the videos below to hear employees from New York to Denver (and more) discuss what it’s like to work at FINRA, and how each of them contributes to our mission of facilitating investor protection and market integrity.
Listen to Brooke, a manager of FINRA’s Securities Helpline for Seniors
This rule is no longer applicable. NASD Rule 1010 Series has been superseded by FINRA Rule 1000 Series. Please consult the appropriate FINRA Rule.
Unless otherwise provided, terms used in the Rule 1010 Series shall have the meaning as defined in Rule 0120.
(a) "Applicant"
The term "Applicant" means a person that applies for membership in FINRA under Rule 1013 or a member
These proposed regulations are outrageous. In a time when markets are posed to melt down, what other hedge does the average investor have but leveraged and inverse funds? These funds are not difficult to understand, certainly no more difficult than the average vastly overvalued equity or byzantine mutual fund.
This seems like a way of preventing normal investors from protecting ourselves in
Dear FINRA,
Restricting access to leveraged and inverse funds only serves to tip the investing playing-field more in the favor of the wealthy and institutional investors. Moreover, while unconventional, not all inverse funds necessarily carry greater risk of ultimate loss than the general market does. I am a frequent investor in SVXY in particular, and depriving me of this investment opportunity
I have my own right to decide which product I want to invest. 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 you can invest in public securities, like leveraged and inverse funds. I got a PhD majored in computational finance and I understand leveraged and inverse funds and
I believe it would be a mistake to reduce access to these popular and useful short to medium term trading funds. There is more than enough information in the market web sites on how to use a x3 fund. Extreme risk lies only on a " black swan" event and these events pose similar risks to all investors. I believe that I have benefited from my use of x2 & x3 funds on the SP500. It
I understand that youd like to restrict my ability to invest in certain investment products, namely leveraged mutual funds. I invest in these risky products only with money that I could afford to lose. I invest more than enough in broadly diversified, low cost index funds to cover a comfortable retirement. The money I use to invest in atypically risky ways is above and beyond what I need to meet
If regulators want to prevent people from gambling, then restrict the worst first. start be preventing online sports betting. then prevent sports betting at casinos. Then prevent slot machines at casinos.
and if the wish to help small investors, make Robinhood and others disclose how much they are paid for "pay for order flow"
And if they wish to help all investors, make
