The last time I checked, I was still living in the UNITED STATES of AMERICA ! I have the right to trade in investments of MY choice. I have studied extensively on many forms of investments, such as options, futures, stocks
and ETF's. I am fully aware of the risks that go with leveraged and inverse funds, options , stocks, and futures. I do not need a regulator telling me what I can and
I oppose any limitations on my investments because it is an investors right to freely access the entirety of the public securities markets without arbitrary restrictions. I want to maintain the freedom to access a broad range of investment products that help me build better portfolios. It is I who have the right to decide which public equities, bonds and funds I want to buy, not the regulators.
I oppose ANY regulation limiting my choice to invest in any product or service of my choice.
We 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.
We shouldn't have to go through any special process
like passing a test before we can invest in public securities,
like
Dear Sirs,
In my opinion FINRA is taking a deceitful step in proposing to restrict an individual's right to invest in Public investments. What you propose is an over reaching "Nanny" solution. People who invest do so with the knowledge there are risks. We win some and we lose some. The dwindling middle class has been affected more from Federal manipulation of the
To Whom This May Concern, I do not agree with SEC Proposed Rule #S7-24-15. I believe that I should have the ability to choose what investments are appropriate for myself. I am capable of appropriately educating myself without having to pass "tests" imposed on me. Leverage and inverse funds are very important to my investment strategy. In fact, I followed a very regimented investment
The limitation on the ability for the individual investor to invest in inverse and leveraged investments is asinine. I may not be a CFA nor have FINRA series licenses, but am smart enough to know "I think this sector is going to go down, and I don't want to become a short seller, so investing in this ETF that is inverse allows me the freedom to invest in something I believe in
Dear FINRA,
I appreciate some of the thoughts in the SEC proposed rule #S7-24-15, however I do oppose restrictions placed on my investment rights. I'm fully aware that all investments come with risk, and it is my responsibility to read a prospectus and research my investments options and choices. As a hardworking member of society, I should have the right to use the money I earn whether
Hi. I understand your concerns. But I believe that using criteria such as tests or high net worth to determine who is eligible to trade securities that are deemed "complex", such as leveraged ETFs, is unnecessary and can actually do more harm than good to my long-term financial security.
I can assure you that I am an active trader and that I know what I'm doing. I am
I regularly use leveraged and inverse funds to hedge my investments. They are an invaluable tool and I use them in a sensible and limited capacity. I am not a "high net worth" individual. I find it offensive that FINRA would even consider taking these away from regular investors. This would just be further proof that this game is "rigged" for the big players.
Comments: I believe that it is an overstep by FINRA to limit access to leveraged and inverse ETFs. By limiting access, FINRA is unduly infringing on the rights of free market participants. Providing education on these products to investors is more than appropriate, but limiting access would be an overstep. I, and all of the people I know personally, have a deep understanding of the
