I have researched various different leveraged funds (and strategies) and believe that in my 20s being able to apply leverage to my investment strategy and to deleverage as I get older will allow me to maximize my returns while reducing my risk given my long investment timeline. Specifically I plan on using a combination of leveraged broad stock market funds and bond funds and maintaining a set
There are dozens of vehicles in which people can choose to make investments. Individual stocks are very likely, if not managed correctly, to lead to substantial investment losses. This is also true with options, futures, FX, etc...
The key factor in all investment decisions is managing things the right way. Having different tools to help improve investment results are important. We should not
I am a small investor who would like to continue to choose my own investments, including the ones that this FINRA rule would restrict as too "complex". I've spent considerable time educating myself on investment theory and the value of a diversified portfolio, and I use a mix of "complex" and conservative investments to match my goals and risk
Dear Regulator/FINRA I am happy to learn of your concern for investors. I am fully aware of the risks involved in buying inverse shares. We are forced to read a prospectus before we invest in these funds. I feel that I should be able to buy any funds of my choice in a 'free' country. I also know that these funds are not usually held for a very long time. I really don't feel that
I should be able to choose the public investments that are right for 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, like leveraged and inverse funds. I am capable of understanding leveraged and inverse funds and their risks.
As an individual investor, I will OBJECT too much regulatory requirements on investors. It will NOT protect small investors, instead of creates confusion and overhead (which will be added to investors in some way). Most stocks aren't less risky than leveraged and inverse funds are.
Any proposal that testing specialized investment knowledge, demonstrate a high net worth and go though a
I should be able to choose the public investments that are right for my individual and family savings. I am capable of understanding leverage and inverse funds and their risks. I do not need these measures imposed on me.
Leveraged and inverse funds are important investment strategies. I use them to help hedge, seek enhanced returns, and for overall portfolio construction purposes. These are
Ive used leveraged investments for years now. It an important investment strategy in my portfolio. I understand the ratio against its common etf (3) I tend to buy when the market is in bear territory. Thus improving my chance of success. Its NOT rocket science. I also recognize that its risky for nervous investors who are fearful. I keep these investments presently low in value and only increase
Leveraged and inverse funds are important to my investment strategy. As an older investor who started investing later in life, I use them to seek enhanced returns, and you should never be permitted to take away my right to think for myself and make my own decisions about how, when, and with whom I invest MY money. I shouldn't have to go through any special process or exam test to be able
I would like to make my own decision as to what to invest. I oppose restrictions on my right to invest in public investments. I, not regulators, should be able to choose the public investments that are right for you and your family. Public investments should be available to all of the public, not just the privileged. I shouldn't need to pass any test before I can invest in public securities
