Comments:
Leveraged and Inverse funds provide me with a unique capability to both hedge market risks and provide a balanced portfolio. As an individual investor, I understand the risks associated with these and other products.
The market is currently stacked against a small investor because the entry is regulated by experience and wealth (not behavior). For example, the day trade rule takes a
Good morning.
I think these proposed regulations are messed up. Just yesterday I was reading how Fidelity is allowing bitcoin in retirement accounts (that Ponzi scheme is something that MIGHT be worth your time, but not this). I live in America and I don't want or need our government limiting me. I want the same opportunity to make money as everyone else. Please stop making more and
TO: All NASD Members and Other Interested Persons
The Securities and Exchange Commission has recently approved amendments to Section 4 of Appendix A, Article III, Section 30 of the Association's Rules of Fair Practice that relates to minimum margin requirements for option contracts on a market or industry index. These amendments which became effective on April 13, 1984 establish minimum
Comments: More restrictions hurt; they do not help. The market is risky, as are many things in life. It is an individuals responsibility to do due diligence before investing. Limiting investment options based on wealth, experience, or any other subjective factor is wrong. An individual, and solely that individual, should have the ability and right to make unrestricted investment decisions on
To whom it may concern: I have an MBA in Fnanace - 1984, and have been investing for the past 40 years. Your proposal to start testing investors before allowing to invest in whatever you deem risky is arbitrary, vicious ans smaks of communism! I do not need your [REDACTED] to tell me what to invest in!!!!! Leveraged and / or inverse funds are no more risky than non-inverse funds! They are
I firmly object to the measures being proposed in this rule, particularly any steps to restrict what products I am able to procure through my brokers as a private (retail) investor. My concern especially applies to the purchase of leveraged ETFs. As a private investor or trader, the onus has been and always will be on me to acquire the necessary knowledge, experience, and trading acumen to be
The current regulations on "complex securities" is adequate. FINRA and SEC doesn't need any further new regulations in complex securities. These complex securities have the same risk and volatility as buying a individual stock. Geared ETF and Inverse are for advance investor and trader. The current agreement with brokers is adequate. I studied geared and crypto trust for hundreds
Dear FINRA, If you change the rules so late in the game it's not fair. It's not fair for investors and even more so for those already invested. If investors can't buy it, how on earth am I going to sell it? I have losses so I am not even going to profit just get back where I was. Somebody got that money I paid; don't I have the right to get it back? It works both ways...you
To whom it may concern, It's undemocratic to make certain investments available only to the already wealthy. Leveraged investments should remain available to everyone, regardless of their net worth. And the same rules should apply equally, to everyone, all the time. It's not possible for regulators to care as much about my investments as I do, despite their best intentions. And nobody
Dear SEC, I'm vehemently opposed to Rule #S7-24-15, as it limits the available securities to the public which are within their right to own. As a licensed investment advisor, we already provide the expertise to our clients to explain leveraged and inverse funds as investments. Specifically, these are not recommended for every client, but can be quite useful for clients as a hedge, and should
