Taking away my ability to purchase inverse and leveraged ETFs is insulting to the retail investor. The current tools available to today's investors have leveled the playing field, with retail having the ability to use tools unavailable in the past. These tools allow me to offset my core positions without having to sell the underlying securities. They also allow me to participate in the
The free availability of leveraged and inverse Exchange Traded Fund (ETF) shares are an absolute benefit to average, individual, small-time investors such as myself. The available prospectus of each fund clearly describes the risks and tells us the proper cautions.
Please note that hedging and leverage opportunities were available to us before these ETF's existed. However, small
Dear FINRA,
I strongly object to RN #22-08 for the following reasons:
1) I believe I have the right to be able to choose the public investments that are right for me and my family.
FINRA seeks to render some public investments unavailable to the public, and to grant access only to the privileged. It's not FINRA's place to decide whether I should or shouldn't be granted
While I understand the nature of trying to protect investors from themselves on investing in certain investment strategies, the criteria presented as possible restrictions potentially goes too far. Investment knowledge does not always equate to net worth size noting that the greatest generation is passing more and more assets to younger generations including some that have very little investment
Leveraged ETF's like QQQ Proshares or Inverse ETF's can significantly enhance returns and consolidate effort, like any fund. Why would FINRA or any gov't agency assume we as investors are too dumb to understand the risks/ benefit analysis? Right now the NASDAQ-indexed QQQ's are down because of government incompetence, throwing around money for people not to
To whom it may concern, FINRA's current effort to seek restrictions around "Complex Products" appears to fall into the category of "fixing something that isn't broken." This is something the government often appears to excel in and in this instance reads as a rather arbitrary and capricious effort to restrict access to investment choices. As a rule, I vehemently
Dear Sir or Madame, I appreciate you hearing my comments regarding your desire to limit inverse and leveraged funds. First of all, we have a right to participate in the market in this area, since I'm aware that every large brokerage institution (bank) has the ability to short or go long the market. Why would you restrict the ability of the average investor to accomplish the same goals, and
Over the years, I have used many of the "complex products" that are the subject of Regulatory Notice 22-08 including leveraged ETPs, inverse ETPs and options. In all cases, I did the appropriate research on these products to understand how they work and the risks associated with using them. These products have been an important part of my investment portfolio to either hedge
I am opposed to proposed FINRA Regulatory Notice #22-08. I, not regulators, should be allowed to choose the publicly available investments that are most appropriate for me and my family and our investment goals. These investments should not be limited to privileged few.
I should not have go through any special process like taking and passing an exam in order to invest in public securities such as
These are products that are used by sophisticated investors who understand the risks and are willing to take them as part of their overall strategy for their reward.
Restricting access or imposing onerous criteria to meet before an investor can trade/invest in them goes against every principle of a free-market economy.
The entire premise of this regulatory notice is false, and data mining is used
