"However, important regulatory concerns arise when investors trade complex products without understanding their unique characteristics and risks." Like the complex derivatives that the large financial institutions created leading up to the Global Financial Crisis and collapse of the housing bubble? Until you remove the ability of institutional investors to be excessively leveraged with margin and create complex risky derivatives in the financial markets, all of your 'protections' for the individual investor cannot be taken seriously. What is gained by limiting use of leveraged and inverse funds by a certain class of investors? If these funds are that much of a concern, eliminate them for everyone. Make them illegal. Work with the SEC to get this done. If inverse and leveraged funds are a concern, they should be more of a concern when used by institutional investors, not individual investors. The overall risks in the financial markets by institutions dwarfs any actions using leveraged and inverse funds by individual investors. Are you also going to limit the massive amounts of leverage that institutions are permitted to use for investing? Be honest about your intentions because 'protecting' individual investors is not the real reason. The benefits from this action would be to reduce volatility and put a higher floor on equity markets, at least as impacted by individual investors. It may even help the Fed raise interest rates marginally higher before breaking the system (again). What's next? Not being able to buy individual stocks, options, bonds? If you're so concerned about individual investors, you should have been making daily appearances on financial media to broadcast the risks novice investors were taking throughout 2020 and 2021. Eliminate accredited investors. It serves little to no purpose to protect anyone. As long as people can go buy lottery tickets and go to casinos, creating barriers to entry, like becoming an accredited investor, are just a sham to create more wealth inequality. What about high risk funds like from ARK Invest, biotech funds, any SPAC, or any other fund or stock that would fall into this category? How about raising the bar for companies going public through any means? Require revenue, profits, growth, positive gross margins, or any of the above? How about holding banks accountable that promote any companies they help bring to the public markets? How about holding financial 'professionals' accountable for taking on too much risk? "We're from the government and we're here to help." (wink, wink)
For the Public
FINRA DATA
FINRA Data provides non-commercial use of data, specifically the ability to save data views and create and manage a Bond Watchlist.
For Industry Professionals
FINPRO
Registered representatives can fulfill Continuing Education requirements, view their industry CRD record and perform other compliance tasks.
For Member Firms
FINRA GATEWAY
Firm compliance professionals can access filings and requests, run reports and submit support tickets.
For Case Participants
DR PORTAL
Arbitration and mediation case participants and FINRA neutrals can view case information and submit documents through this Dispute Resolution Portal.
Need Help? | Check System Status
Log In to other FINRA systems
Anthony Comment On Regulatory Notice 22-08
"However, important regulatory concerns arise when investors trade complex products without understanding their unique characteristics and risks." Like the complex derivatives that the large financial institutions created leading up to the Global Financial Crisis and collapse of the housing bubble? Until you remove the ability of institutional investors to be excessively leveraged with margin and create complex risky derivatives in the financial markets, all of your 'protections' for the individual investor cannot be taken seriously. What is gained by limiting use of leveraged and inverse funds by a certain class of investors? If these funds are that much of a concern, eliminate them for everyone. Make them illegal. Work with the SEC to get this done. If inverse and leveraged funds are a concern, they should be more of a concern when used by institutional investors, not individual investors. The overall risks in the financial markets by institutions dwarfs any actions using leveraged and inverse funds by individual investors. Are you also going to limit the massive amounts of leverage that institutions are permitted to use for investing? Be honest about your intentions because 'protecting' individual investors is not the real reason. The benefits from this action would be to reduce volatility and put a higher floor on equity markets, at least as impacted by individual investors. It may even help the Fed raise interest rates marginally higher before breaking the system (again). What's next? Not being able to buy individual stocks, options, bonds? If you're so concerned about individual investors, you should have been making daily appearances on financial media to broadcast the risks novice investors were taking throughout 2020 and 2021. Eliminate accredited investors. It serves little to no purpose to protect anyone. As long as people can go buy lottery tickets and go to casinos, creating barriers to entry, like becoming an accredited investor, are just a sham to create more wealth inequality. What about high risk funds like from ARK Invest, biotech funds, any SPAC, or any other fund or stock that would fall into this category? How about raising the bar for companies going public through any means? Require revenue, profits, growth, positive gross margins, or any of the above? How about holding banks accountable that promote any companies they help bring to the public markets? How about holding financial 'professionals' accountable for taking on too much risk? "We're from the government and we're here to help." (wink, wink)