I do not believe that it is a good idea for equaiity to reduce or limit access to leveraged funds to anyone. Leveraged funds can help the underprivelaged and by regulating them further they might not know that the vehicles exist. Requiring a certain amount of net worth or potentially expensive or time-consuming tests is just plain wrong. Regulation could also cause these funds to crash, making them more volatile than they already are, which is the opposite of what regulation is supposed to achieve. These funds are simple to understand with the millions of resources available from a 5 minute google search. At a minimum, I don't think S&P500 based funds, regular, or inverse should even be considered as part of new regulation. Personally, I don't think any should, but, S&P500-based levereaged ETFs are essentially managed and these can really help the underpriveleged or low-net-worth population out. Thank you for reading my comment, and please reach out with any quesitons.
Dan Brown Comment On Regulatory Notice 22-08
I do not believe that it is a good idea for equaiity to reduce or limit access to leveraged funds to anyone. Leveraged funds can help the underprivelaged and by regulating them further they might not know that the vehicles exist. Requiring a certain amount of net worth or potentially expensive or time-consuming tests is just plain wrong. Regulation could also cause these funds to crash, making them more volatile than they already are, which is the opposite of what regulation is supposed to achieve. These funds are simple to understand with the millions of resources available from a 5 minute google search. At a minimum, I don't think S&P500 based funds, regular, or inverse should even be considered as part of new regulation. Personally, I don't think any should, but, S&P500-based levereaged ETFs are essentially managed and these can really help the underpriveleged or low-net-worth population out. Thank you for reading my comment, and please reach out with any quesitons.