Before you restrict or remove an investors right to buy leveraged or inverse funds, you should consider that this structure allows educated investors to make these decisions without having to personally handle the underlying pieces that create these investments possible. Removal of these funds would not remove the risk, it would increase the risk as individuals do puts, calls, straddles, etc to have the desired investments.
As for only allowing the wealthy to own these funds, what happened to allowing anyone the right to try and improve their wealth? Or are we now about protecting investors from themselves because we know they can not possibly understand how these funds operate or the risks they involve? Perhaps they should just go to the casinos, tracks, sports betting
, etc. since that would not be as regulated and hence less risk.
Some required education ? That would be good. More then that , about as good as having a Board decide what is free speech.
David Sourwine Comment On Regulatory Notice 22-08
Before you restrict or remove an investors right to buy leveraged or inverse funds, you should consider that this structure allows educated investors to make these decisions without having to personally handle the underlying pieces that create these investments possible. Removal of these funds would not remove the risk, it would increase the risk as individuals do puts, calls, straddles, etc to have the desired investments.
As for only allowing the wealthy to own these funds, what happened to allowing anyone the right to try and improve their wealth? Or are we now about protecting investors from themselves because we know they can not possibly understand how these funds operate or the risks they involve? Perhaps they should just go to the casinos, tracks, sports betting
, etc. since that would not be as regulated and hence less risk.
Some required education ? That would be good. More then that , about as good as having a Board decide what is free speech.