I oppose this proposed regulation because it is over reaching, limiting investors ability, is over reacting to a very small minority of people and does not reflect the vast majority of investors. If the mandate is to protect the public, then require wording and risks for leveraged or inverse funds. There is a place for inverse funds, particularly when markets are declining. and investors should have the ability and choice to be hedge their funds.
James Lawson Comment On Regulatory Notice 22-08
I oppose this proposed regulation because it is over reaching, limiting investors ability, is over reacting to a very small minority of people and does not reflect the vast majority of investors. If the mandate is to protect the public, then require wording and risks for leveraged or inverse funds. There is a place for inverse funds, particularly when markets are declining. and investors should have the ability and choice to be hedge their funds.