The Anti-Money Laundering section of the 2022 Report on FINRA’s Risk Monitoring and Examination Activities (the Report) informs member firms’ compliance programs by providing annual insights from FINRA’s ongoing regulatory operations, including (1) relevant regulatory obligations and related considerations, (2) exam findings and effective practices, and (3) additional resources.
I understand regulations are considered which propose to limit my ability to invest in certain "complex" investments.
I don't think it is necessary or appropriate for some government regulator to presume to make my investment risk decisions for me. That goes beyond the bounds of the government to "protect " its people. The citizen must have the right
Leveraged and inverse funds should be made available to all investors. Investors should be free to invest in any security that fits their risk tolerance profile. Allowing only specific segments of the market to access these securities creates the opportunity for a wider wealth gap. By opening up investments, such as these kind, to all investors creates a level playing field. Investors should
I don't believe that it should be necessary to have any sort of 'test' or other requirements to invest in leveraged funds. While there are risks, potentially substantial, the bulk of brokers require today that you sign a statement understanding the risks of leveraged investing.
Perhaps the compromise should NOT be to move leveraged investing to non-public forms, but to
Hello FINRA,
These types of restrictions take away the opportunity for retail investors to engage in leveraged investing. It should be understood that by eliminating this you would take away the opportunity for investors to take on additional risk based on tolerance of the individual. Please consider that investments regulations should mitigate extreme risk. In these instances most investors
I'm offended by the arrogant supposition that investors are somehow incapable of managing their investment risk and trading, investment, and hedging strategies. Leveraged and inverse funds are valuable and innovative tools that actually allow prudent investors to decrease/manage risk and improve tax efficiency. Any regulatory attempts to restrict the availability and utility of these
I do not want the proposed restrictions placed upon retail traders.
I should be able to trade in public investments freely. I am fully aware of the risks with leveraged and inverse funds and should be able to accept those risks without government intervention.
Regulations should only be implemented when my acceptance of risk effects others, like not wearing seatbelts increasing insurance
I use leveraged ETFs as a part of my portfolio. I have spent a lot of time understanding the behavior and increased volatility of these funds. I think it's important that I have access to the same securities as any privileged investors in order to have access to the same kinds of returns on my portfolio. I understand that different investments have different risks. I prefer the risks
SUGGESTED ROUTING:*
Corporate FinanceLegal & Compliance*These are suggested departments only. Others may be appropriate for your firm.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The NASD requests comment on amending the filing requirements of the Interpretation of the Board of Governors — Review of Corporate Financing to exempt offerings of Canadian issuers filed on proposed SEC Form F-9, and on Form F-10 if
Comments: I strongly feel that the proposal to limit access to Inverse and leveraged ETFs is ill advised. The investors (like me) who understand how these ETFs work and understand the risk, should be allowed to invest and benefit. Personally I review my investments on daily basis. The risk of investing in certain volatile individual stocks is lot more than investing Inverse and leveraged ETFs.