No one has a problem with investing in Amazon of Nvidia or Facebook at their high points only to watch them lose 25% of their value in a matter of weeks if not days. But yet you want to "protect me" from a leveraged or inverse fund. Best case scenario is you do nothing and let me be responsible for me. At worst is a one time information screen that I agree that I am trading in a
This proposition poses a severe threat towards market fairness. Retail investors are already at a disadvantage when it comes to available tools and information compared to institutions. Restrictions like this will only tip the balance even more.
Retail traders or investors should be able to freely choose whatever products that fit their trading strategies. Finance is NOT only for the rich or the
I use leveraged funds in a methodical manner as part of my investing strategy. I fully understand the risks associated with leveraged investments and DO NOT believe the government has any right to regulate investment products. It is my personal choice to incorporate leveraged funds as part of my wealth building strategy and I desire to continue to use them. If you must regulate investments,
I'm investing in these index funds over 15 years. using the inverse funds to hedge my portfolio. These funds are mkt index funds; and I don't need analyses of individual stocks, to invest in them. These funds are very important part of my investment strategies, and I would like to have the opportunity to continue use them in the future. I'm a well informed investor, in these
Hello:
I am writing to voice my opposition to the proposed rules for investing in leveraged and inverse funds. Its a violation of my rights as an investor and imposes unreasonable burden on my ability to trade in a timely manner. I consider myself well informed and do not need additional regulations to guide my investment choices. Leveraged and inverse products are an important part of my
I believe that current disclosures and restrictions are adequate to inform me regarding risks of leveraged and inverse investments. Restricting the options to invest in such alternative and hedging options could, in fact, take away very important portfolio risk managements tools, which could trigger more volatility due to investors like myself selling positions they would like to hold longer
Dear FINRA, the fundamental question you should ask is this: "Are you, as an investor, competent enough to make your own investment decisions (whether they are "complex" or otherwise)"? If one answer's this question as "Yes" then FINRA should have no further involvement. If one answers this question as "No" then FINRA, at most, should recommend sources
I do not support limiting the public from trading in any public investment or instrument. While I do think we need regulations from scams and ponzi schemes, legitimate risky investments should be allowed for everyone. It should be an investor's choice no different from the general public to lose all their money in buying state lottery tickets and gambling in general. We make sure
I as an investor am well informed of the risk associated with a leveraged fund but am also aware of the benefits of these as they allow me to have insurance against market swings without having to allot a large portion of my portfolio.
They have a place for a personal investor like me so I do not have to invest a larger portion of my portfolio in riskier option trading or short selling for
I am writing to contest in the strongest possible way your intent to limit investment in leveraged or inverse funds. As adults, it is every American's right to make investment choices on their own. Whether they are smart or dumb choices, regulators have no business acting as nannies for grown adults.
Rather than putting the burden on the individual investor, you should focus on the
