It is absurd to prevent Americans from investing in any sort of securities that they want to. Risk assessment should be done by the investor, not by government regulators. For example, anyone could invest in a NASDAQ fund. But a leveraged fund gives me 3x the return (and risk) for 1x the investment. I would have to invest 3x as much to get the same return. That just ties up more of my money
I purchased a leveraged and inverse fund to play the rise in interest rates. I looked at the alternatives, decided how much risk I was comfortable taking, and purchased a 2X fund which has done very well in a time of rising interest rates. While I may not be rich, I am educated and quite capable of making decisions. Banning these investments smacks of authority limiting my ability to make
Comments: Good day!
The approach of limiting access to products instead of educating the consumers is a wrong one. It means taking a stance that the only people who should have access to the market are professional investors and accredited investors.
I would recommend providing more guidance on how retail plstforms have to provide the disclosures and warnings to consumers, so that there is a
Well as usual the government is over reaching. It is okay to risk my money in the market as long as I am losing money. If I take position that I feel will make me money the government steps in and wants to make sure I do not. You still get your "cut" in taxes! Anyway, I still run the same risk that the market will go up and wipe out my short position. I do not need the
All investors should be allowed to buy cryptocurrency instruments of any kind without any special accreditation. Investments should not be limited to an elite aristocracy, arbitrarily determined by government agencies. The risks of cryptocurrency are well-documented and available to all potential investors. Many cryptocurrencies have demonstrated their use-cases, and as an asset class it is
The lack of transparency with short interest is triggering a crisis of confidence in the US markets. The uncertainty regarding systemic risk is creating a systemic risk in and of itself. The crisis is just beginning.
I use the inverse leveraged products to hedge my risk. For example, I bought a share of Google upon the advice of a broker acquaintance. I was worried about the upcoming earnings report, but wanted to hold onto my stock for the split coming this Summer. So I bought an inverse leveraged product for a few days to lessen my risk during earnings season. I did have an issue with the ProShares UVXY ETF
Having the ability to invest on leveraged and/or inverse ETFs is an integral part of my investment strategy as it allows me to take advantage of market volatility and or hedge against it. These funds provide an easy mechanism to optimize returns and reduce risk. As with any other investment product, one needs to be familiar with its characteristics, liquidity and inherent risks. I dont believe
Executive Summary
NASD is concerned about the number of increasingly complex products that are being introduced to the market in response to the demand for higher returns or yield. Some of these products have unique features that may not be well understood by investors or registered persons. Others raise concerns about suitability and potential conflicts of interest. While NASD has and will
Comments:
It should be up to the investor him/her self to decide their risk tolerance levels and which products will achieve their goals.
There is less risk in using an inverse ETF than the options derivative markets because the latter has more variables that are measurably harder to comprehend,
Your time would be better spent looking under the hood at what Is going on at financial organizations