I have made my own investment decisions for over 40 years and I do not want regulators telling me what I can and cannot buy and sell. I have a high net worth and use leveraged and inverse funds to hedge and protect my assets by writing weekly options as part of my overall strategy. The regulations are fine the way they are and I do not want to see any more restriction !
What you propose is too broad and intrusive for a free market. These instruments have important legitimate uses. One can't completely eliminate risk from risk assets. There must be some role for personal responsibility. Rather focus on education, and perhaps limits for those who are over-leveraged on margin. Apart from that, taking occasional losses is how we learn to become better
I am writing due to possible restrictions on buying inverse funds. I feel it is everyone's right to invest in any public funds and they should not be limited to a few. Any investing has a certain amount of risk and there should not be certain funds that require additional training or a set amount of personal assets. I use inverse funds as part of my portfolio to hedge against the
I have owned ProShares for many years. I added it to my retirement fund after it had been doing well in my mothers retirement fund where that holding was helpful for my mom's needs.
I find a ProShares holding (SSO) to still be good in my asset allocation.
There is no way that I have even considered any allocation in crypto funds, an area that does need research, appropriate oversight.
It is outrageous that i on a self directed account should not be able to purchase leveraged or inverse securities because someone else wants to babysit me. I should not have a barrier to entry by demonstrating net worth or any other restraints. This is a violation of my freedom to do what i please in the income and money that i have. Seems like a guarding of this assets to be for the most
As a 50 year investor worth almost 2 million in assets, I use inverse and leveraged ETFs on zero to 15% of my investments based on market conditions. I use inverse sprangling in ultra Bear markets . I currently am in inverses for the 1st time in 14 years because the markets are so negative. And I know all about the risks . The examples of mistracking by FNRA is rare and over blown
I believe that most people who do choose to invest in these funds are aware of the risks and do their own homework before they start investing. While I do believe that offering education on the risks, as well as risk mitigation strategies, would be beneficial for traders, I do not believe that extra layers of bureaucracy and testing will create better or safer traders, and will simply reduce the
SUGGESTED ROUTING:*
Internal AuditOperationsSystemsTrading*These are suggested departments only. Others may be appropriate for your firm.
As of March 25, 1992, the following 63 issues joined the Nasdaq National Market, bringing the total number of issues to 2,766:
Symbol
Company
SOES Entry Date
Execution Level
LTCH
Litchfield Financial Corporation
2/25/92
1000
SCHL
In the United States, each individual should and have the right to be responsible for ones own decisions regarding his/her own life matters, including ones assets and possessions. Everyone ought to be able to invest in all public securities, since they are to the public. Diversify ones portfolio is a balanced way to invest. Leveraged and inverse funds are part of the vehicles to diversity, which
FINRA,
I am strongly opposed to regulations being considered to limit the ability of the public to invest in leveraged and inverse funds without such things as passing tests on investment knowledge, demonstrating high net worth, getting approval from a broker, attesting to reading certain materials, and going through "cooling off periods" during which one cannot invest.
