Displaying 2691 - 2700 of 4654 Results
To whom it may concern:
I was very concerned to hear of the proposed regulatory changes for leveraged and inverse funds.
While I support the surface notion of FINRA protecting retail investors, I do not believe restricting access to these "complex investments" is in any way an appropriate step.
Education is a worthwhile goal, but mandating licensing or other knowledge tests
The ability for the general public to invest in various types of financial instruments and vehicles should not be restricted, and doing so would be anti-American in spirit. Let us consider and example of why this the case: the internet has helped promote the democratization of information and provided an incredibly valuable resource for individuals to learn, communicate, share ideas, create art,
Dear FINRA,
I strongly object to RN #22-08 for the following reasons:
1) I believe I have the right to be able to choose the public investments that are right for me and my family.
FINRA seeks to render some public investments unavailable to the public, and to grant access only to the privileged. It's not FINRA's place to decide whether I should or shouldn't be granted
Gentlemen, I am puzzled! Wall Street already has a clear advantage over the retail investor on multiple fronts including and not limited to, research, software, the speed of execution, inside information and in politics. Let us not forget the Robinhood fiasco the past year which was just one example of how markets are manipulated and front-run against the individual investor. Knowing these facts
I OPPOSE RESTRICTIONS TO MY RIGHT TO INVEST!!!
Individual investors should have access to all public investment vehicles without regulators dictating which are appropriate/inappropriate. Rather, regulations should focus on transparency and full disclosure of the strategies employed by fund managers and most of these regulations already exist. Rather than rely on regulatory intervention,
To whom it may concern, FINRA's current effort to seek restrictions around "Complex Products" appears to fall into the category of "fixing something that isn't broken." This is something the government often appears to excel in and in this instance reads as a rather arbitrary and capricious effort to restrict access to investment choices. As a rule, I vehemently
Over the years, I have used many of the "complex products" that are the subject of Regulatory Notice 22-08 including leveraged ETPs, inverse ETPs and options. In all cases, I did the appropriate research on these products to understand how they work and the risks associated with using them. These products have been an important part of my investment portfolio to either hedge
The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) announced today that its Board of Governors approved a rule proposal that would impose expungement procedures requiring arbitrators to take specific steps, including issuing a written explanation, before recommending expungement of information related to arbitration cases from a registered person's Central Registration Depository (CRD) record.
Any test of specialized knowledge should be dependent on the specific investments being considered. The degree of investor awareness required to invest in a leveraged S&P 500 2X fund is suitable for many investors who are aware basically of the risks and have been informed of the proportion of net worth they could / should invest.
Brokers should be held legally liable for INITIATING
Dear FINRA, LETFs are not "complex" products. They are very simple to use. I can simply buy them to introduce modest amount of leverage to my diversified and safe portfolio. LETFs allow me to easily adjust the risk and reward levels in my portfolio. They are SIMPLE instruments. Simplest form of leverage, and the wildest of them are only 3x leveraged. How dare you take away my freedom