Leveraged and Inverse funds are important investment strategies to head against. Such investments should be available to the general public like me who are not privileged - we don't need tests to understand leveraged / inverse funds and the risks they entail. Do not make regulations that only benefit the super rich - give equal opportunity to everyone.
I strongly oppose the regulation on the trading of leveraged funds. It is an essential part of my investment strategy to manage risk and make profit even during market downturn.
Regulator should allow all investors to utilize all available necessary tools to protect their investments instead of only allowing the privileged few to use them.
This is outrageous. Individuals should be allowed the same instruments as the privileged few. I should be able to choose the investments that are right for me and m family.I am capable of understanding leveraged and inverse funds and their risk. I do not need to pass a "test" to invest in these instruments. I am currently using a inverse fund and it is helping to protect (hedge
As investors, we are perfectly aware of the risks we take when we invest in leveraged funds. We are grown people, and do not require a nanny to lock us out of high-risk investments. This regulation not only stops everyday people from becoming fully capable investors, it is condescending to believe this is for our own good.
I do not believe FINRA should remove our access to leverage ETF products. Brokers and companies like Direxion and Proshares provide an ample amount of warnings, disclosures, and educational material to advise the level of risk undertaken. It is and should be our right to maintain our decision to use these products within our investment strategies.
WASHINGTON — The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) today released its 2016 Regulatory and Examination Priorities Letter highlighting three broad issues – supervision, risk management and controls; and liquidity. The letter also emphasizes firm culture, conflicts of interest and ethics, and the significant role each of these plays in the way a firm conducts its business.
FINRA cites
Restricting my choices to invest in public ETFs etc. is unfair. Positioning size and risk are in the hands of the consumer. These depend on market conditions, which are constantly poorly interpreted by major banks and large investment firms, the Fed, and the Treasury who should not be using their power and leverage to limit access to securities during very difficult and volatile times.
Comments: More nanny state dumbing down of the general population. I'm fully aware of the nature and volatility of leveraged ETFs. That they are not typically a buy, hold, and forget about type of vehicle for most people. So what? Disclose that on the front end and let people elect the level of risk tolerance with which they are comfortable.
For some investors a high-volume trading strategy could be something that they seek. For others it might be a sign of excessive trading. But when does a lot become too much? What does a firm's responsibility when it comes to supervising for this behavior? On this episode, FINRA Enforcement's Chris Kelly joins us to tell us more.
I would like you to leave leveraged ETFs alone. I should be able to choose to have a risky security in my portfolio. At WORST, I would be willing to accept a qualification process based on risk tolerance, but not amount of income or assets, or experience. I,e a poor but educated and informed aggressive investor should not be prohibited.
Thank you