Mar. 17, 2020
Comment on SEC Proposed Rule #S7-24-15: I would like the opportunity to express my shock this proposal is even being considered. In the first place, the stock market is a gamble. Everyone can agree on that. Some investments do better than others, some are cyclical, and all appeal to different kinds of investors based on their particular strategies. The idea someone (you) can limit another's portfolio (mine) based on perceived risk in a leveraged fund that is fully vested, yet allow hedge fund trading to proceed with minimal funding escapes rationale. The amount of risk is determined by the investor, be it low, moderate, or high. Is Boeing a higher risk than Microsoft based on it's PE? I say, what difference does that make if it is something I feel comfortable with. What I'm getting to without using several examples of established stocks that exist in the S&P (that should give you an idea that these are not penny stocks) is a leveraged fund allows for great growth when the market performs well. I was up around 100% last year. Conversely, when the market drops I have the choice to get out or ride it out in the same manner I would do with my other stocks. It is my choice, not the SEC's. Your zeal to limit risk could be contagious as it could spread to limits within the general market, and that, my friend, is where we leave capitalism and enter the doors of socialism. No thanks. Regards, Matthew Durkovich