April 7, 2020
I would like to express my strong opposition to the proposed rule. Leveraged and inverse funds give me the freedom to trade the markets based on my convictions, and sometimes they are the only way to do so. For instance, in my retirement accounts, I have no way of shorting investments, so having inverse funds to invest in fills the hole in my arsenal of tools available to take advantage of any market situation.
Investing in any stock or fund is dangerous, and all of us get into investing knowing the dangers thereof. I don't think it helps when a third party decides for us whether we are intelligent enough to understand certain investments, and makes us jump through hoops to be able to use those investment tools.
I want the freedom to choose what I invest in, and I wouldn't want interference from a regulator in doing so. If that regulator is going to tell me which investments are safe and which are not, I would also want that regulator to guarantee that the investments they have deemed safe, never lose me any money. In the absence of such a guarantee, pretending to care about my well-being while knee-capping me by not allowing me to invest how I want to, is just plain hypocrisy. Rules like this are designed only to keep rich, well-connected investors rich and well-connected, while others stay on the side-lines and watch as the rich get richer and the poor get poorer.