Nov. 10, 2022
November 10, 2022 I, a concerned individual retail investor, support the proposal for \S7-26-22 Open-End Fund Liquidity Risk Management Programs and Swing Pricing Form N-PORT Reporting\. For my additional comment, in my personal opinion, the effects of rampant price swings have been a detriment to our markets for too long. Thus, any requirement for large capital entities to operate under higher scrutiny and tighter requirements will be healthy towards becoming a more fair, free market. Furthermore, over recent years an increase in both shorting and naked shorting en masse by entities that may be considered as those under the SEC's watch and subject to the rules of the SEC has caused uncertainty, extreme volatility/price swings, and unfairness in the markets. No one entity nor persons should be allowed the ability to sell what they do not own already to sell. Period, end of story, but that doesn't end up being what happens in reality unfortunately. Thus, if an entity does not have the means to fulfill a trade without shorting/naked shorting/illicit market practice, they should be forced to keep securities on hand to fulfill trades rather than practices that overwhelmingly lead to failures to deliver. Failures to Deliver and heavy shorting activity go hand in hand with the issue on topic to the proposal, as under liquidity crunches one may not have the securities or cash on hand necessary to fulfill FTD requirements in a timely and fair manner, which impacts both the market at large and the retail investing market. These huge price swings can be attributed to the very same aforementioned activities, as well as somewhat lax reporting requirements that do not demand enough clarity and transparency. To expand on that further, I believe this rule will help with this issue by creating a need for better reporting and requirements that may prevent entities from playing the volatility of securities to their sole benefit. I consider this practice, taking advantage of \bag holders\ by letting prices swing wildly and playing it on the way up and down, to be detrimental to the markets as a whole. Its damaging to the integrity of many things, not the least of those being the market itself. Again, I support this proposal and were this to be read I would hope you consider the proposal in question in high regard.