I have been investing since 1969. During that time, I have made many mistakes, some quite costly, but from each of them, I’ve learned something. I’ve never learned anything by being right. If regulation such as you are now proposing had been in effect then, I would have been prohibited from making the choices that taught me to be a better investor. People are not protected by this kind of paternalistic regulation. Rather, growth and learning opportunities are denied them.

FINRA Board, This is a major regulatory overreach. I would hope that this rule regarding individual investors' access to "complex" investments was proposed with the best of intentions - to protect investors from tking on unnecessary risk. But it is not up to you to determine the level of risk that an individual investor is willing to take on - it is up to the investor, and the investor ALONE. An American citizen has the right to take on risk for the potential of high reward. A body of unelected officials has no authority to limit that right.

I firmly object to the measures being proposed in this rule, particularly any steps to restrict what products I am able to procure through my brokers as a private (retail) investor. My concern especially applies to the purchase of leveraged ETFs. As a private investor or trader, the onus has been and always will be on me to acquire the necessary knowledge, experience, and trading acumen to be successful.

Comments: I am NOT in favor of limiting access to leveraged and inverse ETFS. I feel that they provide a substantial level of reasonably priced financial access to both downside protection and upside appreciation, when used responsibly, that is not available in any other investment product. Options can provide similar financial access to these parameters, but can be much more expensive to employ by the average investor. Thank you.

Hi, This makes no sense! High risk assets also have high reward potential! They have a place in the portfolio regardless of net worth! Don’t skew the field against the poor in disguise of protecting the dumb! If you want to screen dumb then have a financial savviness test !

Comments on Regulatory Notice 22-08 I am a self-directed retail user of investing products that is approaching retirement. I do not have a finance background per se, but I have a PhD in engineering with a career revolving around probabilistic risk assessment, and financial concepts translate well. I am not necessarily representative of the “typical” self-directed investor that the regulatory notice is targeting, but I am commenting because any proposed regulations would affect me just as much as any self-directed investor.

Limiting the ability of investors is the wrong approach. We are aware of the risks. Information is always the answer.

I found out about the request for comment through https://www.leteveryoneinvest.com/ which in my opinion gives very misleading information about what FINRA is trying to do here. First, I think FINRA's enforcement of existing rules and regulations is extremely poor and that should be addressed before anything else. What's the point of adding additional suitability rules when the agency doesn't back what currently exists? Second, I think that Americans should be free to invest in what they want.

Comments:I want to keep my rights to trade leveraged and inverse ETF's. thank you

Hi there, I oppose the proposed regulatory enhancements. I especially disagree with tying the ability to trade or invest in leveraged ETFs (or other "complex funds") to net worth. Nothing about having a high net worth guarantees a better understanding of complex funds. Someone with a small portfolio is capable of doing their due diligence before investing in or trading complex funds. I also oppose any "cool down period," as this would effectively make trading such funds impossible—depending on how long the time frame is.