Sorry!! The article you are trying to read is not available now.
Thank you very much;
you're only a step away from
downloading your reports.

Leveraged ETF Ban Spreading Like a Virus

By

It's nothing but investor losses, frustration motivating this pandemic.

PrintPRINT
It's official: Leveraged ETFs have been targeted for termination... or at least their usage and availability to clients has been sharply curtailed.

UBS (UBS), Ameriprise (AMP), Raymond James (RJF), Edward Jones, and LPL Financial are either getting out of leveraged ETFs altogether or curtailing client activity in them. Some market pundits claim that these wealth-management-oriented firms are merely focusing on long-term instruments for their clients, because as we all know, Wall Street never chases short-term profits at the expense of the world around it. It has absolutely nothing to do with compliance officers and lawyers freaking out about the inevitable wave of lawsuits that are on the way.

It's all really too bad, because the growing anti-leveraged ETF movement is all just a way of absolving investors and their advisors of personal responsibility.

Let me make something clear: I really don't give a damn about leveraged ETFs. I've never owned one, traded one, or recommended one. At one point, I was tempted to play with the Direxion Daily Financial Bear 3X Shares (FAZ), but decided I didn't want to live with the volatility. I also didn't like all the gobbledygook in the prospectus about potential tracking errors versus the underlying.

What I do give a damn about is investors who may find these instruments useful, losing access to and liquidity in them, as fewer brokers deal in ETFs.

But Mike, you say, "People don't really understand these leveraged ETFs. You can't possibly expect them to pick up a prospectus and get just how dangerous these instruments are!"

Now that's fair enough. Maybe the regulators really do need to protect people from themselves.

Please.

How many people read the Characteristics and Risks of Standardized Options document issued by the CBOE? You know -- the one that "must be read by an investor prior to buying or selling options contracts." So why don't we just ban people from trading options? Like leveraged ETFs, people might not understand them and therefore they must be protected.
< Previous
Position in RJF.
The information on this website solely reflects the analysis of or opinion about the performance of securities and financial markets by the writers whose articles appear on the site. The views expressed by the writers are not necessarily the views of Minyanville Media, Inc. or members of its management. Nothing contained on the website is intended to constitute a recommendation or advice addressed to an individual investor or category of investors to purchase, sell or hold any security, or to take any action with respect to the prospective movement of the securities markets or to solicit the purchase or sale of any security. Any investment decisions must be made by the reader either individually or in consultation with his or her investment professional. Minyanville writers and staff may trade or hold positions in securities that are discussed in articles appearing on the website. Writers of articles are required to disclose whether they have a position in any stock or fund discussed in an article, but are not permitted to disclose the size or direction of the position. Nothing on this website is intended to solicit business of any kind for a writer's business or fund. Minyanville management and staff as well as contributing writers will not respond to emails or other communications requesting investment advice.

Copyright 2011 Minyanville Media, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
PrintPRINT
 
Featured Videos

WHAT'S POPULAR IN THE VILLE