Archegos Collapse Exposes an SEC Blind Spot_老虎社区_美港股上老虎

Archegos Collapse Exposes an SEC Blind Spot

Bloomberg2021-04-26

No financial market is without its risks, but if there’s one thing I’ve learned in a career as a securities regulator, market chairman, corporate director and investor, it’s this: The more you know, ...

网页链接

免责声明：本文观点仅代表作者个人观点，不构成本平台的投资建议，本平台不对文章信息准确性、完整性和及时性做出任何保证，亦不对因使用或信赖文章信息引发的任何损失承担责任。

SSVC
·2021-04-27
Yeah.. Appreciate your response and comments Thanks
回复
5
举报
收起
- Angsana:
  what's up
  2021-04-27
  回复
  举报
- Atwosome:
  Good sharing
  2021-04-27
  回复
  举报
- Acella:
  😀
  2021-04-27
  回复
  举报
查看更多 1 条评论
stormlee
·2021-04-27
Comment & like pls
回复
点赞
举报
Ben1978
·2021-04-27
Where is the oversight here???
回复
点赞
举报
Peanutschez
·2021-04-27
Oh
回复
1
举报
收起
- stormlee:
  Comment & like pls
  2021-04-27
  回复
  举报
Earthboii
·2021-04-26
Comment and like pls
回复
1
举报
收起
- stormlee:
  Comment & like pls
  2021-04-27
  回复
  举报
Tzuyoda24
·2021-04-26
F
回复
1
举报
收起
- Tzuyoda24:
  F
  2021-04-26
  回复
  举报
- Tzuyoda24:
  F
  2021-04-26
  回复
  举报
- Earthboii回复Tzuyoda24:
  F
  2021-04-26
  回复
  举报
Alfred1007
·2021-04-26
When everyone is making money, no one will care about this.
回复
2
举报
收起
- stormlee:
  Comment & like pls
  2021-04-27
  回复
  举报
- Alfred1007:
  thank you
  2021-04-27
  回复
  举报
- stormlee回复Alfred1007:
  👌
  2021-04-29
  回复
  举报
dt1234567
·2021-04-26
😞
回复
点赞
举报
DogeFather69
·2021-04-26
Hi
回复
1
举报
MewTeo
·2021-04-26
Interesting!
回复
1
举报
Lzoakz
·2021-04-26
?
回复
1
举报
Andus
·2021-04-26
Please like my post! Thank you [Happy]
回复
2
举报
Cyou2
·2021-04-26
Ok
回复
1
举报
收起
- Lzoakz:
  Ok
  2021-04-26
  回复
  举报

热议股票

7x24

全部

关于我们·老虎社区守则·老虎社区账号管理规范·老虎社区服务协议·老虎社区隐私政策

公司名称：北京至简风宜信息技术有限公司

违法和不良信息投诉：010-5681-3562（工作时间9:30-18:30）

邮箱：service@laohu8.com

营业执照：91110105MA01A4U55R

ICP备：京ICP备18016422号

网安备：京公网安备11010502036490

关注我们

{"i18n":{"language":"zh_CN"},"data":{"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1149183354?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","thumbnail":"","is_english":true,"pubTime":"2021-04-26 20:32","share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","id":"1149183354","market":"us","top_or_hot":-1,"title":"Archegos Collapse Exposes an SEC Blind Spot","media":"Bloomberg","content":"<div>\n<p>No financial market is without its risks, but if there’s one thing I’ve learned in a career as a securities regulator, market chairman, corporate director and investor, it’s this: The more you know, ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-04-26/archegos-collapse-exposes-an-sec-blind-spot?srnd=premium-asia\">网页链接</a>\n\n</div>\n","source":"lsy1584095487587","html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Archegos Collapse Exposes an SEC Blind Spot</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nArchegos Collapse Exposes an SEC Blind Spot\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-04-26 20:32 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-04-26/archegos-collapse-exposes-an-sec-blind-spot?srnd=premium-asia><strong>Bloomberg</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>No financial market is without its risks, but if there’s one thing I’ve learned in a career as a securities regulator, market chairman, corporate director and investor, it’s this: The more you know, ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-04-26/archegos-collapse-exposes-an-sec-blind-spot?srnd=premium-asia\">网页链接</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","isBrief":false,"type":0,"news_type":1,"symbol":null,"symbol_name":null,"start_time":0,"source_url":"https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-04-26/archegos-collapse-exposes-an-sec-blind-spot?srnd=premium-asia","article_id":"1149183354","we_media_id":null,"thumbnails":[],"rights":null,"url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1149183354","pubTimestamp":1619440351,"sourceInfo":{"source_id":"lsy1584095487587","name":"Bloomberg"},"weMediaInfo":null,"summary":"No financial market is without its risks, but if there’s one thing I’ve learned in a career as a sec","collect":0,"end_time":0,"defaultTopTitle":"bloomberg.com","property":[],"viewcount":null,"language":"en","relate_stocks":{},"translate_title":"Archegos崩溃暴露SEC盲点","themeId":null,"isJumpTheme":false,"ttsUrl":null,"symbols_score_info":{},"content_text":"No financial market is without its risks, but if there’s one thing I’ve learned in a career as a securities regulator, market chairman, corporate director and investor, it’s this: The more you know, the less risk you take.\nThat's why I support greater disclosure requirements for the kinds of investments that are often held in the shadows, away from public scrutiny and awareness despite their size and potential impact on other investors and markets.\nPrivate investors, hedge funds and others have long been able to take short positions in companies — betting against their future rise in value — without disclosure. And with the collapse of Archegos Capital Management, greater attention is now being paid to the ability of institutional investors and money managers  to hold highly complex and risky derivative-based investments without letting anyone know — including their own investors and counterparties.\nThis can't continue. First of all, disclosure requirements shouldn’t treat certain kinds of investments differently than others. If a hedge fund or investor takes a major long position in a company, defined as greater than 5% of outstanding shares, that has to be disclosed. Why shouldn’t the same standard apply to the same investor taking a major short position?\nMore critically, greater disclosure helps markets price risk better. Financial crises and major losses often emerge from unseen and undisclosed risks, when nobody understands the size of the potential problem until it’s too late. We always hear after these explosions: “If only we had known.” Right now, the knowing isn't possible. There’s no reason for these risky investments to be disclosed publicly because it’s not required.\nThe Securities and Exchange Commission and its new Chairman Gary Gensler can and should fix this. Ample and timely disclosure requirements similar to 13F and 13G filings on major short positions and derivative-based strategies would give market participants the information they need to better understand the risks they take, whether they want to be on the other side of those positions or join them.\nThis is an urgent matter. More of today’s financial markets are controlled by complex, derivative-based and highly leveraged investment strategies. They are often bespoke and hard to value at any given time. And too often, investors in these strategies — including highly sophisticated investors, endowments and other funds — are being told to accept their merits on faith, as well as the risk that goes with them.\nMaybe this is fine for some investors, especially those receiving an attractive return. But there is risk in any investment, and the person who takes a large position using an inscrutable strategy is himself a source of unseen risk. A highly leveraged strategy can involve people and institutions who had no idea they were depending on the success of a complex instrument. The cascading effect, as we know from the global financial crisis, is profound. And unseen.\nI'm aware, of course, that disclosure requirements can be expensive and create complexity. They may also deprive investors of the secrecy their strategies depend on. But think of the overriding benefits: Greater disclosure brings greater transparency, which leads to healthy markets. The more you know, the less risk you take.\nI saw it firsthand at the SEC, which I led for eight years. There, we introduced several important disclosure requirements that revolutionized Wall Street’s practices and brought greater confidence in, for example, financial audits, the release of material information to the public, mutual funds pricing, performance ratings and risk profiles. When we first proposed greater disclosure requirements for these areas, we were told it would be too expensive and too radical. Now, investors and public companies embrace them.\nThat being said, disclosure can often be used to hide, not reveal. At the SEC I fought hard for “plain language” requirements in prospectuses for companies and mutual funds. It seemed to me then, and still does today, that a convoluted or deliberately dense prospectus is as good as no prospectus as all. Disclosure is not the same as transparency.\nI've also seen lawyers use disclosure requirements to present a picture of reality that is opposite the truth. We must remember that the complexity of derivative-based strategies is not a bug but a feature. Any eventual rule should have one overriding goal: Explain the investment as clearly as possible and, importantly, its potential risks, including the amount of potential loss the investment entails.\nThere is yet another good reason for the SEC to act energetically to promote greater and more useful disclosure requirements: The investing public wants it. Whether it’s in the area of shareholder activism, or the claims made by companies regarding their environmental, social or governance (ESG) efforts, or their political contributions, investors want to know more about how their companies are performing.\nThis is a good thing. In fact, it’s the very best expression of free market economics. Free people want to make informed decisions about how they invest their money. That’s no impingement on a free market. It’s how we get one.","kind":null,"is_publish_news":false,"is_publish_highlight":true,"is_publish_live":false,"is_publish_wemedia":null,"editions":null,"column":"","sentiment":"0","news_tag":"","news_rank":0,"symbols":[],"gpt_button":1},"commentList":[{"id":374457150,"gmtCreate":1619478807971,"gmtModify":1634273198634,"author":{"id":"3574906731000207","authorId":"3574906731000207","name":"SSVC","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/545a5ea462ff4ac7cc100bd3d8d97f72","vip":1,"crmLevel":3,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"idStr":"3574906731000207","authorIdStr":"3574906731000207"},"htmlText":"Yeah.. Appreciate your response and comments Thanks&nbsp;","listText":"Yeah.. Appreciate your response and comments Thanks&nbsp;","text":"Yeah.. Appreciate your response and comments Thanks","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":5,"commentSize":4,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/374457150","repostId":1149183354,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1149183354","pubTimestamp":1619440351,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1149183354?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-04-26 20:32","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Archegos Collapse Exposes an SEC Blind Spot","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1149183354","media":"Bloomberg","summary":"No financial market is without its risks, but if there’s one thing I’ve learned in a career as a sec","content":"<p>No financial market is without its risks, but if there’s one thing I’ve learned in a career as a securities regulator, market chairman, corporate director and investor, it’s this: The more you know, the less risk you take.</p>\n<p>That's why I support greater disclosure requirements for the kinds of investments that are often held in the shadows, away from public scrutiny and awareness despite their size and potential impact on other investors and markets.</p>\n<p>Private investors, hedge funds and others have long been able to take short positions in companies — betting against their future rise in value —&nbsp;without disclosure. And with the collapse of Archegos Capital Management, greater attention is now being paid to the ability of institutional investors and money managers&nbsp; to hold highly complex and risky derivative-based investments without letting anyone know — including their own investors and counterparties.</p>\n<p>This can't continue. First of all, disclosure requirements shouldn’t treat certain kinds of investments differently than others. If a hedge fund or investor takes a major long position in a company, defined as greater than 5% of outstanding shares, that has to be disclosed. Why shouldn’t the same standard apply to the same investor taking a major short position?</p>\n<p>More critically, greater disclosure helps markets price risk better. Financial crises and major losses often emerge from unseen and undisclosed risks, when nobody understands the size of the potential problem until it’s too late. We always hear after these explosions: “If only we had known.” Right now, the knowing isn't possible. There’s no reason for these risky investments to be disclosed publicly because it’s not required.</p>\n<p>The Securities and Exchange Commission and its new Chairman Gary Gensler can and should fix this. Ample and timely disclosure requirements similar to 13F and 13G filings on major short positions and derivative-based strategies would give market participants the information they need to better understand the risks they take, whether they want to be on the other side of those positions&nbsp;or join them.</p>\n<p>This is an urgent matter. More of today’s financial markets are controlled by complex, derivative-based and highly leveraged investment strategies. They are often bespoke and hard to value at any given time. And too often, investors in these strategies — including highly sophisticated investors, endowments and other funds — are being told to accept their merits on faith, as well as the risk that goes with them.</p>\n<p>Maybe this is fine for some investors, especially those receiving an attractive return. But there is risk in any investment, and the person who takes a large position using an inscrutable strategy is himself a source of unseen risk. A highly leveraged strategy can involve people and institutions who had no idea they were depending on the success of a complex instrument. The cascading effect, as we know from the global financial crisis, is profound. And unseen.</p>\n<p>I'm aware, of course, that disclosure requirements can be expensive and create complexity. They may also deprive investors of the secrecy their strategies depend on. But think of the overriding benefits: Greater disclosure brings greater transparency, which leads to healthy markets. The more you know, the less risk you take.</p>\n<p>I saw it firsthand at the SEC, which I led for eight years. There, we introduced several important disclosure requirements that revolutionized Wall Street’s practices and brought greater confidence in, for example, financial audits, the release of material information to the public, mutual funds pricing, performance ratings and risk profiles. When we first proposed greater disclosure requirements for these areas, we were told it would be too expensive and too radical. Now, investors and public companies embrace them.</p>\n<p>That being said, disclosure can often be used to hide, not reveal. At the SEC I fought hard for “plain language” requirements in prospectuses for companies and mutual funds. It seemed to me then, and still does today, that a convoluted or deliberately dense prospectus is as good as no prospectus as all. Disclosure is not the same as transparency.</p>\n<p>I've also seen lawyers use disclosure requirements to present a picture of reality that is opposite the truth. We must remember that the complexity of derivative-based strategies is not a bug but a feature. Any eventual rule should have one overriding goal: Explain the investment as clearly as possible and, importantly, its potential risks, including the amount of potential loss the investment entails.</p>\n<p>There is yet another good reason for the SEC to act energetically to promote greater and more useful disclosure requirements: The investing public wants it. Whether it’s in the area of shareholder activism, or the claims made by companies regarding their environmental, social or governance (ESG) efforts, or their political contributions, investors want to know more about how their companies are performing.</p>\n<p>This is a good thing. In fact, it’s the very best expression of free market economics. Free people want to make informed decisions about how they invest their money. That’s no impingement on a free market. It’s how we get one.</p>","source":"lsy1584095487587","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Archegos Collapse Exposes an SEC Blind Spot</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nArchegos Collapse Exposes an SEC Blind Spot\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-04-26 20:32 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-04-26/archegos-collapse-exposes-an-sec-blind-spot?srnd=premium-asia><strong>Bloomberg</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>No financial market is without its risks, but if there’s one thing I’ve learned in a career as a securities regulator, market chairman, corporate director and investor, it’s this: The more you know, ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-04-26/archegos-collapse-exposes-an-sec-blind-spot?srnd=premium-asia\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{},"source_url":"https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-04-26/archegos-collapse-exposes-an-sec-blind-spot?srnd=premium-asia","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1149183354","content_text":"No financial market is without its risks, but if there’s one thing I’ve learned in a career as a securities regulator, market chairman, corporate director and investor, it’s this: The more you know, the less risk you take.\nThat's why I support greater disclosure requirements for the kinds of investments that are often held in the shadows, away from public scrutiny and awareness despite their size and potential impact on other investors and markets.\nPrivate investors, hedge funds and others have long been able to take short positions in companies — betting against their future rise in value — without disclosure. And with the collapse of Archegos Capital Management, greater attention is now being paid to the ability of institutional investors and money managers  to hold highly complex and risky derivative-based investments without letting anyone know — including their own investors and counterparties.\nThis can't continue. First of all, disclosure requirements shouldn’t treat certain kinds of investments differently than others. If a hedge fund or investor takes a major long position in a company, defined as greater than 5% of outstanding shares, that has to be disclosed. Why shouldn’t the same standard apply to the same investor taking a major short position?\nMore critically, greater disclosure helps markets price risk better. Financial crises and major losses often emerge from unseen and undisclosed risks, when nobody understands the size of the potential problem until it’s too late. We always hear after these explosions: “If only we had known.” Right now, the knowing isn't possible. There’s no reason for these risky investments to be disclosed publicly because it’s not required.\nThe Securities and Exchange Commission and its new Chairman Gary Gensler can and should fix this. Ample and timely disclosure requirements similar to 13F and 13G filings on major short positions and derivative-based strategies would give market participants the information they need to better understand the risks they take, whether they want to be on the other side of those positions or join them.\nThis is an urgent matter. More of today’s financial markets are controlled by complex, derivative-based and highly leveraged investment strategies. They are often bespoke and hard to value at any given time. And too often, investors in these strategies — including highly sophisticated investors, endowments and other funds — are being told to accept their merits on faith, as well as the risk that goes with them.\nMaybe this is fine for some investors, especially those receiving an attractive return. But there is risk in any investment, and the person who takes a large position using an inscrutable strategy is himself a source of unseen risk. A highly leveraged strategy can involve people and institutions who had no idea they were depending on the success of a complex instrument. The cascading effect, as we know from the global financial crisis, is profound. And unseen.\nI'm aware, of course, that disclosure requirements can be expensive and create complexity. They may also deprive investors of the secrecy their strategies depend on. But think of the overriding benefits: Greater disclosure brings greater transparency, which leads to healthy markets. The more you know, the less risk you take.\nI saw it firsthand at the SEC, which I led for eight years. There, we introduced several important disclosure requirements that revolutionized Wall Street’s practices and brought greater confidence in, for example, financial audits, the release of material information to the public, mutual funds pricing, performance ratings and risk profiles. When we first proposed greater disclosure requirements for these areas, we were told it would be too expensive and too radical. Now, investors and public companies embrace them.\nThat being said, disclosure can often be used to hide, not reveal. At the SEC I fought hard for “plain language” requirements in prospectuses for companies and mutual funds. It seemed to me then, and still does today, that a convoluted or deliberately dense prospectus is as good as no prospectus as all. Disclosure is not the same as transparency.\nI've also seen lawyers use disclosure requirements to present a picture of reality that is opposite the truth. We must remember that the complexity of derivative-based strategies is not a bug but a feature. Any eventual rule should have one overriding goal: Explain the investment as clearly as possible and, importantly, its potential risks, including the amount of potential loss the investment entails.\nThere is yet another good reason for the SEC to act energetically to promote greater and more useful disclosure requirements: The investing public wants it. Whether it’s in the area of shareholder activism, or the claims made by companies regarding their environmental, social or governance (ESG) efforts, or their political contributions, investors want to know more about how their companies are performing.\nThis is a good thing. In fact, it’s the very best expression of free market economics. Free people want to make informed decisions about how they invest their money. That’s no impingement on a free market. It’s how we get one.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"comments":[{"id":4142586,"gmtCreate":1619479358763,"gmtModify":1635510553785,"authorId":3575326435298567,"author":{"id":3575326435298567,"idStr":"3575326435298567","authorId":3575326435298567,"name":"Angsana","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/3c8492153d7059ec1aa704a1bd541c14","vip":1,"crmLevel":4,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"individualDisplayBadges":[]},"repliedAuthorId":0,"objectId":374457150,"type":1,"supId":0,"prevId":0,"content":"what's <u>up</u>","text":"what's <u>up</u>","html":"what's <u>up</u>"},{"id":4142662,"gmtCreate":1619479611957,"gmtModify":1635510546648,"authorId":3571305152732730,"author":{"id":3571305152732730,"idStr":"3571305152732730","authorId":3571305152732730,"name":"Atwosome","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/2085a92415ef32924f70d916d490adce","vip":1,"crmLevel":8,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"individualDisplayBadges":[]},"repliedAuthorId":0,"objectId":374457150,"type":1,"supId":0,"prevId":0,"content":"Good <u>sharing</u>","text":"Good <u>sharing</u>","html":"Good <u>sharing</u>"},{"id":4146358,"gmtCreate":1619495509144,"gmtModify":1635510196251,"authorId":3563150446821026,"author":{"id":3563150446821026,"idStr":"3563150446821026","authorId":3563150446821026,"name":"Acella","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/2712c4bb0bfbec4d2773e012189db3bc","vip":1,"crmLevel":9,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"individualDisplayBadges":[]},"repliedAuthorId":0,"objectId":374457150,"type":1,"supId":0,"prevId":0,"content":"😀","text":"😀","html":"😀"},{"id":4147959,"gmtCreate":1619509878793,"gmtModify":1635510051194,"authorId":3574295750075516,"author":{"id":3574295750075516,"idStr":"3574295750075516","authorId":3574295750075516,"name":"deeplearning","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d2aba15d86bd565c323909be00778983","vip":1,"crmLevel":3,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"individualDisplayBadges":[]},"repliedAuthorId":0,"objectId":374457150,"type":1,"supId":0,"prevId":0,"content":"done, please like and reply~","text":"done, please like and reply~","html":"done, please like and reply~"}],"langContent":"EN"},{"id":374425160,"gmtCreate":1619478294850,"gmtModify":1634273209728,"author":{"id":"3571959390768435","authorId":"3571959390768435","name":"stormlee","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/80629ef9648273c0d6465aee66dbd98a","vip":1,"crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"idStr":"3571959390768435","authorIdStr":"3571959390768435"},"htmlText":"Comment &amp; like pls","listText":"Comment &amp; like pls","text":"Comment & like pls","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/374425160","repostId":1149183354,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1149183354","pubTimestamp":1619440351,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1149183354?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-04-26 20:32","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Archegos Collapse Exposes an SEC Blind Spot","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1149183354","media":"Bloomberg","summary":"No financial market is without its risks, but if there’s one thing I’ve learned in a career as a sec","content":"<p>No financial market is without its risks, but if there’s one thing I’ve learned in a career as a securities regulator, market chairman, corporate director and investor, it’s this: The more you know, the less risk you take.</p>\n<p>That's why I support greater disclosure requirements for the kinds of investments that are often held in the shadows, away from public scrutiny and awareness despite their size and potential impact on other investors and markets.</p>\n<p>Private investors, hedge funds and others have long been able to take short positions in companies — betting against their future rise in value —&nbsp;without disclosure. And with the collapse of Archegos Capital Management, greater attention is now being paid to the ability of institutional investors and money managers&nbsp; to hold highly complex and risky derivative-based investments without letting anyone know — including their own investors and counterparties.</p>\n<p>This can't continue. First of all, disclosure requirements shouldn’t treat certain kinds of investments differently than others. If a hedge fund or investor takes a major long position in a company, defined as greater than 5% of outstanding shares, that has to be disclosed. Why shouldn’t the same standard apply to the same investor taking a major short position?</p>\n<p>More critically, greater disclosure helps markets price risk better. Financial crises and major losses often emerge from unseen and undisclosed risks, when nobody understands the size of the potential problem until it’s too late. We always hear after these explosions: “If only we had known.” Right now, the knowing isn't possible. There’s no reason for these risky investments to be disclosed publicly because it’s not required.</p>\n<p>The Securities and Exchange Commission and its new Chairman Gary Gensler can and should fix this. Ample and timely disclosure requirements similar to 13F and 13G filings on major short positions and derivative-based strategies would give market participants the information they need to better understand the risks they take, whether they want to be on the other side of those positions&nbsp;or join them.</p>\n<p>This is an urgent matter. More of today’s financial markets are controlled by complex, derivative-based and highly leveraged investment strategies. They are often bespoke and hard to value at any given time. And too often, investors in these strategies — including highly sophisticated investors, endowments and other funds — are being told to accept their merits on faith, as well as the risk that goes with them.</p>\n<p>Maybe this is fine for some investors, especially those receiving an attractive return. But there is risk in any investment, and the person who takes a large position using an inscrutable strategy is himself a source of unseen risk. A highly leveraged strategy can involve people and institutions who had no idea they were depending on the success of a complex instrument. The cascading effect, as we know from the global financial crisis, is profound. And unseen.</p>\n<p>I'm aware, of course, that disclosure requirements can be expensive and create complexity. They may also deprive investors of the secrecy their strategies depend on. But think of the overriding benefits: Greater disclosure brings greater transparency, which leads to healthy markets. The more you know, the less risk you take.</p>\n<p>I saw it firsthand at the SEC, which I led for eight years. There, we introduced several important disclosure requirements that revolutionized Wall Street’s practices and brought greater confidence in, for example, financial audits, the release of material information to the public, mutual funds pricing, performance ratings and risk profiles. When we first proposed greater disclosure requirements for these areas, we were told it would be too expensive and too radical. Now, investors and public companies embrace them.</p>\n<p>That being said, disclosure can often be used to hide, not reveal. At the SEC I fought hard for “plain language” requirements in prospectuses for companies and mutual funds. It seemed to me then, and still does today, that a convoluted or deliberately dense prospectus is as good as no prospectus as all. Disclosure is not the same as transparency.</p>\n<p>I've also seen lawyers use disclosure requirements to present a picture of reality that is opposite the truth. We must remember that the complexity of derivative-based strategies is not a bug but a feature. Any eventual rule should have one overriding goal: Explain the investment as clearly as possible and, importantly, its potential risks, including the amount of potential loss the investment entails.</p>\n<p>There is yet another good reason for the SEC to act energetically to promote greater and more useful disclosure requirements: The investing public wants it. Whether it’s in the area of shareholder activism, or the claims made by companies regarding their environmental, social or governance (ESG) efforts, or their political contributions, investors want to know more about how their companies are performing.</p>\n<p>This is a good thing. In fact, it’s the very best expression of free market economics. Free people want to make informed decisions about how they invest their money. That’s no impingement on a free market. It’s how we get one.</p>","source":"lsy1584095487587","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Archegos Collapse Exposes an SEC Blind Spot</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nArchegos Collapse Exposes an SEC Blind Spot\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-04-26 20:32 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-04-26/archegos-collapse-exposes-an-sec-blind-spot?srnd=premium-asia><strong>Bloomberg</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>No financial market is without its risks, but if there’s one thing I’ve learned in a career as a securities regulator, market chairman, corporate director and investor, it’s this: The more you know, ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-04-26/archegos-collapse-exposes-an-sec-blind-spot?srnd=premium-asia\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{},"source_url":"https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-04-26/archegos-collapse-exposes-an-sec-blind-spot?srnd=premium-asia","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1149183354","content_text":"No financial market is without its risks, but if there’s one thing I’ve learned in a career as a securities regulator, market chairman, corporate director and investor, it’s this: The more you know, the less risk you take.\nThat's why I support greater disclosure requirements for the kinds of investments that are often held in the shadows, away from public scrutiny and awareness despite their size and potential impact on other investors and markets.\nPrivate investors, hedge funds and others have long been able to take short positions in companies — betting against their future rise in value — without disclosure. And with the collapse of Archegos Capital Management, greater attention is now being paid to the ability of institutional investors and money managers  to hold highly complex and risky derivative-based investments without letting anyone know — including their own investors and counterparties.\nThis can't continue. First of all, disclosure requirements shouldn’t treat certain kinds of investments differently than others. If a hedge fund or investor takes a major long position in a company, defined as greater than 5% of outstanding shares, that has to be disclosed. Why shouldn’t the same standard apply to the same investor taking a major short position?\nMore critically, greater disclosure helps markets price risk better. Financial crises and major losses often emerge from unseen and undisclosed risks, when nobody understands the size of the potential problem until it’s too late. We always hear after these explosions: “If only we had known.” Right now, the knowing isn't possible. There’s no reason for these risky investments to be disclosed publicly because it’s not required.\nThe Securities and Exchange Commission and its new Chairman Gary Gensler can and should fix this. Ample and timely disclosure requirements similar to 13F and 13G filings on major short positions and derivative-based strategies would give market participants the information they need to better understand the risks they take, whether they want to be on the other side of those positions or join them.\nThis is an urgent matter. More of today’s financial markets are controlled by complex, derivative-based and highly leveraged investment strategies. They are often bespoke and hard to value at any given time. And too often, investors in these strategies — including highly sophisticated investors, endowments and other funds — are being told to accept their merits on faith, as well as the risk that goes with them.\nMaybe this is fine for some investors, especially those receiving an attractive return. But there is risk in any investment, and the person who takes a large position using an inscrutable strategy is himself a source of unseen risk. A highly leveraged strategy can involve people and institutions who had no idea they were depending on the success of a complex instrument. The cascading effect, as we know from the global financial crisis, is profound. And unseen.\nI'm aware, of course, that disclosure requirements can be expensive and create complexity. They may also deprive investors of the secrecy their strategies depend on. But think of the overriding benefits: Greater disclosure brings greater transparency, which leads to healthy markets. The more you know, the less risk you take.\nI saw it firsthand at the SEC, which I led for eight years. There, we introduced several important disclosure requirements that revolutionized Wall Street’s practices and brought greater confidence in, for example, financial audits, the release of material information to the public, mutual funds pricing, performance ratings and risk profiles. When we first proposed greater disclosure requirements for these areas, we were told it would be too expensive and too radical. Now, investors and public companies embrace them.\nThat being said, disclosure can often be used to hide, not reveal. At the SEC I fought hard for “plain language” requirements in prospectuses for companies and mutual funds. It seemed to me then, and still does today, that a convoluted or deliberately dense prospectus is as good as no prospectus as all. Disclosure is not the same as transparency.\nI've also seen lawyers use disclosure requirements to present a picture of reality that is opposite the truth. We must remember that the complexity of derivative-based strategies is not a bug but a feature. Any eventual rule should have one overriding goal: Explain the investment as clearly as possible and, importantly, its potential risks, including the amount of potential loss the investment entails.\nThere is yet another good reason for the SEC to act energetically to promote greater and more useful disclosure requirements: The investing public wants it. Whether it’s in the area of shareholder activism, or the claims made by companies regarding their environmental, social or governance (ESG) efforts, or their political contributions, investors want to know more about how their companies are performing.\nThis is a good thing. In fact, it’s the very best expression of free market economics. Free people want to make informed decisions about how they invest their money. That’s no impingement on a free market. It’s how we get one.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"langContent":"EN"},{"id":374418134,"gmtCreate":1619476218328,"gmtModify":1634273240106,"author":{"id":"3581742160042398","authorId":"3581742160042398","name":"Ben1978","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","vip":1,"crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"idStr":"3581742160042398","authorIdStr":"3581742160042398"},"htmlText":"Where is the oversight here???","listText":"Where is the oversight here???","text":"Where is the oversight here???","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/374418134","repostId":1149183354,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1149183354","pubTimestamp":1619440351,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1149183354?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-04-26 20:32","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Archegos Collapse Exposes an SEC Blind Spot","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1149183354","media":"Bloomberg","summary":"No financial market is without its risks, but if there’s one thing I’ve learned in a career as a sec","content":"<p>No financial market is without its risks, but if there’s one thing I’ve learned in a career as a securities regulator, market chairman, corporate director and investor, it’s this: The more you know, the less risk you take.</p>\n<p>That's why I support greater disclosure requirements for the kinds of investments that are often held in the shadows, away from public scrutiny and awareness despite their size and potential impact on other investors and markets.</p>\n<p>Private investors, hedge funds and others have long been able to take short positions in companies — betting against their future rise in value —&nbsp;without disclosure. And with the collapse of Archegos Capital Management, greater attention is now being paid to the ability of institutional investors and money managers&nbsp; to hold highly complex and risky derivative-based investments without letting anyone know — including their own investors and counterparties.</p>\n<p>This can't continue. First of all, disclosure requirements shouldn’t treat certain kinds of investments differently than others. If a hedge fund or investor takes a major long position in a company, defined as greater than 5% of outstanding shares, that has to be disclosed. Why shouldn’t the same standard apply to the same investor taking a major short position?</p>\n<p>More critically, greater disclosure helps markets price risk better. Financial crises and major losses often emerge from unseen and undisclosed risks, when nobody understands the size of the potential problem until it’s too late. We always hear after these explosions: “If only we had known.” Right now, the knowing isn't possible. There’s no reason for these risky investments to be disclosed publicly because it’s not required.</p>\n<p>The Securities and Exchange Commission and its new Chairman Gary Gensler can and should fix this. Ample and timely disclosure requirements similar to 13F and 13G filings on major short positions and derivative-based strategies would give market participants the information they need to better understand the risks they take, whether they want to be on the other side of those positions&nbsp;or join them.</p>\n<p>This is an urgent matter. More of today’s financial markets are controlled by complex, derivative-based and highly leveraged investment strategies. They are often bespoke and hard to value at any given time. And too often, investors in these strategies — including highly sophisticated investors, endowments and other funds — are being told to accept their merits on faith, as well as the risk that goes with them.</p>\n<p>Maybe this is fine for some investors, especially those receiving an attractive return. But there is risk in any investment, and the person who takes a large position using an inscrutable strategy is himself a source of unseen risk. A highly leveraged strategy can involve people and institutions who had no idea they were depending on the success of a complex instrument. The cascading effect, as we know from the global financial crisis, is profound. And unseen.</p>\n<p>I'm aware, of course, that disclosure requirements can be expensive and create complexity. They may also deprive investors of the secrecy their strategies depend on. But think of the overriding benefits: Greater disclosure brings greater transparency, which leads to healthy markets. The more you know, the less risk you take.</p>\n<p>I saw it firsthand at the SEC, which I led for eight years. There, we introduced several important disclosure requirements that revolutionized Wall Street’s practices and brought greater confidence in, for example, financial audits, the release of material information to the public, mutual funds pricing, performance ratings and risk profiles. When we first proposed greater disclosure requirements for these areas, we were told it would be too expensive and too radical. Now, investors and public companies embrace them.</p>\n<p>That being said, disclosure can often be used to hide, not reveal. At the SEC I fought hard for “plain language” requirements in prospectuses for companies and mutual funds. It seemed to me then, and still does today, that a convoluted or deliberately dense prospectus is as good as no prospectus as all. Disclosure is not the same as transparency.</p>\n<p>I've also seen lawyers use disclosure requirements to present a picture of reality that is opposite the truth. We must remember that the complexity of derivative-based strategies is not a bug but a feature. Any eventual rule should have one overriding goal: Explain the investment as clearly as possible and, importantly, its potential risks, including the amount of potential loss the investment entails.</p>\n<p>There is yet another good reason for the SEC to act energetically to promote greater and more useful disclosure requirements: The investing public wants it. Whether it’s in the area of shareholder activism, or the claims made by companies regarding their environmental, social or governance (ESG) efforts, or their political contributions, investors want to know more about how their companies are performing.</p>\n<p>This is a good thing. In fact, it’s the very best expression of free market economics. Free people want to make informed decisions about how they invest their money. That’s no impingement on a free market. It’s how we get one.</p>","source":"lsy1584095487587","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Archegos Collapse Exposes an SEC Blind Spot</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nArchegos Collapse Exposes an SEC Blind Spot\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-04-26 20:32 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-04-26/archegos-collapse-exposes-an-sec-blind-spot?srnd=premium-asia><strong>Bloomberg</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>No financial market is without its risks, but if there’s one thing I’ve learned in a career as a securities regulator, market chairman, corporate director and investor, it’s this: The more you know, ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-04-26/archegos-collapse-exposes-an-sec-blind-spot?srnd=premium-asia\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{},"source_url":"https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-04-26/archegos-collapse-exposes-an-sec-blind-spot?srnd=premium-asia","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1149183354","content_text":"No financial market is without its risks, but if there’s one thing I’ve learned in a career as a securities regulator, market chairman, corporate director and investor, it’s this: The more you know, the less risk you take.\nThat's why I support greater disclosure requirements for the kinds of investments that are often held in the shadows, away from public scrutiny and awareness despite their size and potential impact on other investors and markets.\nPrivate investors, hedge funds and others have long been able to take short positions in companies — betting against their future rise in value — without disclosure. And with the collapse of Archegos Capital Management, greater attention is now being paid to the ability of institutional investors and money managers  to hold highly complex and risky derivative-based investments without letting anyone know — including their own investors and counterparties.\nThis can't continue. First of all, disclosure requirements shouldn’t treat certain kinds of investments differently than others. If a hedge fund or investor takes a major long position in a company, defined as greater than 5% of outstanding shares, that has to be disclosed. Why shouldn’t the same standard apply to the same investor taking a major short position?\nMore critically, greater disclosure helps markets price risk better. Financial crises and major losses often emerge from unseen and undisclosed risks, when nobody understands the size of the potential problem until it’s too late. We always hear after these explosions: “If only we had known.” Right now, the knowing isn't possible. There’s no reason for these risky investments to be disclosed publicly because it’s not required.\nThe Securities and Exchange Commission and its new Chairman Gary Gensler can and should fix this. Ample and timely disclosure requirements similar to 13F and 13G filings on major short positions and derivative-based strategies would give market participants the information they need to better understand the risks they take, whether they want to be on the other side of those positions or join them.\nThis is an urgent matter. More of today’s financial markets are controlled by complex, derivative-based and highly leveraged investment strategies. They are often bespoke and hard to value at any given time. And too often, investors in these strategies — including highly sophisticated investors, endowments and other funds — are being told to accept their merits on faith, as well as the risk that goes with them.\nMaybe this is fine for some investors, especially those receiving an attractive return. But there is risk in any investment, and the person who takes a large position using an inscrutable strategy is himself a source of unseen risk. A highly leveraged strategy can involve people and institutions who had no idea they were depending on the success of a complex instrument. The cascading effect, as we know from the global financial crisis, is profound. And unseen.\nI'm aware, of course, that disclosure requirements can be expensive and create complexity. They may also deprive investors of the secrecy their strategies depend on. But think of the overriding benefits: Greater disclosure brings greater transparency, which leads to healthy markets. The more you know, the less risk you take.\nI saw it firsthand at the SEC, which I led for eight years. There, we introduced several important disclosure requirements that revolutionized Wall Street’s practices and brought greater confidence in, for example, financial audits, the release of material information to the public, mutual funds pricing, performance ratings and risk profiles. When we first proposed greater disclosure requirements for these areas, we were told it would be too expensive and too radical. Now, investors and public companies embrace them.\nThat being said, disclosure can often be used to hide, not reveal. At the SEC I fought hard for “plain language” requirements in prospectuses for companies and mutual funds. It seemed to me then, and still does today, that a convoluted or deliberately dense prospectus is as good as no prospectus as all. Disclosure is not the same as transparency.\nI've also seen lawyers use disclosure requirements to present a picture of reality that is opposite the truth. We must remember that the complexity of derivative-based strategies is not a bug but a feature. Any eventual rule should have one overriding goal: Explain the investment as clearly as possible and, importantly, its potential risks, including the amount of potential loss the investment entails.\nThere is yet another good reason for the SEC to act energetically to promote greater and more useful disclosure requirements: The investing public wants it. Whether it’s in the area of shareholder activism, or the claims made by companies regarding their environmental, social or governance (ESG) efforts, or their political contributions, investors want to know more about how their companies are performing.\nThis is a good thing. In fact, it’s the very best expression of free market economics. Free people want to make informed decisions about how they invest their money. That’s no impingement on a free market. It’s how we get one.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"langContent":"EN"},{"id":374544903,"gmtCreate":1619470957402,"gmtModify":1634273274751,"author":{"id":"3566370712497974","authorId":"3566370712497974","name":"Peanutschez","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/2d70c19af05c37b08df1881c97681749","vip":1,"crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"idStr":"3566370712497974","authorIdStr":"3566370712497974"},"htmlText":"Oh&nbsp;","listText":"Oh&nbsp;","text":"Oh","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/374544903","repostId":1149183354,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1149183354","pubTimestamp":1619440351,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1149183354?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-04-26 20:32","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Archegos Collapse Exposes an SEC Blind Spot","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1149183354","media":"Bloomberg","summary":"No financial market is without its risks, but if there’s one thing I’ve learned in a career as a sec","content":"<p>No financial market is without its risks, but if there’s one thing I’ve learned in a career as a securities regulator, market chairman, corporate director and investor, it’s this: The more you know, the less risk you take.</p>\n<p>That's why I support greater disclosure requirements for the kinds of investments that are often held in the shadows, away from public scrutiny and awareness despite their size and potential impact on other investors and markets.</p>\n<p>Private investors, hedge funds and others have long been able to take short positions in companies — betting against their future rise in value —&nbsp;without disclosure. And with the collapse of Archegos Capital Management, greater attention is now being paid to the ability of institutional investors and money managers&nbsp; to hold highly complex and risky derivative-based investments without letting anyone know — including their own investors and counterparties.</p>\n<p>This can't continue. First of all, disclosure requirements shouldn’t treat certain kinds of investments differently than others. If a hedge fund or investor takes a major long position in a company, defined as greater than 5% of outstanding shares, that has to be disclosed. Why shouldn’t the same standard apply to the same investor taking a major short position?</p>\n<p>More critically, greater disclosure helps markets price risk better. Financial crises and major losses often emerge from unseen and undisclosed risks, when nobody understands the size of the potential problem until it’s too late. We always hear after these explosions: “If only we had known.” Right now, the knowing isn't possible. There’s no reason for these risky investments to be disclosed publicly because it’s not required.</p>\n<p>The Securities and Exchange Commission and its new Chairman Gary Gensler can and should fix this. Ample and timely disclosure requirements similar to 13F and 13G filings on major short positions and derivative-based strategies would give market participants the information they need to better understand the risks they take, whether they want to be on the other side of those positions&nbsp;or join them.</p>\n<p>This is an urgent matter. More of today’s financial markets are controlled by complex, derivative-based and highly leveraged investment strategies. They are often bespoke and hard to value at any given time. And too often, investors in these strategies — including highly sophisticated investors, endowments and other funds — are being told to accept their merits on faith, as well as the risk that goes with them.</p>\n<p>Maybe this is fine for some investors, especially those receiving an attractive return. But there is risk in any investment, and the person who takes a large position using an inscrutable strategy is himself a source of unseen risk. A highly leveraged strategy can involve people and institutions who had no idea they were depending on the success of a complex instrument. The cascading effect, as we know from the global financial crisis, is profound. And unseen.</p>\n<p>I'm aware, of course, that disclosure requirements can be expensive and create complexity. They may also deprive investors of the secrecy their strategies depend on. But think of the overriding benefits: Greater disclosure brings greater transparency, which leads to healthy markets. The more you know, the less risk you take.</p>\n<p>I saw it firsthand at the SEC, which I led for eight years. There, we introduced several important disclosure requirements that revolutionized Wall Street’s practices and brought greater confidence in, for example, financial audits, the release of material information to the public, mutual funds pricing, performance ratings and risk profiles. When we first proposed greater disclosure requirements for these areas, we were told it would be too expensive and too radical. Now, investors and public companies embrace them.</p>\n<p>That being said, disclosure can often be used to hide, not reveal. At the SEC I fought hard for “plain language” requirements in prospectuses for companies and mutual funds. It seemed to me then, and still does today, that a convoluted or deliberately dense prospectus is as good as no prospectus as all. Disclosure is not the same as transparency.</p>\n<p>I've also seen lawyers use disclosure requirements to present a picture of reality that is opposite the truth. We must remember that the complexity of derivative-based strategies is not a bug but a feature. Any eventual rule should have one overriding goal: Explain the investment as clearly as possible and, importantly, its potential risks, including the amount of potential loss the investment entails.</p>\n<p>There is yet another good reason for the SEC to act energetically to promote greater and more useful disclosure requirements: The investing public wants it. Whether it’s in the area of shareholder activism, or the claims made by companies regarding their environmental, social or governance (ESG) efforts, or their political contributions, investors want to know more about how their companies are performing.</p>\n<p>This is a good thing. In fact, it’s the very best expression of free market economics. Free people want to make informed decisions about how they invest their money. That’s no impingement on a free market. It’s how we get one.</p>","source":"lsy1584095487587","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Archegos Collapse Exposes an SEC Blind Spot</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nArchegos Collapse Exposes an SEC Blind Spot\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-04-26 20:32 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-04-26/archegos-collapse-exposes-an-sec-blind-spot?srnd=premium-asia><strong>Bloomberg</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>No financial market is without its risks, but if there’s one thing I’ve learned in a career as a securities regulator, market chairman, corporate director and investor, it’s this: The more you know, ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-04-26/archegos-collapse-exposes-an-sec-blind-spot?srnd=premium-asia\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{},"source_url":"https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-04-26/archegos-collapse-exposes-an-sec-blind-spot?srnd=premium-asia","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1149183354","content_text":"No financial market is without its risks, but if there’s one thing I’ve learned in a career as a securities regulator, market chairman, corporate director and investor, it’s this: The more you know, the less risk you take.\nThat's why I support greater disclosure requirements for the kinds of investments that are often held in the shadows, away from public scrutiny and awareness despite their size and potential impact on other investors and markets.\nPrivate investors, hedge funds and others have long been able to take short positions in companies — betting against their future rise in value — without disclosure. And with the collapse of Archegos Capital Management, greater attention is now being paid to the ability of institutional investors and money managers  to hold highly complex and risky derivative-based investments without letting anyone know — including their own investors and counterparties.\nThis can't continue. First of all, disclosure requirements shouldn’t treat certain kinds of investments differently than others. If a hedge fund or investor takes a major long position in a company, defined as greater than 5% of outstanding shares, that has to be disclosed. Why shouldn’t the same standard apply to the same investor taking a major short position?\nMore critically, greater disclosure helps markets price risk better. Financial crises and major losses often emerge from unseen and undisclosed risks, when nobody understands the size of the potential problem until it’s too late. We always hear after these explosions: “If only we had known.” Right now, the knowing isn't possible. There’s no reason for these risky investments to be disclosed publicly because it’s not required.\nThe Securities and Exchange Commission and its new Chairman Gary Gensler can and should fix this. Ample and timely disclosure requirements similar to 13F and 13G filings on major short positions and derivative-based strategies would give market participants the information they need to better understand the risks they take, whether they want to be on the other side of those positions or join them.\nThis is an urgent matter. More of today’s financial markets are controlled by complex, derivative-based and highly leveraged investment strategies. They are often bespoke and hard to value at any given time. And too often, investors in these strategies — including highly sophisticated investors, endowments and other funds — are being told to accept their merits on faith, as well as the risk that goes with them.\nMaybe this is fine for some investors, especially those receiving an attractive return. But there is risk in any investment, and the person who takes a large position using an inscrutable strategy is himself a source of unseen risk. A highly leveraged strategy can involve people and institutions who had no idea they were depending on the success of a complex instrument. The cascading effect, as we know from the global financial crisis, is profound. And unseen.\nI'm aware, of course, that disclosure requirements can be expensive and create complexity. They may also deprive investors of the secrecy their strategies depend on. But think of the overriding benefits: Greater disclosure brings greater transparency, which leads to healthy markets. The more you know, the less risk you take.\nI saw it firsthand at the SEC, which I led for eight years. There, we introduced several important disclosure requirements that revolutionized Wall Street’s practices and brought greater confidence in, for example, financial audits, the release of material information to the public, mutual funds pricing, performance ratings and risk profiles. When we first proposed greater disclosure requirements for these areas, we were told it would be too expensive and too radical. Now, investors and public companies embrace them.\nThat being said, disclosure can often be used to hide, not reveal. At the SEC I fought hard for “plain language” requirements in prospectuses for companies and mutual funds. It seemed to me then, and still does today, that a convoluted or deliberately dense prospectus is as good as no prospectus as all. Disclosure is not the same as transparency.\nI've also seen lawyers use disclosure requirements to present a picture of reality that is opposite the truth. We must remember that the complexity of derivative-based strategies is not a bug but a feature. Any eventual rule should have one overriding goal: Explain the investment as clearly as possible and, importantly, its potential risks, including the amount of potential loss the investment entails.\nThere is yet another good reason for the SEC to act energetically to promote greater and more useful disclosure requirements: The investing public wants it. Whether it’s in the area of shareholder activism, or the claims made by companies regarding their environmental, social or governance (ESG) efforts, or their political contributions, investors want to know more about how their companies are performing.\nThis is a good thing. In fact, it’s the very best expression of free market economics. Free people want to make informed decisions about how they invest their money. That’s no impingement on a free market. It’s how we get one.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"comments":[{"id":4142188,"gmtCreate":1619478307892,"gmtModify":1635510592728,"authorId":3571959390768435,"author":{"id":3571959390768435,"idStr":"3571959390768435","authorId":3571959390768435,"name":"stormlee","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/80629ef9648273c0d6465aee66dbd98a","vip":1,"crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"individualDisplayBadges":[]},"repliedAuthorId":0,"objectId":374544903,"type":1,"supId":0,"prevId":0,"content":"Comment &amp; like pls","text":"Comment &amp; like pls","html":"Comment &amp; like pls"}],"langContent":"EN"},{"id":374239311,"gmtCreate":1619447476233,"gmtModify":1634273381608,"author":{"id":"3579176504922766","authorId":"3579176504922766","name":"Earthboii","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/220705ec8b1493ac8654f6c555727a1d","vip":1,"crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"idStr":"3579176504922766","authorIdStr":"3579176504922766"},"htmlText":"Comment and like pls","listText":"Comment and like pls","text":"Comment and like pls","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/374239311","repostId":1149183354,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1149183354","pubTimestamp":1619440351,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1149183354?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-04-26 20:32","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Archegos Collapse Exposes an SEC Blind Spot","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1149183354","media":"Bloomberg","summary":"No financial market is without its risks, but if there’s one thing I’ve learned in a career as a sec","content":"<p>No financial market is without its risks, but if there’s one thing I’ve learned in a career as a securities regulator, market chairman, corporate director and investor, it’s this: The more you know, the less risk you take.</p>\n<p>That's why I support greater disclosure requirements for the kinds of investments that are often held in the shadows, away from public scrutiny and awareness despite their size and potential impact on other investors and markets.</p>\n<p>Private investors, hedge funds and others have long been able to take short positions in companies — betting against their future rise in value —&nbsp;without disclosure. And with the collapse of Archegos Capital Management, greater attention is now being paid to the ability of institutional investors and money managers&nbsp; to hold highly complex and risky derivative-based investments without letting anyone know — including their own investors and counterparties.</p>\n<p>This can't continue. First of all, disclosure requirements shouldn’t treat certain kinds of investments differently than others. If a hedge fund or investor takes a major long position in a company, defined as greater than 5% of outstanding shares, that has to be disclosed. Why shouldn’t the same standard apply to the same investor taking a major short position?</p>\n<p>More critically, greater disclosure helps markets price risk better. Financial crises and major losses often emerge from unseen and undisclosed risks, when nobody understands the size of the potential problem until it’s too late. We always hear after these explosions: “If only we had known.” Right now, the knowing isn't possible. There’s no reason for these risky investments to be disclosed publicly because it’s not required.</p>\n<p>The Securities and Exchange Commission and its new Chairman Gary Gensler can and should fix this. Ample and timely disclosure requirements similar to 13F and 13G filings on major short positions and derivative-based strategies would give market participants the information they need to better understand the risks they take, whether they want to be on the other side of those positions&nbsp;or join them.</p>\n<p>This is an urgent matter. More of today’s financial markets are controlled by complex, derivative-based and highly leveraged investment strategies. They are often bespoke and hard to value at any given time. And too often, investors in these strategies — including highly sophisticated investors, endowments and other funds — are being told to accept their merits on faith, as well as the risk that goes with them.</p>\n<p>Maybe this is fine for some investors, especially those receiving an attractive return. But there is risk in any investment, and the person who takes a large position using an inscrutable strategy is himself a source of unseen risk. A highly leveraged strategy can involve people and institutions who had no idea they were depending on the success of a complex instrument. The cascading effect, as we know from the global financial crisis, is profound. And unseen.</p>\n<p>I'm aware, of course, that disclosure requirements can be expensive and create complexity. They may also deprive investors of the secrecy their strategies depend on. But think of the overriding benefits: Greater disclosure brings greater transparency, which leads to healthy markets. The more you know, the less risk you take.</p>\n<p>I saw it firsthand at the SEC, which I led for eight years. There, we introduced several important disclosure requirements that revolutionized Wall Street’s practices and brought greater confidence in, for example, financial audits, the release of material information to the public, mutual funds pricing, performance ratings and risk profiles. When we first proposed greater disclosure requirements for these areas, we were told it would be too expensive and too radical. Now, investors and public companies embrace them.</p>\n<p>That being said, disclosure can often be used to hide, not reveal. At the SEC I fought hard for “plain language” requirements in prospectuses for companies and mutual funds. It seemed to me then, and still does today, that a convoluted or deliberately dense prospectus is as good as no prospectus as all. Disclosure is not the same as transparency.</p>\n<p>I've also seen lawyers use disclosure requirements to present a picture of reality that is opposite the truth. We must remember that the complexity of derivative-based strategies is not a bug but a feature. Any eventual rule should have one overriding goal: Explain the investment as clearly as possible and, importantly, its potential risks, including the amount of potential loss the investment entails.</p>\n<p>There is yet another good reason for the SEC to act energetically to promote greater and more useful disclosure requirements: The investing public wants it. Whether it’s in the area of shareholder activism, or the claims made by companies regarding their environmental, social or governance (ESG) efforts, or their political contributions, investors want to know more about how their companies are performing.</p>\n<p>This is a good thing. In fact, it’s the very best expression of free market economics. Free people want to make informed decisions about how they invest their money. That’s no impingement on a free market. It’s how we get one.</p>","source":"lsy1584095487587","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Archegos Collapse Exposes an SEC Blind Spot</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nArchegos Collapse Exposes an SEC Blind Spot\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-04-26 20:32 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-04-26/archegos-collapse-exposes-an-sec-blind-spot?srnd=premium-asia><strong>Bloomberg</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>No financial market is without its risks, but if there’s one thing I’ve learned in a career as a securities regulator, market chairman, corporate director and investor, it’s this: The more you know, ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-04-26/archegos-collapse-exposes-an-sec-blind-spot?srnd=premium-asia\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{},"source_url":"https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-04-26/archegos-collapse-exposes-an-sec-blind-spot?srnd=premium-asia","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1149183354","content_text":"No financial market is without its risks, but if there’s one thing I’ve learned in a career as a securities regulator, market chairman, corporate director and investor, it’s this: The more you know, the less risk you take.\nThat's why I support greater disclosure requirements for the kinds of investments that are often held in the shadows, away from public scrutiny and awareness despite their size and potential impact on other investors and markets.\nPrivate investors, hedge funds and others have long been able to take short positions in companies — betting against their future rise in value — without disclosure. And with the collapse of Archegos Capital Management, greater attention is now being paid to the ability of institutional investors and money managers  to hold highly complex and risky derivative-based investments without letting anyone know — including their own investors and counterparties.\nThis can't continue. First of all, disclosure requirements shouldn’t treat certain kinds of investments differently than others. If a hedge fund or investor takes a major long position in a company, defined as greater than 5% of outstanding shares, that has to be disclosed. Why shouldn’t the same standard apply to the same investor taking a major short position?\nMore critically, greater disclosure helps markets price risk better. Financial crises and major losses often emerge from unseen and undisclosed risks, when nobody understands the size of the potential problem until it’s too late. We always hear after these explosions: “If only we had known.” Right now, the knowing isn't possible. There’s no reason for these risky investments to be disclosed publicly because it’s not required.\nThe Securities and Exchange Commission and its new Chairman Gary Gensler can and should fix this. Ample and timely disclosure requirements similar to 13F and 13G filings on major short positions and derivative-based strategies would give market participants the information they need to better understand the risks they take, whether they want to be on the other side of those positions or join them.\nThis is an urgent matter. More of today’s financial markets are controlled by complex, derivative-based and highly leveraged investment strategies. They are often bespoke and hard to value at any given time. And too often, investors in these strategies — including highly sophisticated investors, endowments and other funds — are being told to accept their merits on faith, as well as the risk that goes with them.\nMaybe this is fine for some investors, especially those receiving an attractive return. But there is risk in any investment, and the person who takes a large position using an inscrutable strategy is himself a source of unseen risk. A highly leveraged strategy can involve people and institutions who had no idea they were depending on the success of a complex instrument. The cascading effect, as we know from the global financial crisis, is profound. And unseen.\nI'm aware, of course, that disclosure requirements can be expensive and create complexity. They may also deprive investors of the secrecy their strategies depend on. But think of the overriding benefits: Greater disclosure brings greater transparency, which leads to healthy markets. The more you know, the less risk you take.\nI saw it firsthand at the SEC, which I led for eight years. There, we introduced several important disclosure requirements that revolutionized Wall Street’s practices and brought greater confidence in, for example, financial audits, the release of material information to the public, mutual funds pricing, performance ratings and risk profiles. When we first proposed greater disclosure requirements for these areas, we were told it would be too expensive and too radical. Now, investors and public companies embrace them.\nThat being said, disclosure can often be used to hide, not reveal. At the SEC I fought hard for “plain language” requirements in prospectuses for companies and mutual funds. It seemed to me then, and still does today, that a convoluted or deliberately dense prospectus is as good as no prospectus as all. Disclosure is not the same as transparency.\nI've also seen lawyers use disclosure requirements to present a picture of reality that is opposite the truth. We must remember that the complexity of derivative-based strategies is not a bug but a feature. Any eventual rule should have one overriding goal: Explain the investment as clearly as possible and, importantly, its potential risks, including the amount of potential loss the investment entails.\nThere is yet another good reason for the SEC to act energetically to promote greater and more useful disclosure requirements: The investing public wants it. Whether it’s in the area of shareholder activism, or the claims made by companies regarding their environmental, social or governance (ESG) efforts, or their political contributions, investors want to know more about how their companies are performing.\nThis is a good thing. In fact, it’s the very best expression of free market economics. Free people want to make informed decisions about how they invest their money. That’s no impingement on a free market. It’s how we get one.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"comments":[{"id":4142193,"gmtCreate":1619478314917,"gmtModify":1635510592364,"authorId":3571959390768435,"author":{"id":3571959390768435,"idStr":"3571959390768435","authorId":3571959390768435,"name":"stormlee","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/80629ef9648273c0d6465aee66dbd98a","vip":1,"crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"individualDisplayBadges":[]},"repliedAuthorId":0,"objectId":374239311,"type":1,"supId":0,"prevId":0,"content":"Comment &amp; like <u>pls</u>","text":"Comment &amp; like <u>pls</u>","html":"Comment &amp; like <u>pls</u>"}],"langContent":"EN"},{"id":374299148,"gmtCreate":1619447076184,"gmtModify":1634273388714,"author":{"id":"3579234000534296","authorId":"3579234000534296","name":"Tzuyoda24","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/64c400e046f5471532f593f1806f232a","vip":1,"crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"idStr":"3579234000534296","authorIdStr":"3579234000534296"},"htmlText":"F","listText":"F","text":"F","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":3,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/374299148","repostId":1149183354,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1149183354","pubTimestamp":1619440351,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1149183354?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-04-26 20:32","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Archegos Collapse Exposes an SEC Blind Spot","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1149183354","media":"Bloomberg","summary":"No financial market is without its risks, but if there’s one thing I’ve learned in a career as a sec","content":"<p>No financial market is without its risks, but if there’s one thing I’ve learned in a career as a securities regulator, market chairman, corporate director and investor, it’s this: The more you know, the less risk you take.</p>\n<p>That's why I support greater disclosure requirements for the kinds of investments that are often held in the shadows, away from public scrutiny and awareness despite their size and potential impact on other investors and markets.</p>\n<p>Private investors, hedge funds and others have long been able to take short positions in companies — betting against their future rise in value —&nbsp;without disclosure. And with the collapse of Archegos Capital Management, greater attention is now being paid to the ability of institutional investors and money managers&nbsp; to hold highly complex and risky derivative-based investments without letting anyone know — including their own investors and counterparties.</p>\n<p>This can't continue. First of all, disclosure requirements shouldn’t treat certain kinds of investments differently than others. If a hedge fund or investor takes a major long position in a company, defined as greater than 5% of outstanding shares, that has to be disclosed. Why shouldn’t the same standard apply to the same investor taking a major short position?</p>\n<p>More critically, greater disclosure helps markets price risk better. Financial crises and major losses often emerge from unseen and undisclosed risks, when nobody understands the size of the potential problem until it’s too late. We always hear after these explosions: “If only we had known.” Right now, the knowing isn't possible. There’s no reason for these risky investments to be disclosed publicly because it’s not required.</p>\n<p>The Securities and Exchange Commission and its new Chairman Gary Gensler can and should fix this. Ample and timely disclosure requirements similar to 13F and 13G filings on major short positions and derivative-based strategies would give market participants the information they need to better understand the risks they take, whether they want to be on the other side of those positions&nbsp;or join them.</p>\n<p>This is an urgent matter. More of today’s financial markets are controlled by complex, derivative-based and highly leveraged investment strategies. They are often bespoke and hard to value at any given time. And too often, investors in these strategies — including highly sophisticated investors, endowments and other funds — are being told to accept their merits on faith, as well as the risk that goes with them.</p>\n<p>Maybe this is fine for some investors, especially those receiving an attractive return. But there is risk in any investment, and the person who takes a large position using an inscrutable strategy is himself a source of unseen risk. A highly leveraged strategy can involve people and institutions who had no idea they were depending on the success of a complex instrument. The cascading effect, as we know from the global financial crisis, is profound. And unseen.</p>\n<p>I'm aware, of course, that disclosure requirements can be expensive and create complexity. They may also deprive investors of the secrecy their strategies depend on. But think of the overriding benefits: Greater disclosure brings greater transparency, which leads to healthy markets. The more you know, the less risk you take.</p>\n<p>I saw it firsthand at the SEC, which I led for eight years. There, we introduced several important disclosure requirements that revolutionized Wall Street’s practices and brought greater confidence in, for example, financial audits, the release of material information to the public, mutual funds pricing, performance ratings and risk profiles. When we first proposed greater disclosure requirements for these areas, we were told it would be too expensive and too radical. Now, investors and public companies embrace them.</p>\n<p>That being said, disclosure can often be used to hide, not reveal. At the SEC I fought hard for “plain language” requirements in prospectuses for companies and mutual funds. It seemed to me then, and still does today, that a convoluted or deliberately dense prospectus is as good as no prospectus as all. Disclosure is not the same as transparency.</p>\n<p>I've also seen lawyers use disclosure requirements to present a picture of reality that is opposite the truth. We must remember that the complexity of derivative-based strategies is not a bug but a feature. Any eventual rule should have one overriding goal: Explain the investment as clearly as possible and, importantly, its potential risks, including the amount of potential loss the investment entails.</p>\n<p>There is yet another good reason for the SEC to act energetically to promote greater and more useful disclosure requirements: The investing public wants it. Whether it’s in the area of shareholder activism, or the claims made by companies regarding their environmental, social or governance (ESG) efforts, or their political contributions, investors want to know more about how their companies are performing.</p>\n<p>This is a good thing. In fact, it’s the very best expression of free market economics. Free people want to make informed decisions about how they invest their money. That’s no impingement on a free market. It’s how we get one.</p>","source":"lsy1584095487587","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Archegos Collapse Exposes an SEC Blind Spot</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nArchegos Collapse Exposes an SEC Blind Spot\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-04-26 20:32 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-04-26/archegos-collapse-exposes-an-sec-blind-spot?srnd=premium-asia><strong>Bloomberg</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>No financial market is without its risks, but if there’s one thing I’ve learned in a career as a securities regulator, market chairman, corporate director and investor, it’s this: The more you know, ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-04-26/archegos-collapse-exposes-an-sec-blind-spot?srnd=premium-asia\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{},"source_url":"https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-04-26/archegos-collapse-exposes-an-sec-blind-spot?srnd=premium-asia","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1149183354","content_text":"No financial market is without its risks, but if there’s one thing I’ve learned in a career as a securities regulator, market chairman, corporate director and investor, it’s this: The more you know, the less risk you take.\nThat's why I support greater disclosure requirements for the kinds of investments that are often held in the shadows, away from public scrutiny and awareness despite their size and potential impact on other investors and markets.\nPrivate investors, hedge funds and others have long been able to take short positions in companies — betting against their future rise in value — without disclosure. And with the collapse of Archegos Capital Management, greater attention is now being paid to the ability of institutional investors and money managers  to hold highly complex and risky derivative-based investments without letting anyone know — including their own investors and counterparties.\nThis can't continue. First of all, disclosure requirements shouldn’t treat certain kinds of investments differently than others. If a hedge fund or investor takes a major long position in a company, defined as greater than 5% of outstanding shares, that has to be disclosed. Why shouldn’t the same standard apply to the same investor taking a major short position?\nMore critically, greater disclosure helps markets price risk better. Financial crises and major losses often emerge from unseen and undisclosed risks, when nobody understands the size of the potential problem until it’s too late. We always hear after these explosions: “If only we had known.” Right now, the knowing isn't possible. There’s no reason for these risky investments to be disclosed publicly because it’s not required.\nThe Securities and Exchange Commission and its new Chairman Gary Gensler can and should fix this. Ample and timely disclosure requirements similar to 13F and 13G filings on major short positions and derivative-based strategies would give market participants the information they need to better understand the risks they take, whether they want to be on the other side of those positions or join them.\nThis is an urgent matter. More of today’s financial markets are controlled by complex, derivative-based and highly leveraged investment strategies. They are often bespoke and hard to value at any given time. And too often, investors in these strategies — including highly sophisticated investors, endowments and other funds — are being told to accept their merits on faith, as well as the risk that goes with them.\nMaybe this is fine for some investors, especially those receiving an attractive return. But there is risk in any investment, and the person who takes a large position using an inscrutable strategy is himself a source of unseen risk. A highly leveraged strategy can involve people and institutions who had no idea they were depending on the success of a complex instrument. The cascading effect, as we know from the global financial crisis, is profound. And unseen.\nI'm aware, of course, that disclosure requirements can be expensive and create complexity. They may also deprive investors of the secrecy their strategies depend on. But think of the overriding benefits: Greater disclosure brings greater transparency, which leads to healthy markets. The more you know, the less risk you take.\nI saw it firsthand at the SEC, which I led for eight years. There, we introduced several important disclosure requirements that revolutionized Wall Street’s practices and brought greater confidence in, for example, financial audits, the release of material information to the public, mutual funds pricing, performance ratings and risk profiles. When we first proposed greater disclosure requirements for these areas, we were told it would be too expensive and too radical. Now, investors and public companies embrace them.\nThat being said, disclosure can often be used to hide, not reveal. At the SEC I fought hard for “plain language” requirements in prospectuses for companies and mutual funds. It seemed to me then, and still does today, that a convoluted or deliberately dense prospectus is as good as no prospectus as all. Disclosure is not the same as transparency.\nI've also seen lawyers use disclosure requirements to present a picture of reality that is opposite the truth. We must remember that the complexity of derivative-based strategies is not a bug but a feature. Any eventual rule should have one overriding goal: Explain the investment as clearly as possible and, importantly, its potential risks, including the amount of potential loss the investment entails.\nThere is yet another good reason for the SEC to act energetically to promote greater and more useful disclosure requirements: The investing public wants it. Whether it’s in the area of shareholder activism, or the claims made by companies regarding their environmental, social or governance (ESG) efforts, or their political contributions, investors want to know more about how their companies are performing.\nThis is a good thing. In fact, it’s the very best expression of free market economics. Free people want to make informed decisions about how they invest their money. That’s no impingement on a free market. It’s how we get one.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"comments":[{"id":4139644,"gmtCreate":1619447086007,"gmtModify":1635510783266,"authorId":3579234000534296,"author":{"id":3579234000534296,"idStr":"3579234000534296","authorId":3579234000534296,"name":"Tzuyoda24","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/64c400e046f5471532f593f1806f232a","vip":1,"crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"individualDisplayBadges":[]},"repliedAuthorId":0,"objectId":374299148,"type":1,"supId":0,"prevId":0,"content":"F","text":"F","html":"F"},{"id":4139646,"gmtCreate":1619447096856,"gmtModify":1635510783022,"authorId":3579234000534296,"author":{"id":3579234000534296,"idStr":"3579234000534296","authorId":3579234000534296,"name":"Tzuyoda24","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/64c400e046f5471532f593f1806f232a","vip":1,"crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"individualDisplayBadges":[]},"repliedAuthorId":0,"objectId":374299148,"type":1,"supId":4139644,"prevId":0,"content":"F","text":"F","html":"F"},{"id":4139726,"gmtCreate":1619447497873,"gmtModify":1635510777621,"authorId":3579176504922766,"author":{"id":3579176504922766,"idStr":"3579176504922766","authorId":3579176504922766,"name":"Earthboii","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/220705ec8b1493ac8654f6c555727a1d","vip":1,"crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"individualDisplayBadges":[]},"repliedAuthorId":3579234000534296,"repliedAuthor":{"id":3579234000534296,"idStr":"3579234000534296","authorId":3579234000534296,"name":"Tzuyoda24","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/64c400e046f5471532f593f1806f232a","vip":1,"crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"individualDisplayBadges":[]},"objectId":374299148,"type":1,"supId":4139644,"prevId":4139646,"content":"F","text":"F","html":"F"}],"langContent":"EN"},{"id":374662003,"gmtCreate":1619444815502,"gmtModify":1631883991786,"author":{"id":"3570656625926041","authorId":"3570656625926041","name":"Alfred1007","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/81d8406380cbc0525927f00a9510f2fa","vip":1,"crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"idStr":"3570656625926041","authorIdStr":"3570656625926041"},"htmlText":"When everyone is making money, no one will care about this.","listText":"When everyone is making money, no one will care about this.","text":"When everyone is making money, no one will care about this.","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":3,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/374662003","repostId":1149183354,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1149183354","pubTimestamp":1619440351,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1149183354?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-04-26 20:32","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Archegos Collapse Exposes an SEC Blind Spot","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1149183354","media":"Bloomberg","summary":"No financial market is without its risks, but if there’s one thing I’ve learned in a career as a sec","content":"<p>No financial market is without its risks, but if there’s one thing I’ve learned in a career as a securities regulator, market chairman, corporate director and investor, it’s this: The more you know, the less risk you take.</p>\n<p>That's why I support greater disclosure requirements for the kinds of investments that are often held in the shadows, away from public scrutiny and awareness despite their size and potential impact on other investors and markets.</p>\n<p>Private investors, hedge funds and others have long been able to take short positions in companies — betting against their future rise in value —&nbsp;without disclosure. And with the collapse of Archegos Capital Management, greater attention is now being paid to the ability of institutional investors and money managers&nbsp; to hold highly complex and risky derivative-based investments without letting anyone know — including their own investors and counterparties.</p>\n<p>This can't continue. First of all, disclosure requirements shouldn’t treat certain kinds of investments differently than others. If a hedge fund or investor takes a major long position in a company, defined as greater than 5% of outstanding shares, that has to be disclosed. Why shouldn’t the same standard apply to the same investor taking a major short position?</p>\n<p>More critically, greater disclosure helps markets price risk better. Financial crises and major losses often emerge from unseen and undisclosed risks, when nobody understands the size of the potential problem until it’s too late. We always hear after these explosions: “If only we had known.” Right now, the knowing isn't possible. There’s no reason for these risky investments to be disclosed publicly because it’s not required.</p>\n<p>The Securities and Exchange Commission and its new Chairman Gary Gensler can and should fix this. Ample and timely disclosure requirements similar to 13F and 13G filings on major short positions and derivative-based strategies would give market participants the information they need to better understand the risks they take, whether they want to be on the other side of those positions&nbsp;or join them.</p>\n<p>This is an urgent matter. More of today’s financial markets are controlled by complex, derivative-based and highly leveraged investment strategies. They are often bespoke and hard to value at any given time. And too often, investors in these strategies — including highly sophisticated investors, endowments and other funds — are being told to accept their merits on faith, as well as the risk that goes with them.</p>\n<p>Maybe this is fine for some investors, especially those receiving an attractive return. But there is risk in any investment, and the person who takes a large position using an inscrutable strategy is himself a source of unseen risk. A highly leveraged strategy can involve people and institutions who had no idea they were depending on the success of a complex instrument. The cascading effect, as we know from the global financial crisis, is profound. And unseen.</p>\n<p>I'm aware, of course, that disclosure requirements can be expensive and create complexity. They may also deprive investors of the secrecy their strategies depend on. But think of the overriding benefits: Greater disclosure brings greater transparency, which leads to healthy markets. The more you know, the less risk you take.</p>\n<p>I saw it firsthand at the SEC, which I led for eight years. There, we introduced several important disclosure requirements that revolutionized Wall Street’s practices and brought greater confidence in, for example, financial audits, the release of material information to the public, mutual funds pricing, performance ratings and risk profiles. When we first proposed greater disclosure requirements for these areas, we were told it would be too expensive and too radical. Now, investors and public companies embrace them.</p>\n<p>That being said, disclosure can often be used to hide, not reveal. At the SEC I fought hard for “plain language” requirements in prospectuses for companies and mutual funds. It seemed to me then, and still does today, that a convoluted or deliberately dense prospectus is as good as no prospectus as all. Disclosure is not the same as transparency.</p>\n<p>I've also seen lawyers use disclosure requirements to present a picture of reality that is opposite the truth. We must remember that the complexity of derivative-based strategies is not a bug but a feature. Any eventual rule should have one overriding goal: Explain the investment as clearly as possible and, importantly, its potential risks, including the amount of potential loss the investment entails.</p>\n<p>There is yet another good reason for the SEC to act energetically to promote greater and more useful disclosure requirements: The investing public wants it. Whether it’s in the area of shareholder activism, or the claims made by companies regarding their environmental, social or governance (ESG) efforts, or their political contributions, investors want to know more about how their companies are performing.</p>\n<p>This is a good thing. In fact, it’s the very best expression of free market economics. Free people want to make informed decisions about how they invest their money. That’s no impingement on a free market. It’s how we get one.</p>","source":"lsy1584095487587","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Archegos Collapse Exposes an SEC Blind Spot</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nArchegos Collapse Exposes an SEC Blind Spot\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-04-26 20:32 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-04-26/archegos-collapse-exposes-an-sec-blind-spot?srnd=premium-asia><strong>Bloomberg</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>No financial market is without its risks, but if there’s one thing I’ve learned in a career as a securities regulator, market chairman, corporate director and investor, it’s this: The more you know, ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-04-26/archegos-collapse-exposes-an-sec-blind-spot?srnd=premium-asia\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{},"source_url":"https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-04-26/archegos-collapse-exposes-an-sec-blind-spot?srnd=premium-asia","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1149183354","content_text":"No financial market is without its risks, but if there’s one thing I’ve learned in a career as a securities regulator, market chairman, corporate director and investor, it’s this: The more you know, the less risk you take.\nThat's why I support greater disclosure requirements for the kinds of investments that are often held in the shadows, away from public scrutiny and awareness despite their size and potential impact on other investors and markets.\nPrivate investors, hedge funds and others have long been able to take short positions in companies — betting against their future rise in value — without disclosure. And with the collapse of Archegos Capital Management, greater attention is now being paid to the ability of institutional investors and money managers  to hold highly complex and risky derivative-based investments without letting anyone know — including their own investors and counterparties.\nThis can't continue. First of all, disclosure requirements shouldn’t treat certain kinds of investments differently than others. If a hedge fund or investor takes a major long position in a company, defined as greater than 5% of outstanding shares, that has to be disclosed. Why shouldn’t the same standard apply to the same investor taking a major short position?\nMore critically, greater disclosure helps markets price risk better. Financial crises and major losses often emerge from unseen and undisclosed risks, when nobody understands the size of the potential problem until it’s too late. We always hear after these explosions: “If only we had known.” Right now, the knowing isn't possible. There’s no reason for these risky investments to be disclosed publicly because it’s not required.\nThe Securities and Exchange Commission and its new Chairman Gary Gensler can and should fix this. Ample and timely disclosure requirements similar to 13F and 13G filings on major short positions and derivative-based strategies would give market participants the information they need to better understand the risks they take, whether they want to be on the other side of those positions or join them.\nThis is an urgent matter. More of today’s financial markets are controlled by complex, derivative-based and highly leveraged investment strategies. They are often bespoke and hard to value at any given time. And too often, investors in these strategies — including highly sophisticated investors, endowments and other funds — are being told to accept their merits on faith, as well as the risk that goes with them.\nMaybe this is fine for some investors, especially those receiving an attractive return. But there is risk in any investment, and the person who takes a large position using an inscrutable strategy is himself a source of unseen risk. A highly leveraged strategy can involve people and institutions who had no idea they were depending on the success of a complex instrument. The cascading effect, as we know from the global financial crisis, is profound. And unseen.\nI'm aware, of course, that disclosure requirements can be expensive and create complexity. They may also deprive investors of the secrecy their strategies depend on. But think of the overriding benefits: Greater disclosure brings greater transparency, which leads to healthy markets. The more you know, the less risk you take.\nI saw it firsthand at the SEC, which I led for eight years. There, we introduced several important disclosure requirements that revolutionized Wall Street’s practices and brought greater confidence in, for example, financial audits, the release of material information to the public, mutual funds pricing, performance ratings and risk profiles. When we first proposed greater disclosure requirements for these areas, we were told it would be too expensive and too radical. Now, investors and public companies embrace them.\nThat being said, disclosure can often be used to hide, not reveal. At the SEC I fought hard for “plain language” requirements in prospectuses for companies and mutual funds. It seemed to me then, and still does today, that a convoluted or deliberately dense prospectus is as good as no prospectus as all. Disclosure is not the same as transparency.\nI've also seen lawyers use disclosure requirements to present a picture of reality that is opposite the truth. We must remember that the complexity of derivative-based strategies is not a bug but a feature. Any eventual rule should have one overriding goal: Explain the investment as clearly as possible and, importantly, its potential risks, including the amount of potential loss the investment entails.\nThere is yet another good reason for the SEC to act energetically to promote greater and more useful disclosure requirements: The investing public wants it. Whether it’s in the area of shareholder activism, or the claims made by companies regarding their environmental, social or governance (ESG) efforts, or their political contributions, investors want to know more about how their companies are performing.\nThis is a good thing. In fact, it’s the very best expression of free market economics. Free people want to make informed decisions about how they invest their money. That’s no impingement on a free market. It’s how we get one.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"comments":[{"id":4142195,"gmtCreate":1619478323730,"gmtModify":1635510592119,"authorId":3571959390768435,"author":{"id":3571959390768435,"idStr":"3571959390768435","authorId":3571959390768435,"name":"stormlee","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/80629ef9648273c0d6465aee66dbd98a","vip":1,"crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"individualDisplayBadges":[]},"repliedAuthorId":0,"objectId":374662003,"type":1,"supId":0,"prevId":0,"content":"Comment &amp; like <u>pls</u>","text":"Comment &amp; like <u>pls</u>","html":"Comment &amp; like <u>pls</u>"},{"id":4147417,"gmtCreate":1619503214768,"gmtModify":1635510094218,"authorId":3570656625926041,"author":{"id":3570656625926041,"idStr":"3570656625926041","authorId":3570656625926041,"name":"Alfred1007","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/81d8406380cbc0525927f00a9510f2fa","vip":1,"crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"individualDisplayBadges":[]},"repliedAuthorId":0,"objectId":374662003,"type":1,"supId":4142195,"prevId":0,"content":"thank <u>you</u>","text":"thank <u>you</u>","html":"thank <u>you</u>"},{"id":4164722,"gmtCreate":1619652196255,"gmtModify":1635508675259,"authorId":3571959390768435,"author":{"id":3571959390768435,"idStr":"3571959390768435","authorId":3571959390768435,"name":"stormlee","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/80629ef9648273c0d6465aee66dbd98a","vip":1,"crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"individualDisplayBadges":[]},"repliedAuthorId":3570656625926041,"repliedAuthor":{"id":3570656625926041,"idStr":"3570656625926041","authorId":3570656625926041,"name":"Alfred1007","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/81d8406380cbc0525927f00a9510f2fa","vip":1,"crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"individualDisplayBadges":[]},"objectId":374662003,"type":1,"supId":4142195,"prevId":4147417,"content":"👌","text":"👌","html":"👌"}],"langContent":"EN"},{"id":374610492,"gmtCreate":1619443891716,"gmtModify":1634273440578,"author":{"id":"3573164150149538","authorId":"3573164150149538","name":"dt1234567","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","vip":1,"crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"idStr":"3573164150149538","authorIdStr":"3573164150149538"},"htmlText":"😞","listText":"😞","text":"😞","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/374610492","repostId":1149183354,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1149183354","pubTimestamp":1619440351,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1149183354?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-04-26 20:32","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Archegos Collapse Exposes an SEC Blind Spot","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1149183354","media":"Bloomberg","summary":"No financial market is without its risks, but if there’s one thing I’ve learned in a career as a sec","content":"<p>No financial market is without its risks, but if there’s one thing I’ve learned in a career as a securities regulator, market chairman, corporate director and investor, it’s this: The more you know, the less risk you take.</p>\n<p>That's why I support greater disclosure requirements for the kinds of investments that are often held in the shadows, away from public scrutiny and awareness despite their size and potential impact on other investors and markets.</p>\n<p>Private investors, hedge funds and others have long been able to take short positions in companies — betting against their future rise in value —&nbsp;without disclosure. And with the collapse of Archegos Capital Management, greater attention is now being paid to the ability of institutional investors and money managers&nbsp; to hold highly complex and risky derivative-based investments without letting anyone know — including their own investors and counterparties.</p>\n<p>This can't continue. First of all, disclosure requirements shouldn’t treat certain kinds of investments differently than others. If a hedge fund or investor takes a major long position in a company, defined as greater than 5% of outstanding shares, that has to be disclosed. Why shouldn’t the same standard apply to the same investor taking a major short position?</p>\n<p>More critically, greater disclosure helps markets price risk better. Financial crises and major losses often emerge from unseen and undisclosed risks, when nobody understands the size of the potential problem until it’s too late. We always hear after these explosions: “If only we had known.” Right now, the knowing isn't possible. There’s no reason for these risky investments to be disclosed publicly because it’s not required.</p>\n<p>The Securities and Exchange Commission and its new Chairman Gary Gensler can and should fix this. Ample and timely disclosure requirements similar to 13F and 13G filings on major short positions and derivative-based strategies would give market participants the information they need to better understand the risks they take, whether they want to be on the other side of those positions&nbsp;or join them.</p>\n<p>This is an urgent matter. More of today’s financial markets are controlled by complex, derivative-based and highly leveraged investment strategies. They are often bespoke and hard to value at any given time. And too often, investors in these strategies — including highly sophisticated investors, endowments and other funds — are being told to accept their merits on faith, as well as the risk that goes with them.</p>\n<p>Maybe this is fine for some investors, especially those receiving an attractive return. But there is risk in any investment, and the person who takes a large position using an inscrutable strategy is himself a source of unseen risk. A highly leveraged strategy can involve people and institutions who had no idea they were depending on the success of a complex instrument. The cascading effect, as we know from the global financial crisis, is profound. And unseen.</p>\n<p>I'm aware, of course, that disclosure requirements can be expensive and create complexity. They may also deprive investors of the secrecy their strategies depend on. But think of the overriding benefits: Greater disclosure brings greater transparency, which leads to healthy markets. The more you know, the less risk you take.</p>\n<p>I saw it firsthand at the SEC, which I led for eight years. There, we introduced several important disclosure requirements that revolutionized Wall Street’s practices and brought greater confidence in, for example, financial audits, the release of material information to the public, mutual funds pricing, performance ratings and risk profiles. When we first proposed greater disclosure requirements for these areas, we were told it would be too expensive and too radical. Now, investors and public companies embrace them.</p>\n<p>That being said, disclosure can often be used to hide, not reveal. At the SEC I fought hard for “plain language” requirements in prospectuses for companies and mutual funds. It seemed to me then, and still does today, that a convoluted or deliberately dense prospectus is as good as no prospectus as all. Disclosure is not the same as transparency.</p>\n<p>I've also seen lawyers use disclosure requirements to present a picture of reality that is opposite the truth. We must remember that the complexity of derivative-based strategies is not a bug but a feature. Any eventual rule should have one overriding goal: Explain the investment as clearly as possible and, importantly, its potential risks, including the amount of potential loss the investment entails.</p>\n<p>There is yet another good reason for the SEC to act energetically to promote greater and more useful disclosure requirements: The investing public wants it. Whether it’s in the area of shareholder activism, or the claims made by companies regarding their environmental, social or governance (ESG) efforts, or their political contributions, investors want to know more about how their companies are performing.</p>\n<p>This is a good thing. In fact, it’s the very best expression of free market economics. Free people want to make informed decisions about how they invest their money. That’s no impingement on a free market. It’s how we get one.</p>","source":"lsy1584095487587","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Archegos Collapse Exposes an SEC Blind Spot</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nArchegos Collapse Exposes an SEC Blind Spot\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-04-26 20:32 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-04-26/archegos-collapse-exposes-an-sec-blind-spot?srnd=premium-asia><strong>Bloomberg</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>No financial market is without its risks, but if there’s one thing I’ve learned in a career as a securities regulator, market chairman, corporate director and investor, it’s this: The more you know, ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-04-26/archegos-collapse-exposes-an-sec-blind-spot?srnd=premium-asia\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{},"source_url":"https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-04-26/archegos-collapse-exposes-an-sec-blind-spot?srnd=premium-asia","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1149183354","content_text":"No financial market is without its risks, but if there’s one thing I’ve learned in a career as a securities regulator, market chairman, corporate director and investor, it’s this: The more you know, the less risk you take.\nThat's why I support greater disclosure requirements for the kinds of investments that are often held in the shadows, away from public scrutiny and awareness despite their size and potential impact on other investors and markets.\nPrivate investors, hedge funds and others have long been able to take short positions in companies — betting against their future rise in value — without disclosure. And with the collapse of Archegos Capital Management, greater attention is now being paid to the ability of institutional investors and money managers  to hold highly complex and risky derivative-based investments without letting anyone know — including their own investors and counterparties.\nThis can't continue. First of all, disclosure requirements shouldn’t treat certain kinds of investments differently than others. If a hedge fund or investor takes a major long position in a company, defined as greater than 5% of outstanding shares, that has to be disclosed. Why shouldn’t the same standard apply to the same investor taking a major short position?\nMore critically, greater disclosure helps markets price risk better. Financial crises and major losses often emerge from unseen and undisclosed risks, when nobody understands the size of the potential problem until it’s too late. We always hear after these explosions: “If only we had known.” Right now, the knowing isn't possible. There’s no reason for these risky investments to be disclosed publicly because it’s not required.\nThe Securities and Exchange Commission and its new Chairman Gary Gensler can and should fix this. Ample and timely disclosure requirements similar to 13F and 13G filings on major short positions and derivative-based strategies would give market participants the information they need to better understand the risks they take, whether they want to be on the other side of those positions or join them.\nThis is an urgent matter. More of today’s financial markets are controlled by complex, derivative-based and highly leveraged investment strategies. They are often bespoke and hard to value at any given time. And too often, investors in these strategies — including highly sophisticated investors, endowments and other funds — are being told to accept their merits on faith, as well as the risk that goes with them.\nMaybe this is fine for some investors, especially those receiving an attractive return. But there is risk in any investment, and the person who takes a large position using an inscrutable strategy is himself a source of unseen risk. A highly leveraged strategy can involve people and institutions who had no idea they were depending on the success of a complex instrument. The cascading effect, as we know from the global financial crisis, is profound. And unseen.\nI'm aware, of course, that disclosure requirements can be expensive and create complexity. They may also deprive investors of the secrecy their strategies depend on. But think of the overriding benefits: Greater disclosure brings greater transparency, which leads to healthy markets. The more you know, the less risk you take.\nI saw it firsthand at the SEC, which I led for eight years. There, we introduced several important disclosure requirements that revolutionized Wall Street’s practices and brought greater confidence in, for example, financial audits, the release of material information to the public, mutual funds pricing, performance ratings and risk profiles. When we first proposed greater disclosure requirements for these areas, we were told it would be too expensive and too radical. Now, investors and public companies embrace them.\nThat being said, disclosure can often be used to hide, not reveal. At the SEC I fought hard for “plain language” requirements in prospectuses for companies and mutual funds. It seemed to me then, and still does today, that a convoluted or deliberately dense prospectus is as good as no prospectus as all. Disclosure is not the same as transparency.\nI've also seen lawyers use disclosure requirements to present a picture of reality that is opposite the truth. We must remember that the complexity of derivative-based strategies is not a bug but a feature. Any eventual rule should have one overriding goal: Explain the investment as clearly as possible and, importantly, its potential risks, including the amount of potential loss the investment entails.\nThere is yet another good reason for the SEC to act energetically to promote greater and more useful disclosure requirements: The investing public wants it. Whether it’s in the area of shareholder activism, or the claims made by companies regarding their environmental, social or governance (ESG) efforts, or their political contributions, investors want to know more about how their companies are performing.\nThis is a good thing. In fact, it’s the very best expression of free market economics. Free people want to make informed decisions about how they invest their money. That’s no impingement on a free market. It’s how we get one.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"langContent":"EN"},{"id":374608168,"gmtCreate":1619442409854,"gmtModify":1634273460245,"author":{"id":"3562800806331755","authorId":"3562800806331755","name":"DogeFather69","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/012eed43a063aef772d43c0a45a463d9","vip":1,"crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"idStr":"3562800806331755","authorIdStr":"3562800806331755"},"htmlText":"Hi","listText":"Hi","text":"Hi","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/374608168","repostId":1149183354,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1149183354","pubTimestamp":1619440351,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1149183354?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-04-26 20:32","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Archegos Collapse Exposes an SEC Blind Spot","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1149183354","media":"Bloomberg","summary":"No financial market is without its risks, but if there’s one thing I’ve learned in a career as a sec","content":"<p>No financial market is without its risks, but if there’s one thing I’ve learned in a career as a securities regulator, market chairman, corporate director and investor, it’s this: The more you know, the less risk you take.</p>\n<p>That's why I support greater disclosure requirements for the kinds of investments that are often held in the shadows, away from public scrutiny and awareness despite their size and potential impact on other investors and markets.</p>\n<p>Private investors, hedge funds and others have long been able to take short positions in companies — betting against their future rise in value —&nbsp;without disclosure. And with the collapse of Archegos Capital Management, greater attention is now being paid to the ability of institutional investors and money managers&nbsp; to hold highly complex and risky derivative-based investments without letting anyone know — including their own investors and counterparties.</p>\n<p>This can't continue. First of all, disclosure requirements shouldn’t treat certain kinds of investments differently than others. If a hedge fund or investor takes a major long position in a company, defined as greater than 5% of outstanding shares, that has to be disclosed. Why shouldn’t the same standard apply to the same investor taking a major short position?</p>\n<p>More critically, greater disclosure helps markets price risk better. Financial crises and major losses often emerge from unseen and undisclosed risks, when nobody understands the size of the potential problem until it’s too late. We always hear after these explosions: “If only we had known.” Right now, the knowing isn't possible. There’s no reason for these risky investments to be disclosed publicly because it’s not required.</p>\n<p>The Securities and Exchange Commission and its new Chairman Gary Gensler can and should fix this. Ample and timely disclosure requirements similar to 13F and 13G filings on major short positions and derivative-based strategies would give market participants the information they need to better understand the risks they take, whether they want to be on the other side of those positions&nbsp;or join them.</p>\n<p>This is an urgent matter. More of today’s financial markets are controlled by complex, derivative-based and highly leveraged investment strategies. They are often bespoke and hard to value at any given time. And too often, investors in these strategies — including highly sophisticated investors, endowments and other funds — are being told to accept their merits on faith, as well as the risk that goes with them.</p>\n<p>Maybe this is fine for some investors, especially those receiving an attractive return. But there is risk in any investment, and the person who takes a large position using an inscrutable strategy is himself a source of unseen risk. A highly leveraged strategy can involve people and institutions who had no idea they were depending on the success of a complex instrument. The cascading effect, as we know from the global financial crisis, is profound. And unseen.</p>\n<p>I'm aware, of course, that disclosure requirements can be expensive and create complexity. They may also deprive investors of the secrecy their strategies depend on. But think of the overriding benefits: Greater disclosure brings greater transparency, which leads to healthy markets. The more you know, the less risk you take.</p>\n<p>I saw it firsthand at the SEC, which I led for eight years. There, we introduced several important disclosure requirements that revolutionized Wall Street’s practices and brought greater confidence in, for example, financial audits, the release of material information to the public, mutual funds pricing, performance ratings and risk profiles. When we first proposed greater disclosure requirements for these areas, we were told it would be too expensive and too radical. Now, investors and public companies embrace them.</p>\n<p>That being said, disclosure can often be used to hide, not reveal. At the SEC I fought hard for “plain language” requirements in prospectuses for companies and mutual funds. It seemed to me then, and still does today, that a convoluted or deliberately dense prospectus is as good as no prospectus as all. Disclosure is not the same as transparency.</p>\n<p>I've also seen lawyers use disclosure requirements to present a picture of reality that is opposite the truth. We must remember that the complexity of derivative-based strategies is not a bug but a feature. Any eventual rule should have one overriding goal: Explain the investment as clearly as possible and, importantly, its potential risks, including the amount of potential loss the investment entails.</p>\n<p>There is yet another good reason for the SEC to act energetically to promote greater and more useful disclosure requirements: The investing public wants it. Whether it’s in the area of shareholder activism, or the claims made by companies regarding their environmental, social or governance (ESG) efforts, or their political contributions, investors want to know more about how their companies are performing.</p>\n<p>This is a good thing. In fact, it’s the very best expression of free market economics. Free people want to make informed decisions about how they invest their money. That’s no impingement on a free market. It’s how we get one.</p>","source":"lsy1584095487587","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Archegos Collapse Exposes an SEC Blind Spot</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nArchegos Collapse Exposes an SEC Blind Spot\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-04-26 20:32 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-04-26/archegos-collapse-exposes-an-sec-blind-spot?srnd=premium-asia><strong>Bloomberg</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>No financial market is without its risks, but if there’s one thing I’ve learned in a career as a securities regulator, market chairman, corporate director and investor, it’s this: The more you know, ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-04-26/archegos-collapse-exposes-an-sec-blind-spot?srnd=premium-asia\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{},"source_url":"https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-04-26/archegos-collapse-exposes-an-sec-blind-spot?srnd=premium-asia","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1149183354","content_text":"No financial market is without its risks, but if there’s one thing I’ve learned in a career as a securities regulator, market chairman, corporate director and investor, it’s this: The more you know, the less risk you take.\nThat's why I support greater disclosure requirements for the kinds of investments that are often held in the shadows, away from public scrutiny and awareness despite their size and potential impact on other investors and markets.\nPrivate investors, hedge funds and others have long been able to take short positions in companies — betting against their future rise in value — without disclosure. And with the collapse of Archegos Capital Management, greater attention is now being paid to the ability of institutional investors and money managers  to hold highly complex and risky derivative-based investments without letting anyone know — including their own investors and counterparties.\nThis can't continue. First of all, disclosure requirements shouldn’t treat certain kinds of investments differently than others. If a hedge fund or investor takes a major long position in a company, defined as greater than 5% of outstanding shares, that has to be disclosed. Why shouldn’t the same standard apply to the same investor taking a major short position?\nMore critically, greater disclosure helps markets price risk better. Financial crises and major losses often emerge from unseen and undisclosed risks, when nobody understands the size of the potential problem until it’s too late. We always hear after these explosions: “If only we had known.” Right now, the knowing isn't possible. There’s no reason for these risky investments to be disclosed publicly because it’s not required.\nThe Securities and Exchange Commission and its new Chairman Gary Gensler can and should fix this. Ample and timely disclosure requirements similar to 13F and 13G filings on major short positions and derivative-based strategies would give market participants the information they need to better understand the risks they take, whether they want to be on the other side of those positions or join them.\nThis is an urgent matter. More of today’s financial markets are controlled by complex, derivative-based and highly leveraged investment strategies. They are often bespoke and hard to value at any given time. And too often, investors in these strategies — including highly sophisticated investors, endowments and other funds — are being told to accept their merits on faith, as well as the risk that goes with them.\nMaybe this is fine for some investors, especially those receiving an attractive return. But there is risk in any investment, and the person who takes a large position using an inscrutable strategy is himself a source of unseen risk. A highly leveraged strategy can involve people and institutions who had no idea they were depending on the success of a complex instrument. The cascading effect, as we know from the global financial crisis, is profound. And unseen.\nI'm aware, of course, that disclosure requirements can be expensive and create complexity. They may also deprive investors of the secrecy their strategies depend on. But think of the overriding benefits: Greater disclosure brings greater transparency, which leads to healthy markets. The more you know, the less risk you take.\nI saw it firsthand at the SEC, which I led for eight years. There, we introduced several important disclosure requirements that revolutionized Wall Street’s practices and brought greater confidence in, for example, financial audits, the release of material information to the public, mutual funds pricing, performance ratings and risk profiles. When we first proposed greater disclosure requirements for these areas, we were told it would be too expensive and too radical. Now, investors and public companies embrace them.\nThat being said, disclosure can often be used to hide, not reveal. At the SEC I fought hard for “plain language” requirements in prospectuses for companies and mutual funds. It seemed to me then, and still does today, that a convoluted or deliberately dense prospectus is as good as no prospectus as all. Disclosure is not the same as transparency.\nI've also seen lawyers use disclosure requirements to present a picture of reality that is opposite the truth. We must remember that the complexity of derivative-based strategies is not a bug but a feature. Any eventual rule should have one overriding goal: Explain the investment as clearly as possible and, importantly, its potential risks, including the amount of potential loss the investment entails.\nThere is yet another good reason for the SEC to act energetically to promote greater and more useful disclosure requirements: The investing public wants it. Whether it’s in the area of shareholder activism, or the claims made by companies regarding their environmental, social or governance (ESG) efforts, or their political contributions, investors want to know more about how their companies are performing.\nThis is a good thing. In fact, it’s the very best expression of free market economics. Free people want to make informed decisions about how they invest their money. That’s no impingement on a free market. It’s how we get one.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"langContent":"EN"},{"id":374600951,"gmtCreate":1619442094573,"gmtModify":1634273464387,"author":{"id":"3582107567380827","authorId":"3582107567380827","name":"MewTeo","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/91f3d0a7febdfdc2eb6e062038990f27","vip":1,"crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"idStr":"3582107567380827","authorIdStr":"3582107567380827"},"htmlText":"Interesting!","listText":"Interesting!","text":"Interesting!","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/374600951","repostId":1149183354,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1149183354","pubTimestamp":1619440351,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1149183354?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-04-26 20:32","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Archegos Collapse Exposes an SEC Blind Spot","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1149183354","media":"Bloomberg","summary":"No financial market is without its risks, but if there’s one thing I’ve learned in a career as a sec","content":"<p>No financial market is without its risks, but if there’s one thing I’ve learned in a career as a securities regulator, market chairman, corporate director and investor, it’s this: The more you know, the less risk you take.</p>\n<p>That's why I support greater disclosure requirements for the kinds of investments that are often held in the shadows, away from public scrutiny and awareness despite their size and potential impact on other investors and markets.</p>\n<p>Private investors, hedge funds and others have long been able to take short positions in companies — betting against their future rise in value —&nbsp;without disclosure. And with the collapse of Archegos Capital Management, greater attention is now being paid to the ability of institutional investors and money managers&nbsp; to hold highly complex and risky derivative-based investments without letting anyone know — including their own investors and counterparties.</p>\n<p>This can't continue. First of all, disclosure requirements shouldn’t treat certain kinds of investments differently than others. If a hedge fund or investor takes a major long position in a company, defined as greater than 5% of outstanding shares, that has to be disclosed. Why shouldn’t the same standard apply to the same investor taking a major short position?</p>\n<p>More critically, greater disclosure helps markets price risk better. Financial crises and major losses often emerge from unseen and undisclosed risks, when nobody understands the size of the potential problem until it’s too late. We always hear after these explosions: “If only we had known.” Right now, the knowing isn't possible. There’s no reason for these risky investments to be disclosed publicly because it’s not required.</p>\n<p>The Securities and Exchange Commission and its new Chairman Gary Gensler can and should fix this. Ample and timely disclosure requirements similar to 13F and 13G filings on major short positions and derivative-based strategies would give market participants the information they need to better understand the risks they take, whether they want to be on the other side of those positions&nbsp;or join them.</p>\n<p>This is an urgent matter. More of today’s financial markets are controlled by complex, derivative-based and highly leveraged investment strategies. They are often bespoke and hard to value at any given time. And too often, investors in these strategies — including highly sophisticated investors, endowments and other funds — are being told to accept their merits on faith, as well as the risk that goes with them.</p>\n<p>Maybe this is fine for some investors, especially those receiving an attractive return. But there is risk in any investment, and the person who takes a large position using an inscrutable strategy is himself a source of unseen risk. A highly leveraged strategy can involve people and institutions who had no idea they were depending on the success of a complex instrument. The cascading effect, as we know from the global financial crisis, is profound. And unseen.</p>\n<p>I'm aware, of course, that disclosure requirements can be expensive and create complexity. They may also deprive investors of the secrecy their strategies depend on. But think of the overriding benefits: Greater disclosure brings greater transparency, which leads to healthy markets. The more you know, the less risk you take.</p>\n<p>I saw it firsthand at the SEC, which I led for eight years. There, we introduced several important disclosure requirements that revolutionized Wall Street’s practices and brought greater confidence in, for example, financial audits, the release of material information to the public, mutual funds pricing, performance ratings and risk profiles. When we first proposed greater disclosure requirements for these areas, we were told it would be too expensive and too radical. Now, investors and public companies embrace them.</p>\n<p>That being said, disclosure can often be used to hide, not reveal. At the SEC I fought hard for “plain language” requirements in prospectuses for companies and mutual funds. It seemed to me then, and still does today, that a convoluted or deliberately dense prospectus is as good as no prospectus as all. Disclosure is not the same as transparency.</p>\n<p>I've also seen lawyers use disclosure requirements to present a picture of reality that is opposite the truth. We must remember that the complexity of derivative-based strategies is not a bug but a feature. Any eventual rule should have one overriding goal: Explain the investment as clearly as possible and, importantly, its potential risks, including the amount of potential loss the investment entails.</p>\n<p>There is yet another good reason for the SEC to act energetically to promote greater and more useful disclosure requirements: The investing public wants it. Whether it’s in the area of shareholder activism, or the claims made by companies regarding their environmental, social or governance (ESG) efforts, or their political contributions, investors want to know more about how their companies are performing.</p>\n<p>This is a good thing. In fact, it’s the very best expression of free market economics. Free people want to make informed decisions about how they invest their money. That’s no impingement on a free market. It’s how we get one.</p>","source":"lsy1584095487587","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Archegos Collapse Exposes an SEC Blind Spot</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nArchegos Collapse Exposes an SEC Blind Spot\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-04-26 20:32 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-04-26/archegos-collapse-exposes-an-sec-blind-spot?srnd=premium-asia><strong>Bloomberg</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>No financial market is without its risks, but if there’s one thing I’ve learned in a career as a securities regulator, market chairman, corporate director and investor, it’s this: The more you know, ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-04-26/archegos-collapse-exposes-an-sec-blind-spot?srnd=premium-asia\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{},"source_url":"https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-04-26/archegos-collapse-exposes-an-sec-blind-spot?srnd=premium-asia","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1149183354","content_text":"No financial market is without its risks, but if there’s one thing I’ve learned in a career as a securities regulator, market chairman, corporate director and investor, it’s this: The more you know, the less risk you take.\nThat's why I support greater disclosure requirements for the kinds of investments that are often held in the shadows, away from public scrutiny and awareness despite their size and potential impact on other investors and markets.\nPrivate investors, hedge funds and others have long been able to take short positions in companies — betting against their future rise in value — without disclosure. And with the collapse of Archegos Capital Management, greater attention is now being paid to the ability of institutional investors and money managers  to hold highly complex and risky derivative-based investments without letting anyone know — including their own investors and counterparties.\nThis can't continue. First of all, disclosure requirements shouldn’t treat certain kinds of investments differently than others. If a hedge fund or investor takes a major long position in a company, defined as greater than 5% of outstanding shares, that has to be disclosed. Why shouldn’t the same standard apply to the same investor taking a major short position?\nMore critically, greater disclosure helps markets price risk better. Financial crises and major losses often emerge from unseen and undisclosed risks, when nobody understands the size of the potential problem until it’s too late. We always hear after these explosions: “If only we had known.” Right now, the knowing isn't possible. There’s no reason for these risky investments to be disclosed publicly because it’s not required.\nThe Securities and Exchange Commission and its new Chairman Gary Gensler can and should fix this. Ample and timely disclosure requirements similar to 13F and 13G filings on major short positions and derivative-based strategies would give market participants the information they need to better understand the risks they take, whether they want to be on the other side of those positions or join them.\nThis is an urgent matter. More of today’s financial markets are controlled by complex, derivative-based and highly leveraged investment strategies. They are often bespoke and hard to value at any given time. And too often, investors in these strategies — including highly sophisticated investors, endowments and other funds — are being told to accept their merits on faith, as well as the risk that goes with them.\nMaybe this is fine for some investors, especially those receiving an attractive return. But there is risk in any investment, and the person who takes a large position using an inscrutable strategy is himself a source of unseen risk. A highly leveraged strategy can involve people and institutions who had no idea they were depending on the success of a complex instrument. The cascading effect, as we know from the global financial crisis, is profound. And unseen.\nI'm aware, of course, that disclosure requirements can be expensive and create complexity. They may also deprive investors of the secrecy their strategies depend on. But think of the overriding benefits: Greater disclosure brings greater transparency, which leads to healthy markets. The more you know, the less risk you take.\nI saw it firsthand at the SEC, which I led for eight years. There, we introduced several important disclosure requirements that revolutionized Wall Street’s practices and brought greater confidence in, for example, financial audits, the release of material information to the public, mutual funds pricing, performance ratings and risk profiles. When we first proposed greater disclosure requirements for these areas, we were told it would be too expensive and too radical. Now, investors and public companies embrace them.\nThat being said, disclosure can often be used to hide, not reveal. At the SEC I fought hard for “plain language” requirements in prospectuses for companies and mutual funds. It seemed to me then, and still does today, that a convoluted or deliberately dense prospectus is as good as no prospectus as all. Disclosure is not the same as transparency.\nI've also seen lawyers use disclosure requirements to present a picture of reality that is opposite the truth. We must remember that the complexity of derivative-based strategies is not a bug but a feature. Any eventual rule should have one overriding goal: Explain the investment as clearly as possible and, importantly, its potential risks, including the amount of potential loss the investment entails.\nThere is yet another good reason for the SEC to act energetically to promote greater and more useful disclosure requirements: The investing public wants it. Whether it’s in the area of shareholder activism, or the claims made by companies regarding their environmental, social or governance (ESG) efforts, or their political contributions, investors want to know more about how their companies are performing.\nThis is a good thing. In fact, it’s the very best expression of free market economics. Free people want to make informed decisions about how they invest their money. That’s no impingement on a free market. It’s how we get one.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"langContent":"EN"},{"id":374845949,"gmtCreate":1619441196181,"gmtModify":1634273473669,"author":{"id":"3571099496073631","authorId":"3571099496073631","name":"Lzoakz","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/1b25fe5f61dfcb3947c3347cb6e1bd6f","vip":1,"crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"idStr":"3571099496073631","authorIdStr":"3571099496073631"},"htmlText":"?","listText":"?","text":"?","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/374845949","repostId":1149183354,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1149183354","pubTimestamp":1619440351,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1149183354?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-04-26 20:32","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Archegos Collapse Exposes an SEC Blind Spot","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1149183354","media":"Bloomberg","summary":"No financial market is without its risks, but if there’s one thing I’ve learned in a career as a sec","content":"<p>No financial market is without its risks, but if there’s one thing I’ve learned in a career as a securities regulator, market chairman, corporate director and investor, it’s this: The more you know, the less risk you take.</p>\n<p>That's why I support greater disclosure requirements for the kinds of investments that are often held in the shadows, away from public scrutiny and awareness despite their size and potential impact on other investors and markets.</p>\n<p>Private investors, hedge funds and others have long been able to take short positions in companies — betting against their future rise in value —&nbsp;without disclosure. And with the collapse of Archegos Capital Management, greater attention is now being paid to the ability of institutional investors and money managers&nbsp; to hold highly complex and risky derivative-based investments without letting anyone know — including their own investors and counterparties.</p>\n<p>This can't continue. First of all, disclosure requirements shouldn’t treat certain kinds of investments differently than others. If a hedge fund or investor takes a major long position in a company, defined as greater than 5% of outstanding shares, that has to be disclosed. Why shouldn’t the same standard apply to the same investor taking a major short position?</p>\n<p>More critically, greater disclosure helps markets price risk better. Financial crises and major losses often emerge from unseen and undisclosed risks, when nobody understands the size of the potential problem until it’s too late. We always hear after these explosions: “If only we had known.” Right now, the knowing isn't possible. There’s no reason for these risky investments to be disclosed publicly because it’s not required.</p>\n<p>The Securities and Exchange Commission and its new Chairman Gary Gensler can and should fix this. Ample and timely disclosure requirements similar to 13F and 13G filings on major short positions and derivative-based strategies would give market participants the information they need to better understand the risks they take, whether they want to be on the other side of those positions&nbsp;or join them.</p>\n<p>This is an urgent matter. More of today’s financial markets are controlled by complex, derivative-based and highly leveraged investment strategies. They are often bespoke and hard to value at any given time. And too often, investors in these strategies — including highly sophisticated investors, endowments and other funds — are being told to accept their merits on faith, as well as the risk that goes with them.</p>\n<p>Maybe this is fine for some investors, especially those receiving an attractive return. But there is risk in any investment, and the person who takes a large position using an inscrutable strategy is himself a source of unseen risk. A highly leveraged strategy can involve people and institutions who had no idea they were depending on the success of a complex instrument. The cascading effect, as we know from the global financial crisis, is profound. And unseen.</p>\n<p>I'm aware, of course, that disclosure requirements can be expensive and create complexity. They may also deprive investors of the secrecy their strategies depend on. But think of the overriding benefits: Greater disclosure brings greater transparency, which leads to healthy markets. The more you know, the less risk you take.</p>\n<p>I saw it firsthand at the SEC, which I led for eight years. There, we introduced several important disclosure requirements that revolutionized Wall Street’s practices and brought greater confidence in, for example, financial audits, the release of material information to the public, mutual funds pricing, performance ratings and risk profiles. When we first proposed greater disclosure requirements for these areas, we were told it would be too expensive and too radical. Now, investors and public companies embrace them.</p>\n<p>That being said, disclosure can often be used to hide, not reveal. At the SEC I fought hard for “plain language” requirements in prospectuses for companies and mutual funds. It seemed to me then, and still does today, that a convoluted or deliberately dense prospectus is as good as no prospectus as all. Disclosure is not the same as transparency.</p>\n<p>I've also seen lawyers use disclosure requirements to present a picture of reality that is opposite the truth. We must remember that the complexity of derivative-based strategies is not a bug but a feature. Any eventual rule should have one overriding goal: Explain the investment as clearly as possible and, importantly, its potential risks, including the amount of potential loss the investment entails.</p>\n<p>There is yet another good reason for the SEC to act energetically to promote greater and more useful disclosure requirements: The investing public wants it. Whether it’s in the area of shareholder activism, or the claims made by companies regarding their environmental, social or governance (ESG) efforts, or their political contributions, investors want to know more about how their companies are performing.</p>\n<p>This is a good thing. In fact, it’s the very best expression of free market economics. Free people want to make informed decisions about how they invest their money. That’s no impingement on a free market. It’s how we get one.</p>","source":"lsy1584095487587","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Archegos Collapse Exposes an SEC Blind Spot</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nArchegos Collapse Exposes an SEC Blind Spot\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-04-26 20:32 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-04-26/archegos-collapse-exposes-an-sec-blind-spot?srnd=premium-asia><strong>Bloomberg</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>No financial market is without its risks, but if there’s one thing I’ve learned in a career as a securities regulator, market chairman, corporate director and investor, it’s this: The more you know, ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-04-26/archegos-collapse-exposes-an-sec-blind-spot?srnd=premium-asia\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{},"source_url":"https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-04-26/archegos-collapse-exposes-an-sec-blind-spot?srnd=premium-asia","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1149183354","content_text":"No financial market is without its risks, but if there’s one thing I’ve learned in a career as a securities regulator, market chairman, corporate director and investor, it’s this: The more you know, the less risk you take.\nThat's why I support greater disclosure requirements for the kinds of investments that are often held in the shadows, away from public scrutiny and awareness despite their size and potential impact on other investors and markets.\nPrivate investors, hedge funds and others have long been able to take short positions in companies — betting against their future rise in value — without disclosure. And with the collapse of Archegos Capital Management, greater attention is now being paid to the ability of institutional investors and money managers  to hold highly complex and risky derivative-based investments without letting anyone know — including their own investors and counterparties.\nThis can't continue. First of all, disclosure requirements shouldn’t treat certain kinds of investments differently than others. If a hedge fund or investor takes a major long position in a company, defined as greater than 5% of outstanding shares, that has to be disclosed. Why shouldn’t the same standard apply to the same investor taking a major short position?\nMore critically, greater disclosure helps markets price risk better. Financial crises and major losses often emerge from unseen and undisclosed risks, when nobody understands the size of the potential problem until it’s too late. We always hear after these explosions: “If only we had known.” Right now, the knowing isn't possible. There’s no reason for these risky investments to be disclosed publicly because it’s not required.\nThe Securities and Exchange Commission and its new Chairman Gary Gensler can and should fix this. Ample and timely disclosure requirements similar to 13F and 13G filings on major short positions and derivative-based strategies would give market participants the information they need to better understand the risks they take, whether they want to be on the other side of those positions or join them.\nThis is an urgent matter. More of today’s financial markets are controlled by complex, derivative-based and highly leveraged investment strategies. They are often bespoke and hard to value at any given time. And too often, investors in these strategies — including highly sophisticated investors, endowments and other funds — are being told to accept their merits on faith, as well as the risk that goes with them.\nMaybe this is fine for some investors, especially those receiving an attractive return. But there is risk in any investment, and the person who takes a large position using an inscrutable strategy is himself a source of unseen risk. A highly leveraged strategy can involve people and institutions who had no idea they were depending on the success of a complex instrument. The cascading effect, as we know from the global financial crisis, is profound. And unseen.\nI'm aware, of course, that disclosure requirements can be expensive and create complexity. They may also deprive investors of the secrecy their strategies depend on. But think of the overriding benefits: Greater disclosure brings greater transparency, which leads to healthy markets. The more you know, the less risk you take.\nI saw it firsthand at the SEC, which I led for eight years. There, we introduced several important disclosure requirements that revolutionized Wall Street’s practices and brought greater confidence in, for example, financial audits, the release of material information to the public, mutual funds pricing, performance ratings and risk profiles. When we first proposed greater disclosure requirements for these areas, we were told it would be too expensive and too radical. Now, investors and public companies embrace them.\nThat being said, disclosure can often be used to hide, not reveal. At the SEC I fought hard for “plain language” requirements in prospectuses for companies and mutual funds. It seemed to me then, and still does today, that a convoluted or deliberately dense prospectus is as good as no prospectus as all. Disclosure is not the same as transparency.\nI've also seen lawyers use disclosure requirements to present a picture of reality that is opposite the truth. We must remember that the complexity of derivative-based strategies is not a bug but a feature. Any eventual rule should have one overriding goal: Explain the investment as clearly as possible and, importantly, its potential risks, including the amount of potential loss the investment entails.\nThere is yet another good reason for the SEC to act energetically to promote greater and more useful disclosure requirements: The investing public wants it. Whether it’s in the area of shareholder activism, or the claims made by companies regarding their environmental, social or governance (ESG) efforts, or their political contributions, investors want to know more about how their companies are performing.\nThis is a good thing. In fact, it’s the very best expression of free market economics. Free people want to make informed decisions about how they invest their money. That’s no impingement on a free market. It’s how we get one.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"langContent":"EN"},{"id":374843878,"gmtCreate":1619440734794,"gmtModify":1634273476710,"author":{"id":"3554883337622926","authorId":"3554883337622926","name":"Andus","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/7a73749b7c39c53b92ecae330a1abe0a","vip":1,"crmLevel":6,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"idStr":"3554883337622926","authorIdStr":"3554883337622926"},"htmlText":"Please like my post! Thank you [Happy]&nbsp;","listText":"Please like my post! Thank you [Happy]&nbsp;","text":"Please like my post! Thank you [Happy]","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/374843878","repostId":1149183354,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1149183354","pubTimestamp":1619440351,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1149183354?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-04-26 20:32","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Archegos Collapse Exposes an SEC Blind Spot","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1149183354","media":"Bloomberg","summary":"No financial market is without its risks, but if there’s one thing I’ve learned in a career as a sec","content":"<p>No financial market is without its risks, but if there’s one thing I’ve learned in a career as a securities regulator, market chairman, corporate director and investor, it’s this: The more you know, the less risk you take.</p>\n<p>That's why I support greater disclosure requirements for the kinds of investments that are often held in the shadows, away from public scrutiny and awareness despite their size and potential impact on other investors and markets.</p>\n<p>Private investors, hedge funds and others have long been able to take short positions in companies — betting against their future rise in value —&nbsp;without disclosure. And with the collapse of Archegos Capital Management, greater attention is now being paid to the ability of institutional investors and money managers&nbsp; to hold highly complex and risky derivative-based investments without letting anyone know — including their own investors and counterparties.</p>\n<p>This can't continue. First of all, disclosure requirements shouldn’t treat certain kinds of investments differently than others. If a hedge fund or investor takes a major long position in a company, defined as greater than 5% of outstanding shares, that has to be disclosed. Why shouldn’t the same standard apply to the same investor taking a major short position?</p>\n<p>More critically, greater disclosure helps markets price risk better. Financial crises and major losses often emerge from unseen and undisclosed risks, when nobody understands the size of the potential problem until it’s too late. We always hear after these explosions: “If only we had known.” Right now, the knowing isn't possible. There’s no reason for these risky investments to be disclosed publicly because it’s not required.</p>\n<p>The Securities and Exchange Commission and its new Chairman Gary Gensler can and should fix this. Ample and timely disclosure requirements similar to 13F and 13G filings on major short positions and derivative-based strategies would give market participants the information they need to better understand the risks they take, whether they want to be on the other side of those positions&nbsp;or join them.</p>\n<p>This is an urgent matter. More of today’s financial markets are controlled by complex, derivative-based and highly leveraged investment strategies. They are often bespoke and hard to value at any given time. And too often, investors in these strategies — including highly sophisticated investors, endowments and other funds — are being told to accept their merits on faith, as well as the risk that goes with them.</p>\n<p>Maybe this is fine for some investors, especially those receiving an attractive return. But there is risk in any investment, and the person who takes a large position using an inscrutable strategy is himself a source of unseen risk. A highly leveraged strategy can involve people and institutions who had no idea they were depending on the success of a complex instrument. The cascading effect, as we know from the global financial crisis, is profound. And unseen.</p>\n<p>I'm aware, of course, that disclosure requirements can be expensive and create complexity. They may also deprive investors of the secrecy their strategies depend on. But think of the overriding benefits: Greater disclosure brings greater transparency, which leads to healthy markets. The more you know, the less risk you take.</p>\n<p>I saw it firsthand at the SEC, which I led for eight years. There, we introduced several important disclosure requirements that revolutionized Wall Street’s practices and brought greater confidence in, for example, financial audits, the release of material information to the public, mutual funds pricing, performance ratings and risk profiles. When we first proposed greater disclosure requirements for these areas, we were told it would be too expensive and too radical. Now, investors and public companies embrace them.</p>\n<p>That being said, disclosure can often be used to hide, not reveal. At the SEC I fought hard for “plain language” requirements in prospectuses for companies and mutual funds. It seemed to me then, and still does today, that a convoluted or deliberately dense prospectus is as good as no prospectus as all. Disclosure is not the same as transparency.</p>\n<p>I've also seen lawyers use disclosure requirements to present a picture of reality that is opposite the truth. We must remember that the complexity of derivative-based strategies is not a bug but a feature. Any eventual rule should have one overriding goal: Explain the investment as clearly as possible and, importantly, its potential risks, including the amount of potential loss the investment entails.</p>\n<p>There is yet another good reason for the SEC to act energetically to promote greater and more useful disclosure requirements: The investing public wants it. Whether it’s in the area of shareholder activism, or the claims made by companies regarding their environmental, social or governance (ESG) efforts, or their political contributions, investors want to know more about how their companies are performing.</p>\n<p>This is a good thing. In fact, it’s the very best expression of free market economics. Free people want to make informed decisions about how they invest their money. That’s no impingement on a free market. It’s how we get one.</p>","source":"lsy1584095487587","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Archegos Collapse Exposes an SEC Blind Spot</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nArchegos Collapse Exposes an SEC Blind Spot\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-04-26 20:32 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-04-26/archegos-collapse-exposes-an-sec-blind-spot?srnd=premium-asia><strong>Bloomberg</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>No financial market is without its risks, but if there’s one thing I’ve learned in a career as a securities regulator, market chairman, corporate director and investor, it’s this: The more you know, ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-04-26/archegos-collapse-exposes-an-sec-blind-spot?srnd=premium-asia\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{},"source_url":"https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-04-26/archegos-collapse-exposes-an-sec-blind-spot?srnd=premium-asia","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1149183354","content_text":"No financial market is without its risks, but if there’s one thing I’ve learned in a career as a securities regulator, market chairman, corporate director and investor, it’s this: The more you know, the less risk you take.\nThat's why I support greater disclosure requirements for the kinds of investments that are often held in the shadows, away from public scrutiny and awareness despite their size and potential impact on other investors and markets.\nPrivate investors, hedge funds and others have long been able to take short positions in companies — betting against their future rise in value — without disclosure. And with the collapse of Archegos Capital Management, greater attention is now being paid to the ability of institutional investors and money managers  to hold highly complex and risky derivative-based investments without letting anyone know — including their own investors and counterparties.\nThis can't continue. First of all, disclosure requirements shouldn’t treat certain kinds of investments differently than others. If a hedge fund or investor takes a major long position in a company, defined as greater than 5% of outstanding shares, that has to be disclosed. Why shouldn’t the same standard apply to the same investor taking a major short position?\nMore critically, greater disclosure helps markets price risk better. Financial crises and major losses often emerge from unseen and undisclosed risks, when nobody understands the size of the potential problem until it’s too late. We always hear after these explosions: “If only we had known.” Right now, the knowing isn't possible. There’s no reason for these risky investments to be disclosed publicly because it’s not required.\nThe Securities and Exchange Commission and its new Chairman Gary Gensler can and should fix this. Ample and timely disclosure requirements similar to 13F and 13G filings on major short positions and derivative-based strategies would give market participants the information they need to better understand the risks they take, whether they want to be on the other side of those positions or join them.\nThis is an urgent matter. More of today’s financial markets are controlled by complex, derivative-based and highly leveraged investment strategies. They are often bespoke and hard to value at any given time. And too often, investors in these strategies — including highly sophisticated investors, endowments and other funds — are being told to accept their merits on faith, as well as the risk that goes with them.\nMaybe this is fine for some investors, especially those receiving an attractive return. But there is risk in any investment, and the person who takes a large position using an inscrutable strategy is himself a source of unseen risk. A highly leveraged strategy can involve people and institutions who had no idea they were depending on the success of a complex instrument. The cascading effect, as we know from the global financial crisis, is profound. And unseen.\nI'm aware, of course, that disclosure requirements can be expensive and create complexity. They may also deprive investors of the secrecy their strategies depend on. But think of the overriding benefits: Greater disclosure brings greater transparency, which leads to healthy markets. The more you know, the less risk you take.\nI saw it firsthand at the SEC, which I led for eight years. There, we introduced several important disclosure requirements that revolutionized Wall Street’s practices and brought greater confidence in, for example, financial audits, the release of material information to the public, mutual funds pricing, performance ratings and risk profiles. When we first proposed greater disclosure requirements for these areas, we were told it would be too expensive and too radical. Now, investors and public companies embrace them.\nThat being said, disclosure can often be used to hide, not reveal. At the SEC I fought hard for “plain language” requirements in prospectuses for companies and mutual funds. It seemed to me then, and still does today, that a convoluted or deliberately dense prospectus is as good as no prospectus as all. Disclosure is not the same as transparency.\nI've also seen lawyers use disclosure requirements to present a picture of reality that is opposite the truth. We must remember that the complexity of derivative-based strategies is not a bug but a feature. Any eventual rule should have one overriding goal: Explain the investment as clearly as possible and, importantly, its potential risks, including the amount of potential loss the investment entails.\nThere is yet another good reason for the SEC to act energetically to promote greater and more useful disclosure requirements: The investing public wants it. Whether it’s in the area of shareholder activism, or the claims made by companies regarding their environmental, social or governance (ESG) efforts, or their political contributions, investors want to know more about how their companies are performing.\nThis is a good thing. In fact, it’s the very best expression of free market economics. Free people want to make informed decisions about how they invest their money. That’s no impingement on a free market. It’s how we get one.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"langContent":"EN"},{"id":374857319,"gmtCreate":1619440517731,"gmtModify":1634273479133,"author":{"id":"3571614044609884","authorId":"3571614044609884","name":"Cyou2","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/3a385102af21e008d83ec34e819d2fe8","vip":1,"crmLevel":3,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"idStr":"3571614044609884","authorIdStr":"3571614044609884"},"htmlText":"Ok","listText":"Ok","text":"Ok","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/374857319","repostId":1149183354,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1149183354","pubTimestamp":1619440351,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1149183354?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-04-26 20:32","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Archegos Collapse Exposes an SEC Blind Spot","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1149183354","media":"Bloomberg","summary":"No financial market is without its risks, but if there’s one thing I’ve learned in a career as a sec","content":"<p>No financial market is without its risks, but if there’s one thing I’ve learned in a career as a securities regulator, market chairman, corporate director and investor, it’s this: The more you know, the less risk you take.</p>\n<p>That's why I support greater disclosure requirements for the kinds of investments that are often held in the shadows, away from public scrutiny and awareness despite their size and potential impact on other investors and markets.</p>\n<p>Private investors, hedge funds and others have long been able to take short positions in companies — betting against their future rise in value —&nbsp;without disclosure. And with the collapse of Archegos Capital Management, greater attention is now being paid to the ability of institutional investors and money managers&nbsp; to hold highly complex and risky derivative-based investments without letting anyone know — including their own investors and counterparties.</p>\n<p>This can't continue. First of all, disclosure requirements shouldn’t treat certain kinds of investments differently than others. If a hedge fund or investor takes a major long position in a company, defined as greater than 5% of outstanding shares, that has to be disclosed. Why shouldn’t the same standard apply to the same investor taking a major short position?</p>\n<p>More critically, greater disclosure helps markets price risk better. Financial crises and major losses often emerge from unseen and undisclosed risks, when nobody understands the size of the potential problem until it’s too late. We always hear after these explosions: “If only we had known.” Right now, the knowing isn't possible. There’s no reason for these risky investments to be disclosed publicly because it’s not required.</p>\n<p>The Securities and Exchange Commission and its new Chairman Gary Gensler can and should fix this. Ample and timely disclosure requirements similar to 13F and 13G filings on major short positions and derivative-based strategies would give market participants the information they need to better understand the risks they take, whether they want to be on the other side of those positions&nbsp;or join them.</p>\n<p>This is an urgent matter. More of today’s financial markets are controlled by complex, derivative-based and highly leveraged investment strategies. They are often bespoke and hard to value at any given time. And too often, investors in these strategies — including highly sophisticated investors, endowments and other funds — are being told to accept their merits on faith, as well as the risk that goes with them.</p>\n<p>Maybe this is fine for some investors, especially those receiving an attractive return. But there is risk in any investment, and the person who takes a large position using an inscrutable strategy is himself a source of unseen risk. A highly leveraged strategy can involve people and institutions who had no idea they were depending on the success of a complex instrument. The cascading effect, as we know from the global financial crisis, is profound. And unseen.</p>\n<p>I'm aware, of course, that disclosure requirements can be expensive and create complexity. They may also deprive investors of the secrecy their strategies depend on. But think of the overriding benefits: Greater disclosure brings greater transparency, which leads to healthy markets. The more you know, the less risk you take.</p>\n<p>I saw it firsthand at the SEC, which I led for eight years. There, we introduced several important disclosure requirements that revolutionized Wall Street’s practices and brought greater confidence in, for example, financial audits, the release of material information to the public, mutual funds pricing, performance ratings and risk profiles. When we first proposed greater disclosure requirements for these areas, we were told it would be too expensive and too radical. Now, investors and public companies embrace them.</p>\n<p>That being said, disclosure can often be used to hide, not reveal. At the SEC I fought hard for “plain language” requirements in prospectuses for companies and mutual funds. It seemed to me then, and still does today, that a convoluted or deliberately dense prospectus is as good as no prospectus as all. Disclosure is not the same as transparency.</p>\n<p>I've also seen lawyers use disclosure requirements to present a picture of reality that is opposite the truth. We must remember that the complexity of derivative-based strategies is not a bug but a feature. Any eventual rule should have one overriding goal: Explain the investment as clearly as possible and, importantly, its potential risks, including the amount of potential loss the investment entails.</p>\n<p>There is yet another good reason for the SEC to act energetically to promote greater and more useful disclosure requirements: The investing public wants it. Whether it’s in the area of shareholder activism, or the claims made by companies regarding their environmental, social or governance (ESG) efforts, or their political contributions, investors want to know more about how their companies are performing.</p>\n<p>This is a good thing. In fact, it’s the very best expression of free market economics. Free people want to make informed decisions about how they invest their money. That’s no impingement on a free market. It’s how we get one.</p>","source":"lsy1584095487587","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Archegos Collapse Exposes an SEC Blind Spot</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nArchegos Collapse Exposes an SEC Blind Spot\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-04-26 20:32 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-04-26/archegos-collapse-exposes-an-sec-blind-spot?srnd=premium-asia><strong>Bloomberg</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>No financial market is without its risks, but if there’s one thing I’ve learned in a career as a securities regulator, market chairman, corporate director and investor, it’s this: The more you know, ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-04-26/archegos-collapse-exposes-an-sec-blind-spot?srnd=premium-asia\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{},"source_url":"https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-04-26/archegos-collapse-exposes-an-sec-blind-spot?srnd=premium-asia","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1149183354","content_text":"No financial market is without its risks, but if there’s one thing I’ve learned in a career as a securities regulator, market chairman, corporate director and investor, it’s this: The more you know, the less risk you take.\nThat's why I support greater disclosure requirements for the kinds of investments that are often held in the shadows, away from public scrutiny and awareness despite their size and potential impact on other investors and markets.\nPrivate investors, hedge funds and others have long been able to take short positions in companies — betting against their future rise in value — without disclosure. And with the collapse of Archegos Capital Management, greater attention is now being paid to the ability of institutional investors and money managers  to hold highly complex and risky derivative-based investments without letting anyone know — including their own investors and counterparties.\nThis can't continue. First of all, disclosure requirements shouldn’t treat certain kinds of investments differently than others. If a hedge fund or investor takes a major long position in a company, defined as greater than 5% of outstanding shares, that has to be disclosed. Why shouldn’t the same standard apply to the same investor taking a major short position?\nMore critically, greater disclosure helps markets price risk better. Financial crises and major losses often emerge from unseen and undisclosed risks, when nobody understands the size of the potential problem until it’s too late. We always hear after these explosions: “If only we had known.” Right now, the knowing isn't possible. There’s no reason for these risky investments to be disclosed publicly because it’s not required.\nThe Securities and Exchange Commission and its new Chairman Gary Gensler can and should fix this. Ample and timely disclosure requirements similar to 13F and 13G filings on major short positions and derivative-based strategies would give market participants the information they need to better understand the risks they take, whether they want to be on the other side of those positions or join them.\nThis is an urgent matter. More of today’s financial markets are controlled by complex, derivative-based and highly leveraged investment strategies. They are often bespoke and hard to value at any given time. And too often, investors in these strategies — including highly sophisticated investors, endowments and other funds — are being told to accept their merits on faith, as well as the risk that goes with them.\nMaybe this is fine for some investors, especially those receiving an attractive return. But there is risk in any investment, and the person who takes a large position using an inscrutable strategy is himself a source of unseen risk. A highly leveraged strategy can involve people and institutions who had no idea they were depending on the success of a complex instrument. The cascading effect, as we know from the global financial crisis, is profound. And unseen.\nI'm aware, of course, that disclosure requirements can be expensive and create complexity. They may also deprive investors of the secrecy their strategies depend on. But think of the overriding benefits: Greater disclosure brings greater transparency, which leads to healthy markets. The more you know, the less risk you take.\nI saw it firsthand at the SEC, which I led for eight years. There, we introduced several important disclosure requirements that revolutionized Wall Street’s practices and brought greater confidence in, for example, financial audits, the release of material information to the public, mutual funds pricing, performance ratings and risk profiles. When we first proposed greater disclosure requirements for these areas, we were told it would be too expensive and too radical. Now, investors and public companies embrace them.\nThat being said, disclosure can often be used to hide, not reveal. At the SEC I fought hard for “plain language” requirements in prospectuses for companies and mutual funds. It seemed to me then, and still does today, that a convoluted or deliberately dense prospectus is as good as no prospectus as all. Disclosure is not the same as transparency.\nI've also seen lawyers use disclosure requirements to present a picture of reality that is opposite the truth. We must remember that the complexity of derivative-based strategies is not a bug but a feature. Any eventual rule should have one overriding goal: Explain the investment as clearly as possible and, importantly, its potential risks, including the amount of potential loss the investment entails.\nThere is yet another good reason for the SEC to act energetically to promote greater and more useful disclosure requirements: The investing public wants it. Whether it’s in the area of shareholder activism, or the claims made by companies regarding their environmental, social or governance (ESG) efforts, or their political contributions, investors want to know more about how their companies are performing.\nThis is a good thing. In fact, it’s the very best expression of free market economics. Free people want to make informed decisions about how they invest their money. That’s no impingement on a free market. It’s how we get one.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"comments":[{"id":4138611,"gmtCreate":1619441267065,"gmtModify":1635510863640,"authorId":3571099496073631,"author":{"id":3571099496073631,"idStr":"3571099496073631","authorId":3571099496073631,"name":"Lzoakz","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/1b25fe5f61dfcb3947c3347cb6e1bd6f","vip":1,"crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"individualDisplayBadges":[]},"repliedAuthorId":0,"objectId":374857319,"type":1,"supId":0,"prevId":0,"content":"Ok","text":"Ok","html":"Ok"}],"langContent":"EN"}],"hasMoreComments":true,"newsSizeData":{"likeSize":21,"commentSize":13,"repostSize":0,"favoriteSize":0,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false}}