a tough one but i can see a case for it. if you buy into a mutual fund, all fund participants share in gains and losses (assume a single class of share), i.e. no one person gains or loses more over the other participants. ponzi schemes are of course illegal and the government could make the case that “investors” are always responsible for knowing what they are getting into, and in that respect, “innocent” investors do not exist. it then seems actually fair that all participants should share equally in the gains/losses (all losses in this cases) of the scheme (which was in fact called a fund). just playing devil’s advocate because if it wa me, i’d disclaim all of the above :)