January 2026 was another month with strong inflows for the U.S. ETF industry.
These inflows occurred in a complex mix of geopolitical tension, unchanged central bank paths, and shifting fiscal narratives that collectively shaped global equity and bond markets. Despite recurring volatility, investor sentiment across major markets remained cautiously constructive, buoyed by resilient economic data and still‑supportive financial conditions.
Geopolitics was the dominant macro-overhang. The month saw U.S. military action in Venezuela, renewed threats of strikes on Iran, and escalating friction between Washington and NATO allies over Greenland, adding layers of uncertainty, particularly for energy and commodity markets. These tensions helped propel oil prices higher and contributed to a weaker U.S. dollar mid‑month before a sharp rebound. European markets felt the spillover through elevated risk premia and heightened sensitivity to U.S.–EU trade rhetoric, especially with tariff threats resurfacing.
Within this environment the Federal Reserve held rates stable at 3.50%–3.75% at its January meeting, signalling a pause after its 2025 interest rate easing amid still elevated inflation and a softening but resilient labor market.
In line with the Federal Reserve, the European Central Bank (ECB) remained also on hold, even as Eurozone inflation (1.9%) fell under the ceiling of the ECB inflation target in December. The same is true for the Bank of England (BoE), as the BoE kept its rate stable, after lowering interest rates by 25 basis points (bps) to 3.75% in December. The Bank of Japan (BoJ) kept its policy rate also stable in January, as the BoJ hiked its policy rate to a 30-year high at 0.75% in December 2025.
Fiscal policy also shaped the performance of the securities markets. The U.S. continued to run large deficits, raising expectations of elevated Treasury issuance that contributed to a further steepening in the U.S. yield curve. In Europe, fiscal consolidation efforts were more measured, with Germany’s economic indicators improving and yields rising accordingly. The Eurozone’s more disciplined stance kept spreads stable, supporting a relatively favorable environment for corporate credit.
The overall somewhat positive macro indicators led to a positive start of the year for equities globally, while markets absorbed negative news with remarkable composure. At the same time, bond markets delivered mixed returns, with long‑dated yields rising globally—most notably in Japan—while Germany remained an exception. Corporate bonds fared better as spreads narrowed in line with healthy balance sheets and steady economic momentum.
From the perspective of the global ETF industry, the performance of the underlying markets led, in combination with the estimated net flows, to increasing assets under management (from $18,690.6 bn as of December 31, 2025, to $19,517.6 bn at the end of January 2026). At a closer look, the increase in assets under management of $827.0 bn for January was driven by the performance of the underlying markets (+$567.8 bn), while estimated net inflows added (+$259.2 bn) to the increase in assets under management.
Assets Under Management by Asset Type
As for the overall structure of the global ETF industry, it was not surprising equity ETFs ($14,908.0 bn) held the majority of assets at the end of January, followed by bond ETFs ($3,235.5 bn), alternatives ETFs ($610.7 bn), commodities ETFs ($555.2 bn), money market ETFs ($107.5 bn), mixed-assets ETFs ($79.9 bn), and “other” ETFs ($20.8 bn).
Graph 1: Market Share, Assets Under Management in the Global ETF Industry by Asset Type, January 31, 2026
Source: LSEG Lipper
Despite the current market environment, it is not surprising that the assets under management for all asset types with the exception of alternatives and “other” marked an all-time high at the end of January.
ETF Flows by Asset Type
The inflows in the global ETF industry for January were driven by equity ETFs (+$169.6 bn), followed by bond ETFs (+$70.2 bn), commodities ETFs (+$70.2 bn), mixed-assets ETFs (+$3.4 bn), money market ETFs (+$3.2 bn), and alternatives ETFs (+$1.2 bn). On the other side of the table, “other” ETFs were the only asset type posting outflows (-$0.3 bn) for the month.
Graph 2: Estimated Net Sales by Asset Type, January 1, – January 31, 2026 (USD Billions)
Source: LSEG Lipper
Given the market environment, it was no surprise to see that the estimated net inflows into ETFs were led by equity ETFs over the course of January.
Assets Under Management by Lipper Global Classifications
In order to examine the global ETF industry in further detail, a review of the Lipper global classifications will lead to more insights on the structure and concentration of assets within the global ETF industry. At the end of January, the global ETF market was split into 303 different peer groups. The highest assets under management at the end of the month were held by ETFs classified as Equity U.S. ($6,813.7 bn), followed by Equity Global ex U.S. ($1,185.4 bn), Equity U.S. Small & Mid Cap ($1,039.4 bn), Equity Global ($851.5 bn), and Equity Japan ($798.7 bn). These five peer groups accounted for 54.76% of the overall assets under management in the global ETF industry, while the 10 largest classifications by assets under management combined accounted for 69.05%.
Overall, 16 of the 303 peer groups each accounted for more than 1% of assets under management. In total, these 16 peer groups accounted for $15,197.6 bn, or 77.87%, of the overall assets under management.
Graph 3: Ten Largest Lipper Global Classifications by Assets Under Management, January 31, 2026 (USD Billions)
Source: LSEG Lipper
The peer groups on the other side of the table showed some funds in the global ETF market are quite low in assets and their constituents may face the risk of being closed in the near future. They are obviously lacking investor interest and might, therefore, not be profitable for their respective fund promoters.
Graph 4: Ten Smallest Lipper Global Classifications by Assets Under Management, January 31, 2026 (USD Billions)
Source: LSEG Lipper
ETF Flows by Lipper Global Classifications
The net inflows of the 10 best-selling Lipper classifications accounted for $153.7 bn. In line with the overall sales trend for January, equity peer groups (+$119.6 bn) gathered the majority of flows by asset type on the table of the 10 best-selling classifications by estimated net inflows for the month. That said, compared with the concentration of flows for the single regions or domiciles, the 10 best-selling Lipper classifications are more diversified at the global level. This flow pattern is expected, as investors from other regions may have other preferences than U.S. investors.
Given the overall fund flow trend in the global ETF industry and the dominance of the U.S. as the leading market for ETFs, it was not surprising that Equity U.S. (+$28.1 bn) was the best-selling Lipper global classification for the month. It was followed by Equity Emerging Markets Global (+$25.7 bn), Equity Global ex US (+$20.2 bn), Equity Global (+$17.2 bn), and Bond USD Medium Term (+$16.8 bn).
Since money market is in general not considered a core asset type within the global ETF industry, it is not surprising that there were no money market classifications on the table for the best-selling classifications for the global ETF industry.
More generally, these numbers showed the global ETF segment is somewhat highly concentrated when it comes to the estimated net flows by classification. Generally speaking, one would expect the flows into ETFs to be concentrated, even as investors around the globe may have different preferences, the main trends are normally global investment trends and investors use ETFs to implement their strategic market views and short-term asset allocation decisions. These products are made and, therefore, are easy to use for these purposes.
Graph 5: Ten Best- and Worst-Lipper Global Classifications by Estimated Net Sales, January 1- January 31, 2026 (USD Billions)
Source: LSEG Lipper
On the other side of the table, the 10 peer groups with the highest estimated net outflows for the year accounted for $16.4 bn in outflows.
Alternative Equity Leveraged (-$8.1 bn) was the classification with the highest outflows for the month. It was bettered by Equity Sector Consumer Discretionary (-$1.4 bn), Equity U.S. Small & Mid Cap (-$1.4 bn), Equity China (-$1.3 bn), and Alternative Cryptocurrency (-$1.0 bn).
As the bottom of the table is dominated by non-core classifications, this may indicate that ETF investors around the globe sell niche positions in their portfolios while buying into core holdings.
Assets Under Management by Promoters
A closer look at assets under management by promoters in the global ETF industry also showed high concentration, with only 220 of the 771 ETF promoters covered in this report holding assets at or above $1.0 bn, totalling $19,417.3 bn at the end of January. The largest ETF promoter in the global ETF industry—iShares ($5,737.0 bn)—accounted for 29.39% of the overall assets under management, ahead of the number-two promoter—Vanguard ($4,405.7 bn)—and the number-three promoter—State Street SPDR ($2,064.5 bn).
Graph 6: The 10 Largest ETF Promoters by Assets Under Management, January 31, 2026 (USD Billions)
Source: LSEG Lipper
The 10-top promoters accounted for 78.96% of the overall assets under management in the global ETF industry. This meant, in turn, the other 761 ETF promoters which had registered at least one ETF for sale over the observation period accounted for only 21.04% of the overall assets under management. These numbers show that the assets under management at the promoter level in the global ETF industry are somewhat more diversified than in the single regions or domiciles.
ETF Flows by Promoters
Since the global ETF industry is highly concentrated with regard to the assets under management by promoter, it was somewhat surprising that only five of the 10 largest promoters by assets under management were among the 10-top selling ETF promoters for January. Vanguard was the best-selling ETF promoter in the global ETF industry for the month (+$58.8 bn), ahead of iShares (+$47.5 bn) and Invesco (+$11.6 bn).
Graph 7: Ten Best-Selling ETF Promoters, January 1 – January 31, 2026 (USD Billions)
Source: LSEG Lipper
The flows of the 10-top promoters accounted for estimated net inflows of $172.4 bn. As for the overall flow trend in January, it was clear that some of the 771 promoters (171) faced estimated net outflows (-$14.3 bn in total) over the course of the month.
Assets Under Management by Region
ETFs domiciled in North America ($14,604.7 bn) held the highest assets under management in the global ETF industry at the end of January. They were followed by ETFs domiciled in Europe ($3,182.0 bn), ETFs domiciled in the Asia Pacific region ($1,685.5 bn), ETFs domiciled in South and Central America ($27.8 bn), ETFs domiciled in Africa ($16.1 bn), while other domiciles held ($1.4 bn) in assets under management.
Graph 8: Assets Under Management in the Global ETF Industry by Region – January 31, 2026 (in bn USD)
Source: LSEG Lipper
These numbers showcase that the global ETF industry is a truly global industry with a high concentration of the assets under management in a few regions/domiciles.
Estimated Net Flows by Region
By reviewing the estimated flows in the global ETF industry by fund domicile and the respective regions, one needs to bear in mind that some domiciles have specific advantages or disadvantages when it comes to ETF distribution. The U.S. is, for example, a single market and can take profit from the size of the overall market, while in Europe every market is or at least can be an ETF domicile, which means that the local markets are much smaller.
That said, the member states of the European Union (EU) have established a fund regulation (Undertakings in Collective Investments and Transferable Securities, or UCITS) which enables the fund and ETF industry to cross-list all products which are registered for sale in one EU country into another EU country. Since UCITS has become such a well-recognized regulatory standard for mutual funds and ETFs, some countries in South and Central America, as well in Asia, allow UCITS funds to be cross-listed and sold to local investors. It is fair to say that there is no other regulatory framework available that allows funds to be distributed in various countries around the globe. Other mutual recognition agreements, such as those between Hong Kong and China or Hong Kong and Taiwan, are only bilateral and have no global reach. This means that the estimated flows for European ETFs also include flows from South and Central America, as well as from Asia.
Graph 9: Estimated Net Flows in the Global ETF Industry by Region, January 1 – January 31, 2026 (in bn USD)
Source: LSEG Lipper
As one may expect from the assets under management, ETFs domiciled in North America (+$177.4 bn) enjoyed the highest estimated net inflows over the course of January. They were followed by ETFs domiciled in Europe (+$57.1 bn), Asia Pacific (+$25.3 bn), and Africa (+$0.1 bn). Opposite to this, ETFs domiciled in other regions (-$0.02 bn), and South and Central America (-$0.6 bn) saw outflows.
Assets Under Management by Domicile
To investigate the concentration by region further, it makes sense to analyze the assets under management by domicile. As of the end of January, the U.S. was the largest single country ETF domicile ($13,997.2 bn) of the 42 ETF domiciles covered in this report, followed by Ireland ($2,297.3 bn), Japan ($759.3 bn), Canada ($607.5 bn), and Luxembourg ($587.5 bn). These five ETF domiciles account for assets under management of $18,248.9 bn, or 93.50%, of the overall assets under management in the global ETF industry.
Graph 10: Ten Largest ETF Domiciles by Assets Under Management – January 31, 2026 (in bn USD)
Source: LSEG Lipper
These numbers show that the assets under management in the global ETF industry are dominated by a small number of domiciles. Obviously, this concentration is caused by the time period over which ETFs are available in the single domiciles, as well the overall market size of these domiciles. That said, Ireland and Luxembourg are true global ETF hubs since ETFs registered under the UCITS regulation can be sold in various markets around the world.
Estimated Net Flows by Domicile
To add more detail to the estimated net flow numbers, it makes sense to shed a light on the single domiciles. The U.S. (+$158.0 bn) was, as to be expected, the single fund domicile with the highest estimated net inflows for January. It was followed by Ireland (+$42.9 bn), Canada (+$19.4 bn), South Korea (+$12.8 bn), and Luxembourg (+$10.1 bn).
Graph 11: The 10 ETF Domiciles with the Highest Estimated Net Inflows, January 1 – January 31, 2026 (in bn USD)
Source: LSEG Lipper
The list of the 10 best-selling domiciles does an even better job of showcasing that ETFs are truly a global phenomenon since it shows that investors around the globe are using ETFs to implement their asset allocation views into their portfolios.
The views expressed are the views of the author, not necessarily those of LSEG.
This article is for information purposes only and does not constitute any investment advice.
