February 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 February 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 February, 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 a U.S. ETF industry perspective, the performance of the underlying markets led, in combination with the estimated net flows, to increasing assets under management (from $13,997.8 bn as of January 31, 2026, to $14,314.0 bn at the end of February). At a closer look, the increase in assets under management of $316.3 bn for February 2026 was driven by estimated net inflows (+$191.0 bn), while the performance of the underlying markets added (+$125.3 bn) to the increase in assets under management.
Assets Under Management in the U.S. ETF Industry
As for the overall structure of the U.S. ETF industry, it was not surprising equity ETFs ($10,919.4 bn) held the majority of assets, followed by bond ETFs ($2,406.7 bn), alternatives ETFs ($506.0 bn), commodities ETFs ($423.9 bn), mixed-assets ETFs ($33.8 bn), and money market ETFs ($24.2 bn).
Graph 1: Market Share, Assets Under Management in the U.S. ETF Industry by Asset Type, February 28, 2026
Source: LSEG Lipper
Given the volatile but positive market environment over the course of the year, it is no surprise that the overall assets under management in the U.S. ETF industry ($14,314.0 bn) hit a new (month end) all-time high at the end of February 2026. When it comes to this, it is noteworthy that the assets under management for all asset types, with the exception of alternatives, also reached a new (month end) all-time high at the end of February.
ETF Flows by Asset Type
The inflows in the U.S. ETF industry for February 2026 were driven by equity ETFs (+$103.9 bn), followed by bond ETFs (+$51.3 bn), money market ETFs (+$18.5 bn), alternatives ETFs (+$9.0 bn), commodities ETFs (+$6.9 bn), and mixed-assets ETFs (+$1.3 bn).
Graph 2: Estimated Net Sales by Asset Type, February 1 – February 28, 2026 (USD Billions)
Source: LSEG Lipper
Given the market environment, it was no surprise to see that equity ETFs led had the highest estimated net inflows over the course of February. That said, it seems to be somewhat unusual that money market ETFs witness estimated net inflows on the level they reached over the course of February. This might be a sign that some U.S. investors have started to put some money on the sidelines as a risk-off move in an environment with increasing geopolitical tensions.
Assets Under Management by Lipper Global Classifications
In order to examine the U.S. ETF markets in further detail, a review of the Lipper global classifications will lead to more insights on the structure and concentration of assets within the U.S. ETF industry. At the end of February 2026, the U.S. ETF market was split into 136 different Lipper global classifications. The highest assets under management at the end of February were held by funds classified as Equity U.S. ($5,847.6 bn), followed by Equity Global ex U.S. ($1,205.7 bn), Equity U.S. Small & Mid Cap ($1,050.0 bn), Bond USD Medium Term ($617.9 bn), and Equity U.S. Income ($510.5 bn). These five classifications accounted for 64.49% of the overall assets under management in the U.S. ETF segment, while the 10-top classifications by assets under management accounted for 77.03%. With regard to this, it is noteworthy that Equity U.S. was the only classification of the top five classifications that witnessed decreasing assets under management, as the estimated net inflows were not able to offset the negative performance of the markets over the course of February.
Overall, 15 of the 136 peer groups each accounted for more than 1% of assets under management. In total, these 15 peer groups accounted for $11,998.6 bn, or 83.82%, of the overall assets under management.
Graph 3: Ten Largest Lipper Global Classifications by Assets Under Management, February 28, 2026 (USD Billions)
Source: LSEG Lipper
In addition, it was noteworthy that the rankings of the largest classifications saw some movement in single positions over the last few years. As the positions of the classifications had been quite stable in the past, this indicates that U.S. investors use ETFs to trade according to their market views. Even as some of these positions might be core holdings, once investors got into risk-off mode they also reduced their exposure to core asset classes.
Despite the fact that the rankings at the top of the league show some changes from time to time, these numbers show that the assets under management by Lipper global classifications continued to be highly concentrated in the U.S. ETF industry.
The peer groups on the other side of the table showed some funds in the U.S. 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, February 28, 2026 (USD Billions)
Source: LSEG Lipper
ETF Flows by Lipper Global Classifications
The net inflows of the 10 best-selling Lipper classifications accounted for $129.5 bn. In line with the overall sales trend for February, equity peer groups (+$68.5 bn) dominated the flows by asset type on the table of the 10 best-selling Lipper global classifications by estimated net inflows. That said, it was surprising to see only four equity classifications on the table of the 10 best-selling classifications for the month given the overall fund flow trend. Conversely, it was not surprising that Equity U.S. (+$26.4 bn) was the best-selling Lipper global classification for February, as U.S. investors seem to have a home bias. Equity Global ex U.S. (+$22.8 bn) was the second best-selling classification, followed by Money Market USD (+$18.5 bn), Bond USD Medium Term (+$14.8 bn), and Equity Emerging Markets Global (+$11.9 bn).
As said before, it was surprising that Money Market USD took one of the top spots on the table of the 10 best-selling Lipper classifications for the month.
The slight outflows from cryptocurrencies (Alternative Cryptocurrency -$0.9 bn) show that U.S. investors may still see the cryptocurrencies such as bitcoin or ethereum as appropriate instruments for the storage of value despite the somewhat negative market sentiment and the sluggish performance of bitcoin. Despite this, the relatively low outflows can be interpreted as a sign for a rather institutional usage of crypto ETFs.
Graph 5: Ten Best- and Worst-Lipper Global Classifications by Estimated Net Sales, February 1 – February 28, 2026 (USD Billions)
Source: LSEG Lipper
More generally, these numbers showed the U.S. ETF segment is also highly concentrated when it comes to fund flows by classification. Generally speaking, one would expect the flows into ETFs to be concentrated since investors often use ETFs to implement their market views and short-term asset allocation decisions. These products are made and, therefore, are easy to use for these purposes.
On the other side of the table, the 10 peer groups with the highest estimated net outflows for February 2026 accounted for $9.0 bn in outflows, which was way below the number for January (-$16.6 bn).
Equity Sector Financials (-$5.3 bn) was the Lipper classification with the highest outflows for the month. It was bettered by Equity Asia Pacific (-$0.9 bn), Alternative Cryptocurrency (-$0.9 bn), Bond Other (-$0.5 bn), and Equity Sector Communication Services (-$0.5 bn).
A view of the list of the 10 Lipper global classifications with the highest estimated net outflows indicates that U.S. investors may have sold non-core allocations and bought into strategic/long-term core allocations.
Assets Under Management by Promoters
A closer look at assets under management by promoters in the U.S. ETF industry also showed high concentration, with only 124 of the 471 ETF promoters in the U.S. holding assets at or above $1.0 bn, accounting for $14,244.5 bn. The largest ETF promoter in the U.S.—iShares ($4,225.0 bn)—accounted for 29.52% of the overall assets under management. Despite a comfortable lead as largest ETF promoter globally, iShares is somewhat closely followed by Vanguard ($4,099.2 bn), the number-two ETF promoter in the U.S. That said, the two largest ETF promoters in the U.S. have a comfortable lead over the number-three promoter—State Street SPDR ($1,927.4 bn).
Graph 6: The 10 Largest ETF Promoters by Assets Under Management, February 28, 2026 (USD Billions)
Source: LSEG Lipper
The 10-top promoters accounted for 88.98% of the overall assets under management in the U.S. ETF industry. This meant, in turn, the other 461 fund promoters registering at least one ETF for sale in the U.S. accounted for only 11.02% of the overall assets under management.
ETF Flows by Promoters
Since the U.S. ETF market is highly concentrated when it comes to assets under management by promoter, it was not surprising that seven of the 10 largest promoters by assets under management were among the 10-top selling ETF promoters for February. Vanguard (+$49.3 bn) was the best-selling ETF promoter in the U.S. for the month, ahead of iShares (+$40.3 bn) and ProShares (+$17.3 bn).
Graph 7: Ten Best-Selling ETF Promoters, February 1 – February 28, 2026 (USD Billions)
Source: LSEG Lipper
The flows of the 10-top promoters accounted for estimated net inflows of $157.7 bn. As for the overall flow trend in February, it was clear that some of the 471 promoters (91) faced estimated net outflows (-$5.9 bn in total) over the course of the month.
Assets Under Management by ETFs
There were 5,026 instruments (primary share classes [4,956] and convenience share classes [70]) listed as ETFs registered for sales in the U.S. in the Lipper database at the end of February. Regarding the overall market pattern, it was not surprising assets under management at the ETF level were also highly concentrated. Only 961 of the 4,956 ETFs (primary share classes = portfolios) held assets above $1.0 bn each. These ETFs accounted for $13,683.9 bn, or 95.60%, of the overall assets in the U.S. ETF industry. The 10 largest ETFs in the U.S. accounted for $4,261.8 bn, or 29.77%, of the overall assets under management.
Graph 8: The 10 Largest ETFs by Assets Under Management, February 28, 2025 (USD Billions)
Source: LSEG Lipper
Estimated Net Flows at ETF Level
A total of 2,756 of the 4,956 ETFs (primary share classes = portfolios) analyzed in this report showed net inflows of more than $10,000 each for February, accounting for inflows of $265.3 bn. This meant the other 2,200 instruments faced no flows, or net outflows, for the month. Upon closer inspection, 409 of the 2,756 ETFs posting net inflows enjoyed inflows of more than $100 m over the course of February—for a total of $232.0 bn. The best-selling ETF for February in the U.S. was ProShares GENIUS Money Market ETF, which enjoyed estimated net inflows of $18.3 bn. It was followed by Vanguard 500 Index Fund; ETF (+$17.0 bn) and Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight ETF (+$5.7 bn).
Graph 9: The 10 Best-Selling ETFs, February 1 – February 28, 2026 (Euro Billions)
Source: LSEG Lipper
The flow pattern at the fund level indicated there was a lot of turnover and rotation during the month, but it also showed the concentration of the U.S. ETF industry even better than the statistics at the promoter or classification levels since the 10 best-selling ETFs account for 35.15% of the overall inflows.
Given its size and the overall trend for net sales at the promoter level, it was somewhat surprising that only four of the 10 best-selling funds for February were issued by iShares. These iShares ETFs accounted for estimated net inflows of $14.2 bn. Meanwhile, iShares’ main competitor Vanguard issued three of the 10 best-selling ETFs in the U.S. which accounted for estimated net inflows of $26.5 bn. This shows that Vanguard may be slowly closing the gap on the league table of the best-selling ETF promoters in the U.S.
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.
