Despite some headwinds, April 2026 was another month with strong inflows for the global ETF industry.
That said, global equity and bond markets in April 2026 were shaped predominantly by political developments, geopolitical tensions, and evolving expectations for central bank policy, resulting in a generally firm but at times uneven market environment.
Geopolitics remained a central driver throughout the month. The conflicts in Eastern Europe and the Middle East continued to influence market sentiment, particularly through their impact on energy prices and global trade routes. Periods of escalation triggered bouts of risk aversion, leading to temporary declines in equity markets and renewed demand for high-quality government bonds. These moves, however, were often quickly reversed, leaving markets volatile and sensitive to headlines.
At the same time, trade tensions between major economies resurfaced as a relevant factor. Policy signals from the United States, China, and the European Union regarding industrial strategy, technology restrictions, and tariffs contributed to uncertainty among investors. Export-oriented sectors reacted particularly sensitively, while broader markets oscillated between concerns over fragmentation and hopes for pragmatic cooperation.
Domestic politics also played a role. Ongoing election campaigns and fiscal debates in key economies influenced expectations around government spending and debt issuance. In some regions, concerns about rising deficits and increased bond supply put upward pressure on yields, weighing on bond prices and creating intermittent headwinds for equities.
Central banks remained firmly in focus. The U.S. Federal Reserve and the European Central Bank reiterated their cautious, data-dependent stance. Communication from the central banks suggested that while inflation risks had not fully disappeared, policymakers were increasingly attentive to signs of slowing economic momentum. As a result, market expectations shifted repeatedly during the month, with alternating phases of pricing in prolonged tight policy and potential easing later in the year. These shifts contributed to fluctuations in both equity and bond markets.
Despite the complex backdrop, several major equity indices managed to reach new record levels during April. The S&P 500 in the United States, Germany’s DAX, and Japan’s Nikkei 225 all moved higher over the course of the month, reflecting continued investor willingness to allocate to equities. This resilience appeared to be supported by expectations that monetary policy could gradually become less restrictive, even as political and geopolitical risks persisted.
Overall, April 2026 illustrated a market environment in which political decisions and central bank signals often outweighed traditional economic drivers. Volatility remained present, but the underlying tone in equity markets stayed constructive, while bond markets continued to adjust to shifting policy expectations.
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 $19,017.6 bn as of March 31, 2025, to $20,507.3 bn at the end of April 2026). At a closer look, the increase in assets under management of $1,489.7 bn for April was driven by the performance of the underlying markets (+$1,261.9 bn), while the estimated net inflows added $227.8 bn to the 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 ($15,842.2 bn) held the majority of assets at the end of April, followed by bond ETFs ($3,262.5 bn), alternatives ETFs ($644.8 bn), commodities ETFs ($505.5 bn), money market ETFs ($140.1 bn), mixed-assets ETFs ($92.1 bn), and “other” ETFs ($20.2 bn).
Graph 1: Market Share, Assets Under Management in the Global ETF Industry by Asset Type, April 30, 2026
Source: LSEG Lipper
After the rebound of most major markets over the course of April, it is not surprising that the overall assets under management (AUM), as well as the AUM of equity, mixed-assets, and money market ETFs, hit a new (month end) all-time high at the end of April.
ETF Flows by Asset Type
The inflows in the global ETF industry for April were driven by equity ETFs (+$193.8 bn), followed by bond ETFs (+$42.7 bn), mixed-assets ETFs (+$3.9 bn), money market ETFs (+$2.1 bn), and “other” ETFs (+$0.1 bn). On the other side of the table, commodities ETFs (-$1.2 bn) and alternatives ETFs (-$13.5 bn) faced outflows for the month.
Graph 2: Estimated Net Sales by Asset Type, April 1 – April 30, 2026 (USD Billions)
Source: LSEG Lipper
Given the market environment, it was not surprising to see that the estimated net inflows into ETFs were led by equity ETFs over the course of April. This might be seen as an indicator that ETF investors globally are in risk-on mode.
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 April, the global ETF market was split into 305 different Lipper Global Classifications. The highest assets under management at the end of the month were held by ETFs classified as Equity U.S. ($7,231.2 bn), followed by Equity Global ex U.S. ($1,281.3 bn), Equity U.S. Small & Mid Cap ($1,126.7 bn), Equity Global ($925.9 bn), and Equity Japan ($857.4 bn). These five classifications accounted for 55.70% of the overall assets under management in the global ETF industry, while the 10 largest classifications by assets under management combined accounted for 70.11%.
Overall, 16 of the 305 Lipper classifications each accounted for more than 1% of assets under management. In total, these 16 classifications accounted for $16,093.8 bn, or 78.48%, of the overall assets under management.
Graph 3: Ten Largest Lipper Global Classifications by Assets Under Management, April 30, 2026 (USD Billions)
Source: LSEG Lipper
The Lipper classifications 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, April 30, 2026 (USD Billions)
Source: LSEG Lipper
ETF Flows by Lipper Global Classifications
The net inflows of the 10 best-selling Lipper classifications accounted for $188.4 bn. In line with the overall sales trend for April, equity peer groups (+$170.1 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 different regions may have different preferences when it comes to their investments. Nevertheless, the table of the 10 best-selling Lipper classifications is heavily impacted by the estimated net flows from the U.S.
Given the overall fund flow trend in the global ETF industry and the dominance of the U.S. as the leading market for ETFs and largest stock market in the world, it was not surprising that Equity U.S. (+$93.4 bn) was the best-selling Lipper global classification for the month. It was followed by Equity Global (+$24.7 bn), Equity Sector Information Technology (+$20.2 bn), Equity Global ex U.S. (+$12.1 bn), and Equity Emerging Markets Global (+$7.4 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 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, April 1- April 30, 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 month accounted for $41.8 bn in outflows. This number was slightly above the outflows for the previous month (-$41.3 bn).
Alternative Equity Leveraged (-$28.6 bn), one of the best-selling classifications for March, was the classification with the highest outflows for the month. It was bettered by Equity Europe (-$2.7 bn), Commodity Energy (-$2.2 bn), Bond USD Government Short Term (-$1.9 bn), and Equity Sector Consumer Staples (-$1.4 bn).
The fact that two of the 10 best-selling Lipper classifications for March 26 (Alternative Equity Leveraged and Bond USD Government Short Term) are on the list of the Lipper classifications with the highest outflows for April 26, shows that ETF investors around the globe adjust their portfolios to the general market environment in short time periods. Hence, they steer their portfolios according to their risk appetite.
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 223 of the 794 ETF promoters covered in this report holding assets at or above $1.0 bn, totalling $20,405.1 bn at the end of April. The largest ETF promoter in the global ETF industry—iShares ($6,022.4 bn)—accounted for 29.37% of the overall assets under management, ahead of the number-two promoter—Vanguard ($4,694.2 bn)—and the number-three promoter—State Street SPDR ($2,157.9 bn).
Graph 6: The 10 Largest ETF Promoters by Assets Under Management, April 30, 2026 (USD Billions)
Source: LSEG Lipper
The 10-top promoters accounted for AUM of $16,280.4 bn, or 79.39%, of the overall assets under management in the global ETF industry. This meant, in turn, the other 784 ETF promoters which had registered at least one ETF for sale over the observation period accounted for only 20.61% 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.
It is not surprising that the global players are dominating the table of the 10-largest ETF promoters by assets under management. That said, it is somewhat surprising that there is only one ETF promoter from the Asia-Pacific region on this table. This might be caused by the high fragmentation of the ETF markets in the region, since most of the ETF promoters in the Asia-Pacific region act quite local.
ETF Flows by Promoters
Since the global ETF industry is highly concentrated when it comes to the assets under management by promoter, it was not surprising that eight of the 10 largest promoters by assets under management were among the 10-top selling ETF promoters for April. Vanguard was the best-selling ETF promoter in the global ETF industry for the month (+$57.5 bn), ahead of iShares (+$20.7 bn) and State Street SPDR (+$28.1 bn).
Graph 7: Ten Best-Selling ETF Promoters, April 1 – April 30, 2026 (USD Billions)
Source: LSEG Lipper
The flows of the 10-top promoters accounted for estimated net inflows of $181.3 bn. As for the overall flow trend in April, it was clear that some of the 794 promoters (192) faced estimated net outflows (-$32.1 bn in total) over the course of the month.
Assets Under Management by Region
ETFs domiciled in North America ($15,568.4 bn) held the highest assets under management in the global ETF industry at the end of April. They were followed by ETFs domiciled in Europe ($3,354.0 bn), ETFs domiciled in the Indo-Pacific region ($1,536.5 bn), ETFs domiciled in South and Central America ($31.1 bn), ETFs domiciled in Africa ($16.0 bn), while other domiciles held ($1.3 bn) in assets under management.
Graph 8: Assets Under Management in the Global ETF Industry by Region – April 30, 2026 (in bn USD)
Source: LSEG Lipper
These numbers show that the global ETF industry is a truly global industry with a high concentration of 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. This 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, April 1 – April 30, 2026 (in bn USD)
Source: LSEG Lipper
As one may expect from the assets under management, ETFs domiciled in North America (+$173.3 bn) enjoyed the highest estimated net inflows over the course of April. They were followed by ETFs domiciled in Europe (+$43.8 bn), the Indo-Pacific region (+$9.7 bn), South and Central America (+$0.9 bn), Africa (+$0.2 bn), and other regions (+$0.01 bn).
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 April, the U.S. was the largest single-country ETF domicile ($14,900.6 bn) of the 42 ETF domiciles covered in this report, followed by Ireland ($2,432.7 bn), Japan ($805.5 bn), Canada ($667.9 bn), and Luxembourg ($618.5 bn). These five ETF domiciles account for assets under management of $19,425.2 bn, or 94.72%, of the overall assets under management in the global ETF industry.
Graph 10: Ten Largest ETF Domiciles by Assets Under Management – April 30, 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. (+$161.4 bn) was, as to be expected, the single fund domicile with the highest estimated net inflows for April. It was followed by Ireland (+$32.9 bn), Canada (+$11.9 bn), Luxembourg (+$9.9 bn), and South Korea (+$7.0 bn).
Graph 11: The 10 ETF Domiciles with the Highest Estimated Net Inflows, April 1 – April 30, 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.
