The trend to delist an ETF which is not gathering enough investor interest on a given exchange seems to be accelerating in Europe. As I read about the latest delisting of 20 ETFs from the LSE by Amundi ETF on August 4, 2026, and earlier this year by Xtrackers, I thought I have seen this movie before and found an article by myself on this topic which I published back in April 2024. Hence, this article is an extension to the old article.
As said before, the delisting of ETFs is not a new phenomenon in Europe and shows that the market is maturing. In the past it was usual to list an ETF on all major exchanges and smaller trading venues to reach as many investors as possible. This behavior has changed over time. This shows that cross-listings on multiple exchanges are a cost factor which is taken into consideration by ETF promoters in Europe. As a result, ETF promoters do focus the listings of an ETF nowadays on the trading venues where they expect the highest investor interest. Hence, the number of cross-listings for a specific ETF can be increasing or decreasing over time, as investor interest on a particular exchange may change over time.
Even as the ETF promoters claim that they want to accumulate the liquidity for the respective ETFs on the exchange with the highest turnover to ensure tight spreads and in general good trading conditions, the cost for an exchange listing and the maintenance of a local currency (convenience) share class might be another major reason for the delisting. To be clear, the delisting of an ETF does not mean that a local currency share class will be closed automatically, but in some cases they will.
The delisting of an ETF also has an impact on the investors who hold shares of the respective ETF, as they will no longer be able to sell the shares on the trading venue where they bought them. This means that investors would have to transfer the shares to an exchange where they are still listed. This would need some time and may potentially incur (much) higher trading costs. This means investors in the respective ETF should sell their shares in the ETF on the respective exchange before the ETF is delisted and may buy the same ETF on an exchange where the listing is maintained. Otherwise, they may have to look for an ETF with the same investment objective to maintain their asset allocation.
This means a good communication strategy is key for ETF promoters to avoid the impact described on investors, which may be disappointed if they were hit by additional trading costs, as they were possibly not made aware of the delisting.
Generally speaking, it can be said that the delisting of ETFs has not become a trend in Europe, but the ETF issuers have become more cost cautious and want to increase the (on exchange) liquidity of their ETFs wherever possible. When it comes to this, it is to be expected that we will see more ETF delistings on single exchanges over time, which is from my point of view a sign of a maturing ETF industry, as this removes some of the friction in the wider landscape of the European ETF industry.
This article is for information purposes only and does not constitute any investment advice.
The views expressed are the views of the author, not necessarily those of LSEG.
