The global ETF industry enjoyed strong inflows over the course of July 2026. These inflows occurred while global financial markets made little overall progress, but the modest headline moves concealed a sharp change in leadership. Renewed tension between the United States and Iran drove oil prices higher, revived inflation fears, and pushed government bond yields up. At the same time, investors moved away from highly valued technology shares and towards energy, financial, and other value-oriented sectors.
Geopolitics once again supplied the month’s main shock. The resumption of U.S.-Iran hostilities raised concerns about oil production and shipping through the Middle East. Brent and West Texas Intermediate crude rose by more than 20%, reversing much of June’s decline. Energy shares benefited, but the rise in oil complicated the outlook for inflation and economic growth, particularly in energy-importing Europe and Japan. Markets nevertheless appeared to assume that the confrontation would stop short of another full-scale disruption to global supplies.
In the United States, the Federal Reserve kept the federal funds target at 3.50% to 3.75% during its July meeting. Its statement described economic activity as solid but said inflation remained above the 2% objective, partly because of supply-driven increases in energy prices. The decision exposed a notable division within the Federal Open Market Committee: three members voted for an immediate quarter-point increase. That split strengthened expectations that U.S. rates could remain high for longer and contributed to rising Treasury yields.
The European Central Bank (ECB) also remained on hold, leaving its deposit rate at 2.25% during its July meeting after raising it by 25 basis points (bps) in June. The ECB warned that energy prices were still well above their pre-conflict levels and that the full inflationary effects had yet to emerge. Its balance-sheet reduction continued as maturing bonds under the APP and PEPP programs were no longer reinvested. That combination of restrictive rates and declining central-bank holdings limited support for eurozone government debt, even as subdued growth restrained the rise in yields.
The Bank of Japan (BoJ) maintained its overnight rate at around 1% during its July meeting. The BoJ expected higher oil prices, wage increases, semiconductor costs, and the weaker yen to keep inflation above 2% during the second half of the fiscal year. Japanese bonds, therefore, remained vulnerable to expectations of additional tightening.
With regard to this, it was no surprise that global government and corporate bonds declined in general.
Fiscal policy added another source of unease. Higher defense and infrastructure spending supported parts of the European economy, but expanding borrowing requirements left sovereign markets sensitive to debt sustainability and issuance. In Japan, government measures to reduce household energy bills moderated the near-term inflation forecast but transferred part of the burden to the public finances.
Equity performance reflected these shifts, as investors questioned whether the earnings generated by artificial-intelligence investment justified elevated technology valuations. Energy and financial companies advanced instead, supported by higher commodity prices, resilient earnings, and more moderate valuations. As a result, U.S. shares were broadly flat, with the S&P 500 losing 0.1%, while markets outside the United States performed better. Hence, the MSCI World Index gained 0.5% in U.S. dollar terms over the course of the month.
July’s message was clearest in the bond market. The inflation shock had not passed, central banks were reluctant to ease, and governments still needed substantial financing. Equities absorbed that combination through a rotation rather than a broad selloff. Bonds had less room to escape.
From the perspective of the global ETF industry, the performance of the underlying markets led, in combination with the estimated net flows, to decreasing assets under management (from $22,095.8 bn as of June 30, 2026, to $22,060.8 bn at the end of July 2026). At a closer look, the decrease in assets under management of $35.0 bn for July was driven by the performance of the underlying markets (-$328.2 bn) while the estimated net inflows contributed +$293.1 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 ($17,173.9 bn) held the majority of assets at the end of July, followed by bond ETFs ($3,492.0 bn), alternatives ETFs ($717.6 bn), commodities ETFs ($431.8 bn), money market ETFs ($140.7 bn), mixed-assets ETFs ($99.4 bn), and “other” ETFs ($16.9 bn).
Graph 1: Market Share, Assets Under Management in the Global ETF Industry by Asset Type, July 31, 2026
Source: LSEG Lipper
Given the on average negative performance of the underlying securities markets over the course of July, it was not surprising that the overall assets under management (AUM), as well as the AUM of all asset types with the exception of bond and money market ETFs did not hit a new (month end) all-time high at the end of July.
ETF Flows by Asset Type
The inflows in the global ETF industry for July were driven by equity ETFs (+$197.7 bn), followed by bond ETFs (+$64.7 bn), alternatives ETFs (+$25.5 bn), mixed-assets ETFs (+$2.6 bn), commodities ETFs (+$2.4 bn), “other” ETFs (+$0.2 bn), and money market ETFs (+$0.1 bn).
Graph 2: Estimated Net Sales by Asset Type, July 1 – July 31, 2026 (USD Billions)
Source: LSEG Lipper
Given the market environment, it was somewhat surprising to see that the estimated net inflows into ETFs for July were led by equity ETFs by such a wide margin. 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 July, the global ETF market was split into 307 different Lipper Global Classifications. The highest assets under management at the end of the month were held by ETFs classified as Equity U.S. ($7,773.5 bn), followed by Equity Global ex U.S. ($1,369.9 bn), Equity U.S. Small & Mid Cap ($1,197.4 bn), Equity Global ($1,036.5 bn), and Equity Japan ($894.8 bn). These five classifications accounted for 55.63% of the overall assets under management in the global ETF industry, while the 10 largest classifications by assets under management combined accounted for 69.75%.
Overall, 17 of the 307 Lipper classifications each accounted for more than 1% of assets under management. In total, these 17 classifications accounted for $17,447.2 bn, or 79.09%, of the overall assets under management.
Graph 3: Ten Largest Lipper Global Classifications by Assets Under Management, July 31, 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, July 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 $199.4 bn. In line with the overall sales trend for July, equity peer groups (+$161.7 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. (+$64.3 bn) was the best-selling Lipper global classification for the month. It was followed by Equity Sector Information Technology (+$21.3 bn), Equity Global ex U.S. (+$19.9 bn), Equity Global (+$19.3 bn), and Alternative Equity Leveraged (+$16.0 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 of the 10 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, July 1- July 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 month accounted for $14.1 bn in outflows. This number was way below the outflows for the previous month (-$25.7 bn).
Alternative Dedicated Short Bias (-$2.7 bn) was the classification with the highest outflows for the month. It was bettered by Money Market USD (-$2.6 bn), Equity China (-$2.6 bn), Equity Global ex U.S. Small & Mid Cap (-$1.9 bn), and Equity Asia Pacific ex Japan (-$1.4 bn).
The names of the classifications on the list of the 10 Lipper classifications with the highest outflows for April 26 show that ETF investors globally are adjusting their portfolios to the general market environment. 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 243 of the 843 ETF promoters covered in this report holding assets at or above $1.0 bn, totalling $21,946.5 bn at the end of July. The largest ETF promoter in the global ETF industry—iShares ($6,313.5 bn)—accounted for 28.62% of the overall assets under management, ahead of the number-two promoter—Vanguard ($5,002.7 bn)—and the number-three promoter—State Street SPDR ($2,275.2 bn).
Graph 6: The 10 Largest ETF Promoters by Assets Under Management, July 31, 2026 (USD Billions)
Source: LSEG Lipper
The 10-top promoters accounted for AUM of $17,252.7 bn, or 78.21%, of the overall assets under management in the global ETF industry. This meant, in turn, the other 833 ETF promoters which had registered at least one ETF for sale over the observation period accounted for only 21.79% 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 seven of the 10 largest promoters by assets under management were among the 10-top selling ETF promoters for July. Vanguard was the best-selling ETF promoter in the global ETF industry for the month (+$64.6 bn), ahead of iShares (+$41.2 bn) and State Street SPDR (+$35.4 bn).
Graph 7: Ten Best-Selling ETF Promoters, July 1 – July 31, 2026 (USD Billions)
Source: LSEG Lipper
The flows of the 10-top promoters accounted for estimated net inflows of $195.7 bn. As for the overall flow trend in July, it was clear that some of the 843 promoters (212) faced estimated net outflows (-$10.8 bn in total) over the course of the month.
Assets Under Management by Region
ETFs domiciled in North America ($16,500.4 bn) held the highest assets under management in the global ETF industry at the end of July. They were followed by ETFs domiciled in Europe ($3,590.7 bn), ETFs domiciled in the Indo-Pacific region ($1,919.2 bn), ETFs domiciled in South and Central America ($33.3 bn), ETFs domiciled in Africa ($16.1 bn), while other domiciles held ($1.1 bn) in assets under management.
Graph 8: Assets Under Management in the Global ETF Industry by Region – July 31, 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, July 1 – July 31, 2026 (in bn USD)
Source: LSEG Lipper
As one may expect from the assets under management, ETFs domiciled in North America (+$202.9 bn) enjoyed the highest estimated net inflows over the course of July. They were followed by ETFs domiciled in Europe (+$56.7 bn), the Indo-Pacific region (+$33.0 bn), South and Central America (+$0.4 bn), and Africa (+$0.2 bn), while the other regions (-$0.001 bn) faced shy outflows for the month.
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 July, the U.S. was the largest single-country ETF domicile ($15,785.6 bn) of the 41 ETF domiciles covered in this report, followed by Ireland ($2,626.2 bn), Japan ($832.8 bn), Canada ($714.8 bn), and Luxembourg ($659.9 bn). These five ETF domiciles account for assets under management of $20,619.2 bn, or 93.47%, of the overall assets under management in the global ETF industry.
By looking at these numbers, one needs to bear in mind that China is excluded from this report, since there is no data on the assets under management from ETFs domiciled in China available at the time this report was written.
Graph 10: Ten Largest ETF Domiciles by Assets Under Management – July 31, 2026 (in bn USD)
Source: LSEG Lipper
These numbers show that assets under management in the global ETF industry are dominated by a small number of domiciles. Obviously, this concentration is at least partly 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. (+$188.0 bn) was, as to be expected, the single fund domicile with the highest estimated net inflows for July. It was followed by Ireland (+$47.4 bn), Taiwan (+$16.3 bn), Canada (+$14.9 bn), and South Korea (+$9.6 bn).
Graph 11: The 10 ETF Domiciles with the Highest Estimated Net Inflows, July 1 – July 31, 2026 (in bn USD)
Source: LSEG Lipper
The list of the 10 best-selling domiciles does an even better job of showing that ETFs are truly a global phenomenon since it shows that investors around the globe are using ETFs to implement their asset allocation views in their portfolios.
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.
