The global ETF industry enjoyed strong inflows over the course of the first nine months of 2026. A time period which was defined by a combination of geopolitical tensions, shifting fiscal priorities, and diverging monetary policies. Investors entered the year expecting a relatively stable environment supported by easing inflation and accommodative central banks. Instead, markets faced a more challenging backdrop shaped by energy security concerns, trade fragmentation, and renewed inflationary pressures.
Geopolitics became a central market driver. Escalating tensions in the Middle East, particularly involving Iran, created recurring concerns about energy supplies and global shipping routes. These developments revived fears that higher energy costs could reignite inflation and slow economic growth. Meanwhile, the ongoing conflict between Russia and Ukraine continued to influence European security policy and reinforced the trend toward higher defense spending across the continent.
Global trade remained another key theme. The strategic rivalry between the United States and China continued to reshape supply chains and investment decisions. While both countries sought to avoid a return to full-scale tariff escalation, businesses continued diversifying production networks and reducing dependence on individual markets. Governments increasingly promoted industrial resilience and domestic production, accelerating longer-term shifts in global trade patterns.
Fiscal policy provided important support for economic activity. Across Europe, governments increased spending on defense, infrastructure, and strategic industries in response to a more uncertain geopolitical environment. Public investment helped offset weaker external demand and contributed to economic resilience. Similar initiatives were evident in other developed economies as policymakers sought to strengthen energy security, technological competitiveness, and supply-chain independence.
Equity markets were driven by a balance between structural growth opportunities and macroeconomic uncertainty. Investment linked to artificial intelligence, semiconductors, data centers, and digital infrastructure remained a powerful theme throughout the period. Strong demand for technological innovation continued to attract capital despite concerns surrounding inflation, energy prices, and geopolitical risks. At the same time, market leadership frequently rotated as investors adjusted expectations for growth and monetary policy.
The most significant development for financial markets was the growing divergence among major central banks. Rather than moving in a coordinated direction, policymakers increasingly responded to domestic economic conditions, creating different policy paths across regions.
The European Central Bank (ECB) adopted a more hawkish stance as inflation pressures proved more persistent than expected. In September, the ECB raised interest rates, citing inflation risks linked to the Middle East conflict and reaffirming its commitment to restoring price stability. Policymakers acknowledged economic resilience while highlighting continuing uncertainty surrounding both growth and inflation.
The Federal Reserve also moved toward tighter policy. After maintaining a cautious approach for much of the year, the Fed raised interest rates in September, pointing to resilient domestic demand and insufficient progress in returning inflation to target. The decision reflected a growing concern that inflation risks remained elevated despite a healthy economic backdrop.
Meanwhile, the Bank of Japan continued its gradual policy normalization, prompting investors to reassess long-standing funding and carry-trade strategies. The Bank of England, by contrast, maintained a more balanced approach as it sought to manage inflation risks while supporting a slowing economy.
Bond markets reflected these changing expectations. Investors focused increasingly on inflation risks, fiscal sustainability, and central bank credibility. Hopes for synchronized global monetary easing faded, replaced by a more selective assessment of regional opportunities and risks.
By the end of September, financial markets were operating in an environment defined by policy divergence, geopolitical uncertainty, and economic resilience. Energy shocks, strategic competition, fiscal activism, and independent central bank actions shaped investor sentiment throughout the first three quarters, setting the stage for an equally challenging final quarter of 2026.
Assets Under Management
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 $22,830.7 bn at the end of September 2026) over the course of the first nine months of 2026. At a closer look, the increase in assets under management of $4,140.1 bn for the year 2026 so far was driven by estimated net inflows (+$2,251.7 bn), while the performance of the underlying markets added $1,888.4 bn to the assets under management.
Graph 1: Growth in Assets Under Management in the Global ETF Industry by Asset Type, January 1, 1991 – September 30, 2026 (in bn USD)
Source: LSEG Lipper
As for the overall structure of the global ETF industry, it was not surprising equity ETFs ($17,737.8 bn) held the majority of assets at the end of September, followed by bond ETFs ($3,568.8 bn), alternatives ETFs ($772.1 bn), commodities ETFs ($471.7 bn), money market ETFs ($152.7 bn), mixed-assets ETFs ($108.1 bn), and “other” ETFs ($19.5 bn).
Graph 2: Market Share, Assets Under Management in the Global ETF Industry by Asset Type, September 30, 2026
Source: LSEG Lipper
Taking the overall market environment into account, it is not surprising that the overall assets under management, as well as the assets under management for all asset types hit new (month end) all-time highs over the course of the year so far. That said, the assets under management for alternatives, mixed-assets, and money market ETFs reached a (month end) all-time high at the end of September.
ETF Flows by Asset Type
The global ETF industry saw strong inflows (+$2,251.7 bn) over the course of the year 2026 so far. The flow pattern over the course of the first three quarters shows that the inflows into ETFs slowed down as the geopolitical tensions in the Middle East intensified over the course of March but returned to their former level from April onwards. The estimated net sales peaked in July and slowed down over the course of August in September. In fact, September was the months with the second lowest inflows for the year so far.
Graph 3: Monthly Estimated Net Sales, January 1, 2026 – June 30, 2026 (USD Billions)
Source: LSEG Lipper
The impressive estimated monthly net flows might be seen as proof that the acceptance and adoption of ETFs by investors around the globe has been further increased over the course of the year 2026. In fact, the estimated net flows over the course of the first nine months of 2026 (+$2,251.7 bn) are already above the inflows of the record year 2025 (+$2,094.5 bn).
That said, the inflows in the global ETF industry for 2026 so far were driven by equity ETFs (+$1,476.6 bn), followed by bond ETFs (+$565.6 bn), alternatives ETFs (+$112.3 bn), money market ETFs (+$46.8 bn), mixed-assets ETFs (+$29.5 bn), and commodities ETFs (+$23.4 bn), while “other” ETFs (-$2.4 bn) was the only asset type facing outflows.
Graph 4: Estimated Net Sales by Asset Type, September 1 – September 30, 2026 (USD Billions)
Source: LSEG Lipper
Given the volatile but positive market environment, it was not surprising to see that the estimated net inflows into ETFs for 2026 so far were led by equity ETFs by such a wide margin. This might be seen as an indicator that ETF investors globally were in risk-on mode over the course of 2026 so far.
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 September, the global ETF market was split into 312 different Lipper Global Classifications. The highest assets under management at the end of the month were held by ETFs classified as Equity U.S. ($8,076.0 bn), followed by Equity Global ex U.S. ($1,407.7 bn), Equity U.S. Small & Mid Cap ($1,169.9 bn), Equity Global ($1,091.8 bn), and Equity Japan ($945.5 bn). These five classifications accounted for 55.59% of the overall assets under management in the global ETF industry, while the 10 largest classifications by assets under management combined accounted for 69.87%.
Overall, 18 of the 312 Lipper classifications each accounted for more than 1% of assets under management. In total, these 18 classifications accounted for $18,313.3 bn, or 80.21%, of the overall assets under management.
Graph 5: Ten Largest Lipper Global Classifications by Assets Under Management, September 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 6: Ten Smallest Lipper Global Classifications by Assets Under Management, September 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 $1,450.0 bn. In line with the overall sales trend for 2026 so far, equity peer groups (+$1,129.1 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 somewhat 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, it was not surprising that Equity U.S. (+$521.7 bn) was the best-selling Lipper global classification for the year so far, as it held this position on the flow table for eight of the nine months of 2026. It was followed by Equity Global (+$175.7 bn), Equity Global ex U.S. (+$172.2 bn), Equity Sector Information Technology (+$120.4 bn), and Bond USD Medium Term (+$105.3 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 7: Ten Best- and Worst-Lipper Global Classifications by Estimated Net Sales, January 1- September 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 first nine months of 2026 accounted for $27.4 bn in outflows.
Equity China (-$11.6 bn) was the classification with the highest outflows for the year 2026 so far. It was bettered by Equity Sector Financials (-$3.1 bn), Equity Sector Communication Services (-$2.8 bn), Unclassified (-$2.4 bn), and Equity Germany Small & Mid Cap (-$1.6 bn).
The names of the classifications on the list of the 10 Lipper classifications with the highest outflows for the year 2026 so far show that ETF investors globally may have adjusted the risk factors in 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 244 of the 871 ETF promoters covered in this report holding assets at or above $1.0 bn, totalling $22,708.8 bn at the end of September. The largest ETF promoter in the global ETF industry—iShares ($6,450.2 bn)—accounted for 28.25% of the overall assets under management, ahead of the number-two promoter—Vanguard ($5,118.3 bn)—and the number-three promoter—State Street SPDR ($2,321.7 bn).
Graph 8: The 10 Largest ETF Promoters by Assets Under Management, September 30, 2026 (USD Billions)
Source: LSEG Lipper
The 10-top promoters accounted for AUM of $17,721.2 bn, or 77.62%, of the overall assets under management in the global ETF industry. This meant, in turn, the other 861 ETF promoters which had registered at least one ETF for sale over the observation period accounted for only 22.38% 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 2026 so far. iShares was the best-selling ETF promoter in the global ETF industry for the first nine months (+$477.5 bn), ahead of Vanguard (+$463.9 bn) and State Street SPDR (+$153.8 bn).
Graph 9: Ten Best-Selling ETF Promoters, January 1 – September 30, 2026 (USD Billions)
Source: LSEG Lipper
The flows of the 10-top promoters accounted for estimated net inflows of $1,497.2 bn. As for the overall flow trend over the course of 2026 so far, it was clear that some of the 881 promoters (186) which offered at least one ETF within the observation period faced estimated net outflows (-$47.2 bn in total) over the course of the year so far.
Assets Under Management by Region
ETFs domiciled in North America ($17,038.2 bn) held the highest assets under management in the global ETF industry at the end of September. They were followed by ETFs domiciled in Europe ($3,690.9 bn), ETFs domiciled in the Indo-Pacific region ($2,045.0 bn), ETFs domiciled in South and Central America ($37.7 bn), ETFs domiciled in Africa ($16.7 bn), while other domiciles held ($1.4 bn) in assets under management.
Graph 10: Assets Under Management in the Global ETF Industry by Region – September 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 11: Estimated Net Flows in the Global ETF Industry by Region, January 1 – September 30, 2026 (in bn USD)
Source: LSEG Lipper
As one may expect from the assets under management, ETFs domiciled in North America (+$1,662.8 bn) enjoyed the highest estimated net inflows over the course of the year 2026 so far. They were followed by ETFs domiciled in Europe (+$404.3 bn), the Indo-Pacific region (+$176.3 bn), South and Central America (+$7.1 bn), and Africa (+$1.0 bn), while the other regions (-$0.04 bn) faced shy outflows for the first nine months of 2026.
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 September, the U.S. was the largest single-country ETF domicile ($16,298.1 bn) of the 41 ETF domiciles covered in this report, followed by Ireland ($2,716.2 bn), Japan ($877.3 bn), Canada ($740.1 bn), and Luxembourg ($668.9 bn). These five ETF domiciles account for assets under management of $21,300.6 bn, or 93.30%, 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 12: Ten Largest ETF Domiciles by Assets Under Management – September 30, 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 light on the single domiciles. The U.S. (+$1,526.6 bn) was, as to be expected, the single fund domicile with the highest estimated net inflows for the year 2026 so far. It was followed by Ireland (+$310.9 bn), Canada (+$136.2 bn), South Korea (+$72.9 bn), and Luxembourg (+$72.5 bn).
Graph 13: The 10 ETF Domiciles with the Highest Estimated Net Inflows, January 1 – September 30, 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 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 Lipper or LSEG.
