Introduction
Europe enters the autumn of 2025 under a cloud of uncertainty. Growth remains close to zero across several eurozone economies; inflation lingers despite restrictive monetary policy, and the long-promised industrial revival feels elusive. Beneath this surface of fatigue lies a quiet but fundamental shift: the concentration of global financial power in the hands of a few. Behind the rise of index funds, ‘passive’ products and the language of sustainability, an entire model of market balance and democratic accountability is being redrawn. Speaking of it today is not a luxury, it is a necessity for Europe’s economic sovereignty and credibility.
I. A Continent in Doubt, a Finance in Concentration
Over the past decade, asset management has undergone a silent revolution. Exchange-Traded Funds (ETFs) (simple, low-cost and transparent instruments) have transformed global investment. But behind this apparent pluralism lies a reality of extreme concentration. According to ETFGI (2025), three global firms manage around 70% of global ETF assets, amounting to more than $17 trillion. Their rise is not the result of conspiracy, but of efficiency: economies of scale lower costs and attract flows, reinforcing dominance in a self-sustaining loop.
II. The Index as a New Frontier of Power
An index may seem neutral, a statistical mirror of markets, yet it has become an instrument of sovereignty. Five providers (MSCI, S&P Dow Jones, FTSE Russell, Bloomberg, and CRSP) now control over 95% of the global index market. By defining what qualifies as an ’emerging market’, a ‘sustainable company’, or a ‘strategic sector’, these private actors shape how the global economy is represented. What is excluded from an index risks economic invisibility. The cost of licensing these indices further consolidates the system: large managers obtain favourable terms, while smaller firms face prohibitive fees.
III. When Size Becomes a Systemic Risk
Financial stability, in times of slow growth and high interest rates, relies heavily on confidence. Yet confidence becomes fragile when most of global savings are intermediated by a handful of firms. The Financial Stability Board (FSB) and the Bank for International Settlements (BIS) warn that any major disruption (a sell-off, an algorithmic malfunction, or a sudden withdrawal) could trigger systemic liquidity shocks across markets. This is not merely a question of too-big-to-fail; it is about private actors becoming structural pillars of the financial order itself.
IV. Europe Between Dependence and Regulation
In response, the European Union has built what may be the world’s most sophisticated framework of financial and extra-financial regulation. From the CSRD to the EU Taxonomy, the SFDR and the new ESRS standards, the EU’s regulatory architecture aims to enforce clarity, comparability and accountability. But while these instruments are indispensable, they remain reactive: rules operate downstream, whereas concentration occurs upstream in the data, in the indices, in the algorithms. Europe regulates what it can measure, but the rules of measurement themselves are often set elsewhere.
V. ESG: From Moral Compass to Market Strategy
The rise of ESG investing (Environmental, Social, Governance) was meant to humanise capitalism, embedding ethics into profit. In Europe, it became a civic project: aligning markets with climate goals and social cohesion. But the rapid expansion of ESG products has also blurred its meaning. According to the ESMA 2024 Greenwashing Report, nearly 40% of funds claiming ESG alignment contain inconsistencies between their marketing and actual holdings. This does not always imply deceit; it often reflects interpretive fragmentation, multiple definitions of ‘sustainable’ with no common metric.
VI. Why It Matters Now More Than Ever
The current crisis is not only fiscal or industrial; it is conceptual. Europe’s dependency is no longer limited to raw materials or technologies; it extends to financial standards and symbolic power. Who defines what counts as risk, value or sustainability? Increasingly, that authority resides not in public institutions, but in the methodologies of a few global firms. ETFs, often praised for their simplicity, reveal this shift in essence. They are not guilty, but symptomatic, a mirror reflecting how decision-making has become embedded in automated systems and distant governance.
VII. Restoring Balance: Europe’s Project of Measure
Reintroducing pluralism in finance is not about dismantling global markets, it is about ensuring they remain contestable. That requires action at multiple levels: encouraging European index providers to emerge; creating a public ESG rating agency independent from market funding; mandating the disclosure of shareholder voting records; and developing the European Single Access Point (ESAP) as a shared data platform. These are not acts of resistance but of reconstruction, these are ways to anchor capitalism in accountability.
Key Figures
• $17 trillion – Global ETF assets under management (ETFGI, 2025)
• 70% – Share held by the top three global managers
• 95% – Market share of the top five index providers
• 40% – ESG-labelled funds with inconsistencies (ESMA, 2024)
• 0.4% – Forecast eurozone growth for 2025 (European Commission)
Sources :
1. ETFGI, European ETF Industry Report, February 2025
2. Lipper Alpha / Refinitiv, Concentration of AUM in the ETF Industry, August 2025
3. ESMA, Final Report on Greenwashing, June 2024
4. OECD, Common Ownership and Competition, 2023
5. Financial Stability Board & BIS, Asset Management and Financial Stability, 2024
6. European Commission, CSRD, EU Taxonomy, SFDR, ESRS, 2025
7. European Commission, Autumn 2025 Economic Forecasts
8. Reuters, EU watchdog warns of resource limits to tackle greenwashing, June 2024