Platforms · Software · Providers · Markets
Lithuania's client count climbed
Investment firms in Lithuania served 4.9 million retail clients from other countries in 2025, according to ESMA. That was 31% of the 15.5 million clients in its figures. Cyprus recorded 4.2 million, or 27%, across 78 reporting firms. Lithuania's total came from just two firms.
The Lithuanian count grew from 500 customers in 2022. A year before 2025, ESMA recorded one firm with 2.6 million clients; the following year, two firms reported a combined total nearly 90% higher. Their average was about 2.4 million clients each, the highest among the jurisdictions in the report.
A concentrated distribution model
One Lithuanian provider featured among Europe's five largest cross-border firms by client numbers. ESMA also found that one Lithuanian firm served retail clients across all 29 other EU and EEA countries, but did not say if it was the same firm. The regulator did not name either company. Bank of Lithuania records point to Revolut Securities Europe as the established provider, while Robinhood Europe appears to be the likeliest newcomer.
Robinhood Europe's annual report says it secured its Lithuanian MiFID licence in April 2025. The firm completed passporting ahead of a 30 June launch in parts of Europe, offering stock-token derivatives and crypto perpetual futures. It gives no corresponding European client figure, so the firms' respective shares of the 4.9 million cannot be established. The figures and company identification were first reported by Finance Magnates.
The broader market is concentrated: the five largest providers served 70% of reported clients, the top 10 accounted for 82%, and the top 20 for 91%. The remaining 329 firms served less than 4%. Execution was the main service, while advice was absent from the service menus of all five leading firms.
- Execution reached 87% of active cross-border clients; portfolio management reached 11%, and investment advice less than 1%.
- The Lithuanian firms received 2,251 complaints in 2025, up 44%. That was approximately 46 per 100,000 clients, against a European average of 71.
- ESMA cautioned that clients who joined in the second half of the year may not have had time to complain. The report excludes domestic and branch business, and one person can appear under more than one provider.
What an operations team should check
For broker operations, the published totals leave a material attribution gap: they do not show how the client base divides between the two firms. Teams working with entity-level reporting should check how cross-border counts are assigned to each legal entity, and whether the reporting view separates clients from domestic and branch business.
The complaint rate also needs the client growth context. A useful check is whether complaint reporting can be reviewed alongside onboarding timing, without treating the lower rate per client as evidence of better outcomes. Because one person may be counted by more than one provider, teams should also establish whether their own client and complaint measures use comparable counting rules.
ESMA's next reporting cycle should indicate whether growth came from the established provider, the newer entrant, or both. Until then, operators cannot use the published aggregate to allocate the reported client load between the two firms. They can check that internal reporting preserves the distinction between entities and records the timing of client additions alongside complaints.
