The Quoted Companies Alliance has published new research on AGMs for growth companies. It covers how small and mid-cap companies are approaching their annual shareholder meetings, what formats they are using, what is holding them back from changing, and what the UK regulatory picture looks like compared to other markets.
We have written up the findings below.
Only 1% of AIM-listed companies held a hybrid AGM in 2025. For FTSE 100 companies, that figure is 38%. The research points to cost and legal uncertainty as the main reasons smaller companies have been slower to adopt hybrid and virtual formats.
Half of small and mid-cap companies said they would hold a virtual AGM if the law allowed it. Among FTSE 100 companies, around two thirds said the same. The interest is clearly there across the market.
It would be easy to interpret this research to conclude that virtual is the preferred meeting format, but the reality is more nuanced.
Both major proxy agencies, ISS and Glass Lewis, currently recommend voting against proposals for virtual-only AGMs. Their concern is shareholder democracy: the ability of investors to meet the board face to face, ask questions directly and hold management to account in person. That is not a trivial concern, and it is one reason the debate is still live.
Some companies that moved to virtual-only formats have since returned to hybrid in response to shareholder pressure. Marks and Spencer is one example cited in the research, having moved back to a hybrid AGM in 2025 following shareholder feedback. Read more about how M&S approached digitally enabled AGMs in our case study. The direction of travel is not simply towards virtual. It is towards organisations making a more deliberate choice about what format serves their shareholders best.
The UK Government has signalled its intention to change the law to permit virtual-only AGMs, as part of its Modernising Corporate Reporting reforms. The detail and timeline are still subject to consultation, with nothing confirmed yet. The QCA is recommending that any update includes a requirement for companies to seek shareholder approval before moving to a virtual-only format, with that authorisation renewed at least every five years.
For companies thinking about their options, it is worth keeping an eye on how this develops.
Norway held 55% of meetings virtually in 2025, the highest rate in Europe. Germany is at just under 40%, following legislative changes in 2022 that gave companies a clear framework and required them to seek shareholder approval to go virtual. Notably, 84% of DAX 40 companies already have authorisation from shareholders to hold a virtual-only AGM in 2026.
Australia has permitted virtual AGMs since 2022, with 14% held virtually and 23% hybrid in 2025. The UK is one of only eight OECD jurisdictions without specific legal provisions for virtual AGMs, which goes some way to explaining the lower adoption rates seen in the research.
There is no single right answer on meeting format. In-room, hybrid and virtual each have genuine trade-offs around participation, cost, accessibility and governance. The right choice depends on your shareholder base, your articles of association, your budget and what your shareholders actually want.
What the research does suggest is that many organisations have not actively reviewed that question recently. The legal environment is changing, shareholder expectations are evolving, and the range of practical options is broader than it was a few years ago.
If cost has been a reason to put the conversation off, it is worth having it anyway. The options and the numbers may be different from what you expect.
Lumi Global works with organisations across the UK and internationally, supporting in-room, hybrid and virtual formats. Whatever meeting format you choose, ensuring that there is parity for all stakeholders is a key consideration. According to the QCA's research, 56% of FTSE 350 AGMs held virtually, in hybrid format or by webcast in 2025 ran on the Lumi platform.
If you would like to talk through your format options, we are happy to have that conversation.