According to Vantage Market Research the Global Lab Grown Diamonds Market Size is expected to reach a value of USD 27.2 Billion in 2023. The Lab Grown Diamonds Market is projected to showcase a CAGR of 9.1% from 2024 to 2032 and is estimated to be valued at USD 59.5 Billion by 2032.
The lab-grown diamonds market has emerged as a formidable force within the diamond industry, captivating consumers with its ethical and sustainable approach to creating stunning gemstones. Unlike mined diamonds, which are extracted from the earth through an environmentally impactful process, lab-grown diamonds are meticulously crafted in controlled laboratory environments.
This innovative technology replicates the natural diamond formation process, resulting in stones with the same physical, chemical, and optical properties as their mined counterparts. The burgeoning lab-grown diamond market is fueled by a confluence of factors, including rising environmental consciousness, evolving consumer preferences, technological advancements, and increasing disposable incomes.
As Guy Borenstein gears up for Stuller’s Bench Jeweler Workshop in March, there’s one hot topic that will be addressed for the fifth consecutive year: synthetic diamonds.
There’s no shortage of available equipment to detect lab-grown diamonds. According to the Natural Diamond Council (NDC), there are about 40 instruments on the market that aim to discover natural versus synthetic diamonds.
“Five years ago, I asked attendees how many were screening for lab-grown diamonds [LGDs] and one hand went up,” says the director of gemstone procurement for the Lafayette, Louisiana-based manufacturer. That number has grown as the years passed, but “the majority are still not checking,” he adds.
Considering the recent number of undisclosed synthetics sent to labs, retailers should be more vigilant. In the last two months, four labs — comprising one in Italy and three, including the Gemological Institute of America (GIA), with US outposts — have reported incidents of synthetic diamonds submitted for grading under the guise of being natural. The labs, with their multitude of testing instruments and scientific savvy, have the manpower and resources to uncover the truth, but what about retailers, small manufacturers, and dealers? Other than sending every diamond purchased either over the counter or from a jewelry maker to a lab, what can the rest of industry do to guard against unknowing purchases of synthetic diamonds? Screen, baby, screen.
Marc Altman of B&E Jewelers in Southampton, Pennsylvania., started selling synthetics only last year, but has encountered them in newly manufactured goods sold to him as natural and in the engagement rings of unknowing clients. In the case of the new jewelry, he suspects it was an honest error.
“It was one ring,” he says. “It was a big order, and my assumption was that they also made jewelry with LGDs.”
Thanks to his GIA ID100 screening tool, he was able to spot-check trays of new finished jewelry. In the case of individual client rings, he’ll use a polariscope and the ID100 to determine if a diamond is natural or synthetic. In the last three weeks, he’s taken in two rings for resizing that were set with lab-grown and not the natural diamonds that clients thought they had. These examples are why screening goods on intake is critical and reveals deficiencies in disclosure by others at the time of sale. These are lawsuits in the making.
“If I didn’t [screen], my reputation would be at risk,” he says.
Fraud or flub?
Recent high-profile lab incidents aside — like the 6-carat synthetic laser-inscribed as a natural the International Gemological Institute (IGI) examined, or the pink, yellow and brown lab-grown diamonds posing as natural that Gem Science Laboratory (GSI) received — not every facility sees the spike in undisclosed synthetics as deliberate by fraudsters.
As a percentage of all diamonds examined, the number submitted as natural that turn out to be lab-grown is miniscule, says IGI CEO Tehmasp Printer.
“Ten years ago, 95% of parcels were contaminated,” he continues. “Today that number is reduced to half a percent. Initially, some did try to push LGDs as naturals and then labs learned how to ID the material. Now, there are mistakes and errors, but most are not intentional. No manufacturers are polishing LGDs and naturals in the same space; it’s done separately. The problems occur when parcels are given out for memo, and then there is a little switch here and there by mistake.”
Other incidents aren’t as clear. A recent GSI discovery involved mounted brown diamonds with linear graining and polished surfaces “to try to pass it as natural,” maintains Debbie Azar, cofounder and president of GSI. “While initial gemological observations would suggest they were likely natural, our advanced testing processes revealed they were CVD [chemical vapor deposition lab-grown diamonds] almost immediately by looking at their optical defects.”
No matter the intention behind the incidents, GIA takes each one — and steps to avoid them — seriously. For example, nearly every synthetic diamond that comes in for a report is inscribed as such. It also recently unveiled a same-day service for report confirmation of GIA-graded diamonds with or without markings. The service is offered to combat fraudulent inscriptions and for now is free.
“We should all be doing everything possible to ensure consumer trust,” says Pritesh Patel, GIA senior vice president and chief operating officer. Patel is responsible for lab operations. “One is not more vulnerable than another in the trade; everybody should be vigilant,” he cautions.
One of the toughest tasks in effectively screening jewelry today is the large quantity of small stones. The labs can handle it, but it’s tedious.
“Our biggest challenge is testing items encrusted with micro-pavé — jewelry set with 0.005-carat and smaller diamonds,” says Angelo Palmieri, president of GCAL by Sarine. “The challenge predominantly revolves around exercising patience.”
Then there are the hidden halos of diamonds; only visible diamonds can be easily checked on finished jewelry, so the trade must remember to flip pieces on their sides for inspection.
“We see as many naturals in LGD-set jewelry as we see LGDs in natural diamond jewelry,” adds Palmieri. “We see this happen with everybody, from high-end brands to sightholders. We’re not seeing 50% wrong — we see cases where one is natural or LGD. It doesn’t look intentional; it looks like it’s hard to keep track of the melee.”
Azar, too, is familiar with this wearisome process.
“Pieces with smaller diamonds and melee can be extremely time-consuming and the work is intricate,” she says. “We screen thousands of diamonds each day and we are detecting undisclosed laboratory-grown diamonds every day. They are usually in mounted goods where the mounting obscures full observation of the diamond.”
The solution? Enhanced quality controls such as constant and repeated testing when diamonds are loose and once they’re set. “Most companies don’t want to put in the hard work (and patience) that comes with thorough and complete testing,” observes Palmieri.
IGI screening lab. (IGI)Tools and techniques
Like Altman, other retailers can use a microscope, polariscope and GIA’s ID100 in store — they’re compact and not too cost prohibitive.
Labs have myriad methods, including custom machines and proprietary research, to uncover the truth. There are also common methods used by all labs, like “Raman and photoluminescence spectroscopy” and “basic gemological testing,” among others, notes Palmieri.
GIA even has a facility in New Jersey devoted solely to the study of lab-grown diamonds to stay ahead of their developments. “GIA spends a tremendous amount on research,” notes Patel.
GIA Gem Instruments Polariscope. (GIA)
Lab consensus is that one instrument isn’t enough. Multiple tools and experienced operators are necessary to reveal undisclosed synthetics.
“Each instrument has its own advantages and limitations,” says Palmieri. “No one machine can give you all the answers.”
Azar urges the trade to adopt a deductive process for distinguishing between naturals and synthetics. For example, does it have garnet crystals? Then it is “definitively natural,” she says. But if a diamond has no inclusions or is type IIa, send it to a lab for testing. For mounted goods, “all bets are off because of the complexities,” she adds.
Dror Yehuda, president of Yehuda Diamond Company — formerly a maker of clarity-enhanced diamonds — shifted to manufacturing diamond detectors around 2015. That’s the year, he maintains, that lab-grown diamonds came to market with gusto. “The vast majority of my customers stopped carrying my Yehuda diamonds and moved to LGDs,” he reveals.
As a result, Yehuda built the first Sherlock Holmes detector, which is in its fourth generation. Three models now exist to accommodate a variety of needs and budgets.
To date, he has sold over 15,000 detectors worldwide.
“The second generation was tested by project Assure and was the only detector other than [De Beers’] SynthDetect that detected 100% of the LGDs,” says Yehuda.
The Assure Directory from the NDC is a resource for anyone trying to determine what instruments to purchase. Assure provides results of independent testing of a “wide range of diamond-verification instruments,” according to Samantha Sibley, technical educator at De Beers Group Ignite in the UK, which spearheads De Beers’ corporate approach to innovation.
Assure tests instruments for “diamond accuracy, referral rates, speed, and natural false positive rates [i.e., does the instrument pass any synthetic diamonds as natural?],” she continues. “The latter is the most crucial measure, and all De Beers verification instruments have a 0% false positive rate from both Assure 1.0 [2019] and Assure 2.0 [2022].”
Big Sherlock. (Yehuda Diamond Company)Model behavior
Manufacturing house Stuller takes extreme precautions to safeguard against undisclosed synthetics. The firm has 62 pieces of screening equipment and 40 associates to run them. It even has an in-house GIA lab for melee analysis (Stuller staffers aren’t even allowed inside).
Starting at a quarter of a point, Stuller tests every diamond individually, screening more than 5 million units a year. Each stone is tested by at least two different technologies so one “can compensate for the weakness of another,” adds Borenstein. “In a year, 50,000 units out of 5 million go to the lab for further tests.”
The onus is on Stuller to test because of Federal Trade Commission (FTC) regulations.
“Every player throughout the supply chain should test,” he urges. “We are still catching undisclosed stones on a daily basis, so just imagine how many of those are filtering into the market in an area with no screening at all.”
GIA iD100 instrument.(GIA)
Jay Seiler of Jay Seiler Jewelers in Duluth, Minnesota, is a risk taker. He has a Presidium tester to weed out cubic zirconia and moissanite when he buys gold, but no other equipment in-house to test diamonds. Why? He’s a private jeweler now after years of operating a big store. His clients are largely older, known to him, bought diamonds before the advent of lab-grown, and 90% of his work is custom. Still, what about the new diamonds he buys? Therein lies the risk.
By the time someone faces an undisclosed synthetic, however, it’s likely too late. “You won’t be able to defend yourself in court,” says Borenstein.
“Disclosure is not as explicit as it should be, and that will be a huge challenge for retailers in a few years,” says Palmieri.
WD Lab Grown Diamonds, the second largest lab grown producer in the USA, has filed for bankruptcy.
The Washington DC-based company is the first major casualty of the plunge in lab grown prices.
It filed for Chapter 7 protection last Wednesday (11 October) in a Delaware bankruptcy court, with disclosed liabilities of $44m with assets of $3m.
WD pioneered chemical vapor deposition (CVD) diamonds since 2008 and had its own patented process.
In 2016 it produced its first 5 carat round brilliant diamond and in 2018, it set a record for the largest gem quality lab grown, at 9.04 carat.
In 2021 it acquired J2 Materials, and advanced materials and diamond crystal growth laboratory based in Chicago.
WD generated $33m of revenue last year, according to a Financial Times report. But the company has fallen victim to low prices and intense competition from China and India.
De Beers decided to call time on offering lab-grown diamonds for engagement rings even as the man-made alternatives continue to cannibalize demand in one of the company’s most important markets.
After vowing for years that it wouldn’t sell stones created in laboratories, in 2018 De Beers reversed that position and only this year started testing sales of the diamonds in the crucial engagement-ring sector.
The diamond industry leader said Wednesday that the trial showed that it wasn’t a sustainable market.
De Beers’ move comes as the kinds of stones that go into the cheaper one- or two-carat solitaire bridal rings popular in the US have experienced far sharper price drops than the rest of the market, with the lower-cost lab-grown competition seen behind the collapse.
De Beers has said the current weakness is a natural downswing in demand after the pandemic, with engagement rings particularly vulnerable. The company concedes that there has been some penetration into the category from synthetic stones, but doesn’t see it as a structural shift.
Lab-grown diamonds — physically identical stones that can be made in matter of weeks in a microwave chamber — have long been seen as an existential threat to the natural mining industry. Proponents say they can offer a cheaper alternative without many of the environmental or social downsides sometimes attached to mined diamonds.
While the price of some natural stones used in lower-quality engagement rings have plummeted in the past year, the fall in lab-grown prices has been even steeper. De Beers has said it expects lab-grown prices to continue to decline as more supply comes into the market
Retailers would need to double the number of lab-grown carats they sell every two years, just to maintain profits, De Beers said.
One of the world’s most popular types of rough diamonds has plunged into a pricing free fall, as an increasing number of Americans choose engagement rings made from lab-grown stones instead.
Diamond demand across the board has weakened after the pandemic, as consumers splash out again on travel and experiences, while economic headwinds eat into luxury spending. However, the kinds of stones that go into the cheaper one- or two-carat solitaire bridal rings popular in the US have experienced far sharper price drops than the rest of the market.
The reason, according to industry insiders, is soaring demand for lab-grown stones. The synthetic diamond industry has paid special attention to this category, where consumers are especially price-sensitive, and the efforts are now paying off in the world’s biggest diamond buyer.
The shift doesn’t mean engagement rings are about to go on deep discount — the impact is limited to the rough-diamond market, an opaque world of miners, merchants and tradespeople that is several steps removed from the price tags in a jewelry store.
However, the scale and speed of the pricing collapse of one of the diamond industry’s most important products has left the market reeling. Now, the question is whether the plunging demand for natural diamonds in this category represents a permanent change, and — crucially — if the inroads made by lab-grown gems will eventually spread to the more expensive diamonds that are typically dominated by Asian buying.
Industry leader De Beers insists the current weakness is a natural downswing in demand, after stuck-at-home shoppers sent prices soaring during the pandemic, with cheaper engagement rings having been particularly vulnerable. The company concedes that there has been some penetration into the category from synthetic stones, but doesn’t see it as a structural shift.
“There has been a little bit of cannibalization. That has happened, I don’t think we should deny that,” said Paul Rowley, who heads De Beers’ diamond trading business. “We see the real issue as a macroeconomic issue.”
Lab-grown diamonds — physically identical stones that can be made in a matter of weeks in a microwave chamber — have long been seen as an existential threat to the natural mining industry, with proponents saying they can offer a cheaper alternative without many of the environmental or social downsides sometimes attached to mined diamonds.
For much of the last decade, the risk remained unrealized, with synthetics eating away at cheaper gift-giving segments but making limited headway otherwise. That is now changing, with lab-grown products starting to take a much bigger bite of the crucial US bridal market.
De Beers has responded to weakening demand by aggressively cutting prices for the category known as “select makeables” — rough diamonds between 2 and 4 carats that can be cut into stones about half that size when polished, yielding centrepiece diamonds for bridal rings that are high quality, but not flawless.
De Beers has cut prices in the category by more than 40% in the past year, including one cut of more than 15% in July, according to people familiar with the matter.
The one-time monopoly still wields considerable power in the rough diamond market, selling its gems through 10 sales each year in which the buyers — known as sightholders — generally have to accept the price and the quantities offered.
Price drop De Beers typically reserves aggressive cuts as a last resort, and the scale of the recent price falls for a benchmark product is unprecedented outside of a speculative bubble crash, traders said.
In June 2022, De Beers was charging about $1,400 a carat for the select makeable diamonds. By July this year, that had dropped to about $850 a carat. And there may be more room to fall: the diamonds are still 10% more expensive than in the “secondary” market, where traders and manufacturers sell among themselves.
De Beers declined to comment on its diamond pricing.
One of the clearest signs of the traction being made by lab-grown diamonds is their share of diamond exports from India, where about 90% of global supply is cut and polished. Lab-grown accounted for about 9% of diamond exports from the country in June, compared with about 1% five years ago. Given the steep discount that they sell for, that means about 25% to 35% of volume is now lab-grown, according to Liberum Capital Markets.
The impact on De Beers was clear in the first half. The Anglo American Plc’s unit’s first half profits plunged more than 60% to just $347 million, with its average selling price falling from $213 per carat to $163 per carat. Its August sale was the smallest of the year so far.
De Beers has responded by giving its buyers additional flexibility. It’s allowed them to defer contracted purchases for the rest of the year of up to 50% of the diamonds bigger than 1 carat, according to people familiar with the situation.
While lab-grown diamonds are currently hurting demand for natural stones, the upstart industry is also suffering. The price of synthetic diamonds has plunged even more steeply than that of natural stones, and are selling at a bigger discount than ever before.
About five years ago, lab-grown gems sold at about a 20% discount to natural diamonds, but that has now blown out to around 80% as the retailers push them at increasingly lower prices and the cost of making them falls. The price of polished stones in the wholesale market has fallen by more than half this year alone.
De Beers started selling its own lab-grown diamonds in 2018 at a steep discount to the going price, in an attempt to differentiate between the two categories. The company expects lab-grown prices to continue to tumble, in what it sees as a tsunami of more supply coming onto the market, Rowley said. That should create an even bigger delta in prices between natural diamonds and lab-grown, helping differentiate the two products, he said.
“With the increase in supply we’ll see prices fall through the price point and reach a level where, long term, it does not compete with bridal because it comes too cheap,” said Rowley. “Ultimately they are different products and the finite and rarity of natural diamonds is a different proposition.”
The research documents by MRFR indicate that the “Synthetic Diamonds Market Research Report Information by Application, Product, Region, Type, and Manufacturing Process – Forecast Till 2032”, the Synthetic Diamonds market is predicted to grow substantially over the assessment timeframe from 2022 to 2032 at a healthy CAGR of around 7.80%.
The reports even share predictions regarding the market’s growing revenue share, which will likely reach USD 29.9 Billion by the end of 2032. As per the reports, the market was worth nearly USD 15.2 Billion in 2022.
The primary market factors accelerating market expansion include rising demand from the semiconductor and electronics sectors as well as increased demand for computer chips and other microchips used in many other types of electronics.
The increase in demand for synthetic diamonds from the semiconductor and electronics industries is the primary factor behind the growth of the global market for synthetic diamonds. The increase in disposable money among the general population benefits the market.
The World Jewellery Confederation (CIBJO) and the International Grown Diamond Association (IGDA) have agreed to collaborate to protect consumer confidence around synthetic diamonds.
The organizations have signed a memorandum of understanding (MoU) calling for the pair to develop standards, operating principles and terminology for lab-grown diamonds, they said Monday. IGDA president Joanna Park-Tonks will sit on CIBJO’s laboratory-grown diamond committee, which has created a “Laboratory-Grown Diamond Guideline” governing standards for trading and handling synthetic stones.
The honest and accurate presentation of sustainability issues is a current focus for CIBJO’s laboratory-grown committee and was an element during the discussions between CIBJO and IGDA, the organizations said.
“We have had open lines of communication for some time already, and IGDA did participate in the public review before we released the ‘Laboratory-Grown Diamond Guidance’ document in 2021,” said CIBJO president Gaetano Cavalieri. “Over the past several years, the laboratory-grown diamonds sector has grown into a large and a prominent part of our industry, and we all have a vested interest in each other’s success.”
The signing took place on Sunday during the National Association of Jewellers (NAJ) Summit in Birmingham, UK.
India-based Ethereal Green Diamond has created and sold the largest polished lab-grown diamond in history, according to the International Gemological Institute (IGI), which graded it.
Named Shiphra, the emerald-cut, 50.25-carat, type IIa stone has G color, VS2 clarity, and an “excellent” score for cut, polish and symmetry, IGI said Thursday. It measures 22.95 x 18.45 x 11.57 millimeters. It’s the world’s first polished lab-grown diamond above 50 carats, IGI claimed.
Ethereal grew the 150-carat rough using the chemical vapor deposition (CVD) method over a period of eight months. It cut the stone in Surat, India, and will display the polished at its JCK Las Vegas booth. Swiss brand Shiphra Jewelry has bought it and lent its name to the piece.
“This gemstone is a paradigm-shifting breakthrough, surpassing 50 carats while exemplifying preeminent standards of sophistication and quality,” said Tehmasp Printer, president and managing director of IGI India.
The record comes shortly after IGI graded its largest lab-grown diamond to date: A 35-carat CVD stone that Maitri Lab Grown Diamonds produced. Last month, the Gemological Institute of America (GIA) said it had examined a 34.59-carat diamond that Ethereal synthesized using the same method.
Diamonds have long been revered for their beauty, rarity, and association with luxury. However, traditional diamond mining comes with ethical concerns and environmental impacts. In recent years, laboratory-grown diamonds have emerged as an alternative, marketed as a sustainable and eco-friendly choice. This article explores whether laboratory-grown diamonds truly live up to their claims of sustainability and environmental friendliness.
The Process of Laboratory-Grown Diamonds: Laboratory-grown diamonds, also known as synthetic or cultured diamonds, are created in controlled environments using advanced technology. They are produced through two primary methods: High-Pressure High-Temperature (HPHT) and Chemical Vapor Deposition (CVD). Both methods involve replicating the natural conditions that cause diamond formation but in a shorter time frame.
Environmental Impact: a) Land Disruption: Traditional diamond mining often requires extensive land clearing and excavation, leading to habitat destruction and soil erosion. In contrast, laboratory-grown diamonds are produced in labs, eliminating the need for land disruption.
b) Energy Consumption: The production of laboratory-grown diamonds does require significant energy inputs, mainly in the form of electricity. However, advancements in technology have made the process more efficient, reducing energy requirements over time. Renewable energy sources can also be used to power these facilities, further minimizing their carbon footprint.
c) Water Usage: Traditional diamond mining can consume substantial amounts of water, contributing to local water scarcity and ecosystem degradation. Laboratory-grown diamond production generally requires significantly less water, making it a more environmentally friendly option.
d) Chemical Usage: While the production of laboratory-grown diamonds involves the use of chemicals, the industry is continually striving to reduce their environmental impact. Responsible manufacturers are working on developing greener chemical processes and minimizing the use of harmful substances.
Ethical Considerations: Traditional diamond mining has long been associated with human rights issues, including exploitative labor practices and conflicts (so-called “blood diamonds”). Laboratory-grown diamonds, on the other hand, offer a more transparent and traceable supply chain. Consumers can be confident that their diamonds are not contributing to human suffering or funding conflicts.
Long-Term Sustainability: a) Repurposing Waste: Laboratory-grown diamond production generates significantly less waste compared to mining. Additionally, by-products from the manufacturing process can be repurposed, further reducing the ecological impact.
b) Circular Economy: As laboratory-grown diamonds gain popularity, a potential future advantage lies in their ability to be recycled and repurposed. This aligns with the principles of a circular economy, where materials are reused rather than discarded.
Conclusion:
Laboratory-grown diamonds offer an alternative to traditional diamond mining that addresses many of the ethical and environmental concerns associated with the industry. While there are energy and chemical inputs involved, the overall impact is significantly reduced compared to mining. Furthermore, the transparency and traceability of laboratory-grown diamonds provide assurance to consumers seeking an ethical and sustainable choice.
As with any industry, continuous improvements are needed to enhance the sustainability of laboratory-grown diamond production. Manufacturers should prioritize the use of renewable energy, minimize chemical usage, and explore recycling options. By doing so, laboratory-grown diamonds can truly become a more sustainable and eco-friendly option, offering consumers the beauty and luxury they desire without compromising the environment or human rights.
Lightbox has promoted Adam O’Grady to the newly created role of chief operating officer, effective March 27.
The executive will lead all aspects of supply chain and manufacturing activity for the De Beers-owned lab-grown diamond company, it said last week. These include diamond synthesis and jewelry manufacturing, cutting and polishing, and research and development.
O’Grady has been general manager of the Lightbox lab since 2019. In addition to his new responsibilities, he will continue to oversee operations and engineering at the company’s advanced manufacturing lab in Gresham, Oregon, where he is based.
“He is a transformational leader with deep knowledge of the lab-grown diamond category,” said Lightbox CEO Antoine Borde.
Prior to joining Lightbox, O’Grady spent his two-decade professional career at Element Six, De Beers’ industrial super-materials and synthetic-diamond business. He served in a series of general management and senior project roles in South Africa, China and the UK. In 2019, he oversaw the design and construction of Lightbox’s $94 million manufacturing lab in Gresham, which opened in October 2020.
As of 2021 the laboratory-grown diamond trade market was estimated to be worth around $1.9 billion, according to a report by Frost & Sullivan.
This market is expected to grow significantly in the coming years, with some estimates suggesting that it could reach a value of over $15 billion by 2035.
laboratory-grown diamond trade has been growing steadily in recent years. There are several factors driving this growth.
Price: Laboratory-grown diamonds are typically less expensive than natural diamonds, which makes them an attractive option for consumers who are looking for high-quality jewelry at a more affordable price.
Ethical concerns: Some consumers are hesitant to purchase natural diamonds due to concerns about ethical issues such as conflict diamonds. Laboratory-grown diamonds are considered to be a more ethical alternative, as they are produced in a controlled environment and do not have the same potential ethical issues as natural diamonds.
Environmental concerns: The process of mining natural diamonds can have a significant environmental impact. Laboratory-grown diamonds are generally considered to be more environmentally friendly, as they do not require mining.
Advancements in technology: The technology used to produce laboratory-grown diamonds has improved significantly in recent years, making it easier and more cost-effective to produce high-quality diamonds. All of these factors have contributed to the growth of the laboratory-grown diamond trade, and it is expected to continue to grow in the coming years.
The answer is not yet: It is worth noting that natural diamonds still hold a significant share of the diamond market, and it remains to be seen how much of an impact laboratory-grown diamonds will have on the industry as a whole over the next decade.
Laboratory grown rough diamond type 2A carbon crystal.
The main difference between a natural mined diamond and a laboratory grown diamond is their origin. Natural diamonds are formed deep within the Earth’s mantle under extreme heat and pressure over millions of years, while laboratory grown diamonds are created in a controlled environment in a laboratory setting. Some other differences between natural mined diamonds and laboratory grown diamonds include:
Cost: Laboratory grown diamonds are generally less expensive than natural mined diamonds, as they don’t require expensive mining and extraction processes.
Clarity: Laboratory grown diamonds are generally more consistent in terms of their clarity, as they are grown under controlled conditions. Natural mined diamonds can have inclusions or blemishes, which can affect their clarity and value.
Size and Colour: Laboratory grown diamonds can be grown to larger sizes and in a wider range of colours, which may not be as easily available in natural mined diamonds.
Environmental impact: The environmental impact of laboratory grown diamonds is generally considered to be lower than that of natural mined diamonds, as mining can have a significant impact on the environment.
Rarity and Value: Natural mined diamonds are still considered more rare and valuable than laboratory grown diamonds, due to their long history and cultural significance. Ultimately, whether someone chooses a natural mined diamond or a laboratory grown diamond may depend on their personal preferences and priorities, such as environmental concerns, budget, or the desire for a natural, unique stone.
It is worth noting that both natural mined diamonds and laboratory grown diamonds are chemically and physically identical, and both can be certified and graded by independent gemmological laboratories based on the same criteria.
Martin Rapaport recently released an incendiary memo to the diamond and jewelry industry calling on them to stop doing business in lab-grown diamonds (LGD), which he characterized as “synthetic” and “fraudulent.”
He also claimed those selling LGD were “operating dishonestly and unethically” and trading short-term opportunities at the expense of those that are “certain and sustainable.”
Rapaport is the ultimate industry insider, and there’s no question about which side his bread is buttered on. As chairman of The Rapaport Group, his company is a portal for information about and services to the diamond industry, including the Rapaport Price List, which it claims is the industry’s primary source for diamond price and market information, and an online diamond trading network, RapNet.
In a request for comment, a Rapaport representative shared the memo but added no additional comment.
Rapaport wrote:
“The greatest challenge facing the diamond trade is greed. Our trade is willfully destroying the underlying value of diamonds as a store of value through the marketing, promotion and sale of synthetic diamonds as a replacement for natural diamonds”
And he added, “Essentially, the diamond industry is trading short-term, unsustainable profits for the reputation of diamonds as a store of value.”
Then he went further, “Many – if not most – in our trade are operating dishonestly and unethically by failing to make full disclosure about the value retention of synthetic diamonds.”
And his memo concluded, “The Rapaport Group does not facilitate the sale of synthetic diamonds in any way. We believe they are a fraudulent product because of how they are sold. They are also a threat to the fundamental message of diamonds.”
This memo followed a submission to the Responsible Jewellery Council (RJC) in December 2021, where he pointed to Zales, James Allen, Jared, Diamond Direct (all Signet brands) and Brilliant Earth as not providing full disclosure about the LGD jewelry they sell. “Consumer expectations are not being managed honestly by unethical retailers,” he claimed.
According to lawyer Milton Springut, partner at Moses Singer, Rapaport’s disparaging and potentially injurious claims against lab-grown diamonds and the parties who do business in them probably don’t violate federal or state liability laws.
But Rapaport’s words are ill-chosen, and his claims are without merit, according to experts I spoke with.
Synthesized But No Less Real Lab-grown diamonds may be synthetic, as in made by man, but they are just as “real” as a natural diamond, as defined by the FTC. A diamond, no matter its origin is “a mineral consisting essentially of pure carbon crystallized in the isometric system. It is found in many colors. Its hardness is 10; its specific gravity is approximately 3.52; and it has a refractive index of 2.42.”
While lab-growns that meet the above criteria can be labeled as a “diamond,” the FTC also ruled that their man-made origin must be clearly disclosed.
So it requires marketers must precede the word “diamond” with “equal conspicuousness” such words as “‘laboratory-grown,’ ‘laboratory-created,’ ‘[manufacturer name]-created,’ or some other word or phrase of like meaning, so as to disclose clearly the nature of the product and the fact it is not a mined gemstone.”
It took a little while for some involved to find their footing under the new FTC guidelines, but now it seems all companies and retailers trading in lab growns have gotten on board and clearly, responsibly and honestly disclose the man-made, laboratory-grown origins of their stones.
That’s why Rapaport’s word choice of “synthetic” is over the line, implying that lab-grown diamonds are “simulants,” on the order of CZs or moissanite that may have a diamond-look, but are distinctly different in their physical properties and chemical composition.
“It’s an intentionally pejorative term because he is desperately trying to hold on to the tradition of mined diamonds,” said Marty Hurwitz, founder of market-research firm MVI Marketing LLC (THE MVEye) that specializes in the gem, jewelry and watch industries since 1987.
“One could argue using the term ‘synthetic’ may cause harm to lab-grown businesses, but it is clear that people who use the word are using it in a denigrating fashion,” he continued.
Hurwitz also notes the Gemological Institute of America (GIA), a non-profit educational and research organization that is the industry’s primary source for grading stones, doesn’t use the term “synthetic” any longer. It provided a limited grading program for lab-grown diamonds since 2007, then expanded and elevated it in 2020 as LGDs gained more industry and consumer acceptance.
GIA’s chief executive Susan Jacques described its decision as the natural evolution of the diamond market.
“We are responding to consumer demand,” she stated. “We want to make sure that consumers are educated, that we can protect their trust in the gem and jewelry industry as well as the products they are buying. As consumers adopt this new category, it’s important that we evolve with the new consumer.”
Value Is In The Meaning Rapaport’s rage against lab-grown diamonds seems to hinge on the fact that having an equivalent competing product in the market is causing the price of mined diamonds to fall. That’s the natural economic law of supply and demand.
And given that the prices of lab-grown diamonds are steadily falling, it is putting downward pricing pressure on mined diamonds too, reports diamond industry analyst Edahn Golan, though mined diamonds are experiencing a more moderate decline.
Then Rapaport goes one step further to claim that a mined diamond is a repository or “store of value” and that retaining, even increasing, its monetary value over time is part of the promise with purchase. This is patently false, both Hurwitz and Golan affirm.
“There is limited to no investment value in diamonds,” Hurwitz said. “Some categories of mined diamonds are investment grade and go up in value, but most diamonds depreciate faster than a car leaving the showroom. The average consumer has been fed a marketing myth, the greatest marketing story ever told. Most consumers never find out the truth because they don’t resell their diamonds.”
Golan added that jewelers have perpetuated the myth by offering a trade-in, so a purchaser of a $2,000 diamond ring can get that back in credit if they return to purchase a bigger, more expensive stone.
“I’m hearing the big trend in America now is for people who want to upgrade their engagement ring decide to keep their original stone and have it made into something else, like a pendant,” he said.
People hold onto their stone because of its sentimental, symbolic value, which is where the actual value lies, as Warren Buffett said, “Price is what you pay. Value is what you get.”
DeBeers tried to equate the two with its rule that a man should pay two-to-three months’ salary on an engagement ring. But ironically, that’s turned back on the industry because, with a lab grown, he can buy a bigger, more impressive stone that speaks even louder of his love for her when he pops the question.
Nothing Unethical, Fraudulent Or Dishonest Selling Lab Growns Rapaport goes too far when he suggests that there is something unethical, fraudulent or dishonest in selling lab-grown diamonds.
“The idea that diamonds are a store of value is a fundamental component of diamond demand. Consumers are being misled by retailers who sell man-made diamonds without full disclosure. The default assumption among consumers is that man-made diamonds will appreciate over time, even though the opposite is true,” he stated in his RJC filing.
One could argue that what is unethical, fraudulent and dishonest is suggesting that a mined diamond retains, even grows in monetary value.
“Rapaport is thinking like a diamond trader. Trading prices move up and down with the market. When they go up, it’s good; when they go down, it’s bad,” Golan said, noting that the increasing availability and consumer demand for lab growns is moving the needle for mined diamonds in the wrong direction.
Unlike traders, retailers think about cash flow, margins and turns. And this is where lab-grown diamonds have the edge.
“Jewelry stores hold loose diamonds on hand and the margins on loose natural diamonds is around 36%, while the margin for LGD was 54% at the end of December. And if it takes a retailer a year to sell a mined stone, but it only averages seven months to sell a lab-grown, a retailer will make more money at the end of the year,” Golan explained.
Hurwitz rhetorically asks, “Should we tell the consumers who are walking into our stores asking for lab-growns to go away? Should we say, ‘We don’t want to sell you this product that means incredibly high margins and profits for us and incredibly high value to you?’”
Retailers that trade in lab-growns are transparent and honest about the origin of their stones. The FTC requires it. There is nothing unethical, fraudulent or dishonest for a retailer to sell a customer what they want at the price they want to pay and to make money in the process.
“Half the diamonds are sold in the United States, and 50% of the business in the United States is bridal. The natural diamond industry is losing a chunk of that ‘Holy Grail’ to lab growns. The industry has to adapt to the changing world. It’s a combination of a cultural and business change that are driving each other,” Golan shared.
Can’t Turn Back The Clock “Rapaport has a tremendous self-interest in seeing the mined diamond business continue to thrive,” observed Hurwitz. “He’s trying to ensure that things never change. He wants to hold onto the tradition, but that’s futile.”
While Rapaport may be trying to valiantly to save the mined diamond industry, he may be doing more harm than good.
“The good news for the lab-grown diamond industry is that he appears to be going off the rails in his attacks, and as a result, fewer and fewer people are listening to him,” Hurwitz said.
“There is a consumer revolution happening because of lab-grown diamonds. As an industry, we must embrace the change and give consumers a choice.” he continued.
“Rapaport just wants to tell everybody that this product is good and that is bad. But the only voice that matters is the consumer. And the consumer is organically and very virally embracing this new product.”
Pandora, the world’s biggest jeweller, is launching a collection using exclusively lab-made diamonds in the US and Canada as part of the company’s strategy to eliminate mined gems and create more affordable products with less associated emissions.
The Danish company, which plans to make its operations carbon neutral within three years, said the collection is the first one crafted with 100% recycled silver and gold.
SIGN UP FOR THE SUPPLIERS DIGEST
“This brings greenhouse gas emissions of the collection’s entry product – a silver ring with a 0.15 carat lab-created diamond ($300) – down to 2.7 kg CO2e, which is equal to the average emissions of a t-shirt,” Pandora said.
The flagship product, a one carat lab-created diamond set in a 14 carat solid gold ring and sold for about $1,950, has a footprint of 10.4kg CO2e, which is less than the average emissions of a pair of jeans.
The jeweller, best known for its charm bracelets, has committed to craft all its pieces from recycled silver and gold by 2025.
Pandora launched its first Pandora Brilliance collection using only man-made diamonds in the UK last year.
“Lab-created diamonds are just as beautiful as mined diamonds, but available to more people and with lower carbon emissions,” chief executive officer Alexander Lacik said in the statement.
World’s top jewellery maker Pandora ditches mined diamonds The Danish company, best known for its charm bracelets, already doesn’t include mined diamonds in most of its pieces. (Image courtesy of Pandora.) While producing diamonds is energy-intensive, Pandora said its gems would be made using only renewable energy.
Since 2011, when prices peaked thanks to China’s younger shoppers, diamonds have faltered. Lab-grown stones, initially priced confusingly close to the real thing, posed a challenge.
Top diamond makers reacted to the new kind of diamonds, widely embraced by young consumers as they look identical to mined stones, by launching a joint marketing campaign.
Under the motto “Real is Rare”, the Natural Diamond Council (formerly the Diamond Producers Association), which groups the world’s leading diamond companies, launched a series of film-like spots targeting millennials — those born between 1981 and 1996.
Failing that, they begun selling man-made diamonds themselves. Anglo American’s De Beers created the Lightbox brand to sell alternative diamonds for a fraction of the price of the mined ones.
Ethical concerns Despite the establishment of the Kimberley Process in 2003, aimed at removing conflict diamonds from the supply chain, experts say trafficking of precious rocks is still ongoing.
Miners and world famous jewellers including Tiffany & Co, have come up with innovative ways of certifying their stones as ethically mined, mostly based in blockchain technology.
In 2020, the New York-based company began providing customers with details of newly sourced, individually registered diamonds that trace a stone’s path all the way back to the mine.
When De Beers first introduced its Lightbox lab-grown jewelry brand in 2018, the diamond world sat up and took notice. The mining giant had long been outspoken about its belief that synthetic stones were neither special nor unique. And despite having entered the field itself, the company still holds by that sentiment. Since first making waves throughout the trade, it has done its utmost to create a clear distinction between the two types of stones, touting natural diamonds as a higher-value, engagement-worthy offering, and positioning Lightbox’s products in what brand CEO Steve Coe delineates as “the accessibly priced fashion-jewelry space.”
But a look at the market four years on suggests that this message may have been lost in translation.
The opening gambit
After the initial shock of the Lightbox announcement wore off, the general theory in the natural-diamond industry was that the brand was De Beers’ strategy for negating the perceived threat of lab-grown. Understood but unspoken in its marketing was that Lightbox aimed to create an alternative stream for synthetics — one that wasn’t bridal and wasn’t in that price range.
“I think there was a great opportunity for lab-grown diamonds that De Beers didn’t want to pass up,” says Dick Garard, president of the International Grown Diamond Association (IGDA). “They thought they had a marketing strategy there…. They came out with a pricing structure, and the intent was to drive the pricing down to that point. I think their overall intent was to help augment their mined-diamond business.”
Jewelry consultant Pam Danziger also took Lightbox’s debut as a warning shot to synthetics — a way of reframing them as a lesser alternative to natural stones, not as a luxury product.
“De Beers tried to tell the consumer what lab-grown diamonds were for,” she says. “They said it’s for fashion, not for anything serious. It was like they were trying to exert market control and keep lab-grown in a separate lane.”
Of course, a company as big and well-known as De Beers can’t rock the boat without creating some far-reaching ripples, and it did — just not necessarily the ones it may have been expecting.
Stamp of approval?
If De Beers’ subliminal strategy was to create an invisible barrier around the space where lab-grown was supposed to reside, the plan did not unfold as it was meant to. Rather than decreasing interest in synthetic diamonds as a viable alternative to natural, the company’s move into the space solidified lab-grown’s legitimacy among trade members and consumers alike.
“[De Beers] kind of heightened the awareness and desire for lab-grown diamonds,” explains Adrienne Fay, vice president of Warren Buffett-owned jeweler Borsheims. “Maybe it was an unintended consequence, rather than a misstep, that by trying to point out that this is a product inferior to mined diamonds, it sort of highlighted the fact that it’s actually a product very similar to mined diamonds, and that there is a demand for it.”
The De Beers name on lab-grown jewelry became the ultimate stamp of approval for customers, agrees Eileen Hopman, owner of Hopman Jewelers in Elkhart, Indiana. Whenever she saw doubt from shoppers about the validity of synthetics, she says, she would whisper the magic words: “Even De Beers is selling lab-grown.” From there, the purchase was usually a fait accompli.
Traders, too, have taken the De Beers move as an endorsement, reports Mark Clodius, owner of Clodius & Co. Jewelers in Rockford, Illinois.
“It certainly prompted overall approval throughout the industry, and quite dramatically,” he says. “It achieved so much publicity that it was hard for jewelers to ignore it.”
“What De Beers has…been successful at is having price consistency among diamond growers.”
Adrienne Fay Vice President, Borsheims
The bridal boom
Fay, Hopman and Clodius are among the jewelers that were already carrying lab-grown diamonds before the launch of Lightbox. From the brand’s debut in 2018 until a year later, the retailers saw a big jump in growth, with sales doubling or better every year after that.
Consumer surveys appear to support this trend. The number of bridal shoppers who feel a natural diamond is important has gone down, according to a 2021 survey from wedding website The Knot. Nearly one quarter of all engagement ring purchases last year featured a man-made center stone, it found — an increase of 11% over two years. Another study, this one by jewelry insurance business Brite & Co., confirms that lab-grown is gaining on natural when it comes to bridal appeal: The market share of synthetic-diamond engagement rings grew to more than 28% in 2021 from 19% the year before, while average spending rose 9%, not far behind the 12% increase that mined stones enjoyed.
Despite the data, however, De Beers insists it will not hop on the lab-grown engagement train and says it still sees synthetics functioning most promisingly in fashion. The lower price point of that segment “opens up a very exciting opportunity for a much higher level of repeat purchases,” says Coe. “There are some retailers out there that are pushing the [engagement] avenue very strongly…but we see the big opportunity for lab-grown elsewhere.”
Still, by setting a bar and sticking to it, Lightbox might be missing out. The bulk of lab-grown sales at Borsheims are for bridal, and synthetics make up approximately 60% of engagement ring purchases at Clodius. Hopman, who first began carrying them as an alternative to natural stones, says they’ve become her bread and butter, making up 90% of all engagement center stones she sells. The lab-created gems have become so popular with her buyers that she has stopped carrying natural diamonds unless they’re preset in a piece she really likes.
“Like De Beers, we were initially promoting them more for fashion jewelry versus engagement rings,” she explains. “But more people came in and wanted bigger diamonds, and as the prices for mined diamonds began to increase, they were stuck settling for either a smaller diamond or a lesser-quality stone. And we began showing them the lab-grown. Once we let them know the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) had sanctioned them as real diamonds, they took off.”
“There are some retailers out there that are pushing the [engagement] avenue very strongly…but we see the big opportunity elsewhere.”
Steve Coe CEO, Lightbox
The price is right
One thing De Beers has managed to do, Fay believes, is contain the price of lab-grown, though not at the $800-per-carat level that Lightbox charges. Not even at the $1,500-per-carat price tag of its Finest line, which includes synthetic stones with a higher color range of D to F.
“De Beers, because they’re such a behemoth, they’re going to have an impact,” asserts Fay. “I think what De Beers has managed to disrupt, and been successful at, is having price consistency among lab-grown diamond growers.”
The figures seem to prove her right. Within six months of Lightbox’s arrival on the scene, the average discount for a 1-carat lab-grown diamond grew to 42% of the equivalent natural stone — up from 29% in January 2018, just before the De Beers brand launched, according to data that Reuters cited from industry analyst Paul Zimnisky. Meanwhile, wholesale prices for synthetics fell 13.3% from 2019 to 2020, according to online marketplace Virtual Diamond Boutique.
Clodius and Hopman are currently selling lab-grown engagement rings at approximately 50% to 70% of their natural counterparts’ prices, depending on the cut and carat weight of the stone, and the price they pay their lab-grown suppliers has dropped since 2018. However, they’re a bit more hesitant to attribute the latter development to Lightbox. So is Zimnisky.
“I believe it’s the overall fundamentals of the market that are pressuring lab-grown diamond prices — particularly the supply side of the equation — not Lightbox per se,” Zimnisky says. “Perhaps the Lightbox launch a few years back has accelerated this trend, but when you really look at the supply fundamentals of the space, how many new producers have entered the space in the recent past, I think it’s more production growth and production improvements that have accelerated supply [and] most heavily weighed on prices.”
“It was like [De Beers was] trying to exert market control and keep lab-grown in a separate lane.”
Pam Danziger Jewelry consultant
Down the line
What does the future hold for lab-grown, and will De Beers play a role in how it gets there? The answer depends on whom you ask.
“Will lab-grown diamonds fall into fashion? Yes,” says the IGDA’s Garard. “But will they also still fall into bridal and high-end? Absolutely. And supply is too tight to meet demand currently, so to have a carat sell for $800? I think that’s a bit low.”
Zimnisky disagrees: “Ultimately, I think the Lightbox price point is the right level for the lab-grown diamond product in general. Sometimes I think it’s too low, and sometimes I feel that it’s too high, so that’s probably a sign that it’s just about right — for now, at least. However…in five years’ time, this price point will probably seem too high. I think we’ll see $500 per carat or less in 10 years’ time. Longer-term, I think the price point is what will ultimately relegate the product to more ‘fashion’-oriented — more so than marketing efforts.”
