Do Luxury Watches Actually Appreciate? Data Answer

A Rolex Submariner Date that retailed near $9,150 at its 2020 release now trades between $13,000 and $15,400 on the secondary market, per Chrono24 and WatchCharts listings as of mid-2026. That single line is why “watches appreciate” gets repeated at every dinner party. It is also misleading. The same WatchCharts data shows that of roughly 200 collections tracked across all price points, only about 15% were flat or up in a representative recent month, while the rest declined.

The honest answer to whether luxury watches appreciate is narrower than the marketing: a handful of references from three brands appreciate, most of everything else loses money, and the gap between those two outcomes has widened since the secondary market peaked in spring 2022.

The numbers that get quoted, and the ones that get omitted

Start with what the data actually supports. The WatchCharts Overall Market Index, composed of 300 watches from the top 10 luxury brands weighted by transaction value, declined steadily from its spring 2022 peak through most of 2024 before stabilizing. Through 2025 the index finished in positive territory, but the gains stayed concentrated: Patek Philippe led at roughly +7.7% for the year, while Audemars Piguet remained slightly negative. Across nearly 200 collections tracked in a representative early-2025 month, only about 15% held flat or rose.

That concentration is the entire story. When people invoke watches as an asset class, they are almost always citing the performance of perhaps a dozen references, then generalizing it to a category containing thousands. The watch secondary market structure rewards scarcity and brand hierarchy, not the act of buying a nice watch.

Consider the three references most often used as proof. Each retailed years ago and now trades well above its original list price. Each is also nearly impossible to buy at retail, which is precisely what creates the premium.

Source: WatchCharts Overall Market Index and model pages; Chrono24 listings (2025–2026).

Finluxy Watch Value Retention Score: the three references scored

The Finluxy Watch Value Retention Score divides secondary market value after five years by original retail price, times 100. Above 100 means appreciation; below 100 means the watch lost value against its sticker. The calculation is deliberately blunt because it strips out the rationalizations buyers use to justify the purchase emotionally.

For the Submariner Date 126610LN, Chrono24 records an official 2020 release list price near $9,150, with the secondary market settling between $13,000 and $15,400 in 2026. Taking the midpoint of roughly $14,200 against the release-year retail produces a score of about 155. Measured instead against the current $10,400 retail price, the score compresses to roughly 137 — the same figure pattern shown in the cluster’s reference example. Both are above 100, and the spread between them illustrates why the comparison year matters as much as the watch.

Source: Chrono24 (Rolex release-year retail); WatchCharts model pages for secondary market value (2026); Patek Philippe and Audemars Piguet retail figures from secondary market dealer records. Retail figures predate recent price increases; scores are approximate and condition-dependent.

Scores above 300 look spectacular until the denominator is examined. The Nautilus 5711/1A was discontinued in 2021, and discontinuation is the engine of nearly every extreme retention figure in this category. A model that can no longer be bought new converts its waitlist into a price floor overnight. The Nautilus price versus resale gap is real, but it is a one-time scarcity event, not a repeatable return stream. You cannot buy the 5711/1A at $34,900 today; that window closed.

Why retail price is the wrong starting number for most buyers

Here is the problem buried in every retention score: the retail price in the denominator is frequently a price you cannot actually pay. Rolex sports models, the discontinued Nautilus, and the most desirable Royal Oaks are allocation-only at authorized dealers. The real entry cost for most buyers is the secondary market price, which already contains the premium.

Run the Submariner again from a buyer’s actual position. Acquire the 126610LN today at roughly $14,200 rather than the fictional $9,150 retail nobody outside the allocation system pays. The appreciation that already happened is now your cost basis. For your purchase to “appreciate,” the secondary market must climb from an elevated level that has, per WatchCharts, already corrected meaningfully from its 2022 peak. The score that looks like 155 to an original retail buyer looks like 100 — break-even before costs — to the person buying in today.

This is the single most overlooked point in watch appreciation coverage, and it is specific to this dataset: the published retention scores measure the return captured by the allocation insider, not the return available to the buyer reading the article. The price threshold where watches stop being investments is reached the moment you pay the secondary market premium yourself.

The costs the appreciation story ignores

Even granting appreciation, the headline price delta is gross, not net. Ownership carries recurring costs that compound against the holding period, and the cluster’s lifecycle framework subtracts them explicitly: insurance, servicing, and secure storage.

Insurance runs roughly 1% to 5% of insured value annually, per BriteCo’s specialist watch coverage. On a $14,200 Submariner held five years, that is between $710 and $3,550 in cumulative premiums depending on carrier and location. A full Rolex service, recommended at intervals Rolex sets around a decade for modern calibers but which heavy wearers shorten to five to seven years, costs $800 to $1,200 at independents and more at official service centers, before any parts. Insured round-trip shipping for service adds $150 to $300.

Source: BriteCo (insurance); Bob’s Watches, ECI Jewelers, and Watch Chest (service pricing, 2025–2026). Ranges reflect carrier, model, and channel variation; service may not be required within a five-year hold for lightly worn modern references.

A lightly worn modern Submariner may skip service entirely within five years, which softens the figure — but insurance does not pause. Buyers comparing watches to equities should hold the framework honest: the true cost of Submariner ownership over ten years includes these line items whether or not the resale price cooperates. Detailed servicing cost by brand matters more for complicated movements than for a time-and-date diver.

The opportunity cost most coverage skips entirely

Watch appreciation is rarely measured against the obvious alternative: leaving the money in an index fund. The cluster framework calls for exactly this comparison, expressed as compound annual growth rate against the S&P 500 over the same window.

S&P 500 annual total returns from 2020 through 2024 ran 16.26%, 26.89%, −19.44%, 24.23%, and 23.31%, per Macrotrends data. Compounded, that is a five-year CAGR in the low-to-mid teens — roughly 13% to 14% annualized, turning $10,000 into approximately $19,000 over the period. The Submariner’s release-buyer score of 155 implies a comparable compound annual growth rate of roughly 9%. The watch underperformed the index for the buyer who bought at retail, and underperformed it badly for the buyer who paid the secondary market premium.

The Nautilus and Royal Oak beat the index on paper, but only for owners who secured retail allocation years ago and held through the correction. For anyone entering today at secondary prices, the comparison inverts. WatchCharts notes that even the strongest 2025 performers saw gains concentrated in a handful of references while most Swiss brands declined year-over-year, which means the index comparison is unflattering for the median watch buyer, not the cherry-picked one.

What this means for a $150k+ household

At $150k+ income, a $14,000 to $50,000 watch is a discretionary purchase, not a portfolio allocation, and the data argues for treating it that way. The three references that appreciate require either an existing authorized-dealer relationship and patience for allocation, or willingness to pay a secondary premium that already prices in the appreciation. Neither path produces index-beating returns net of insurance, service, and the opportunity cost of capital sitting on your wrist instead of compounding.

The defensible decision framework is narrow. If you will wear the watch and value it as an object, the strong value retention on a Rolex sports model or a discontinued grail means your effective cost of ownership over a holding period can be low — sometimes near zero after resale, occasionally positive — which is a genuinely different proposition from a depreciating luxury good like a car. That is the real case for these specific watches, and it is a cost-of-ownership argument, not an investment one. The distinction matters because it sets the right expectation: you are buying a durable object that holds value unusually well, not an asset that grows. If appreciation is the actual goal, the same capital in a low-cost index fund outperformed all three hero references for the buyer entering at today’s prices, with daily liquidity and none of the storage or authentication risk. Comparing a Rolex versus Omega on value retention or weighing a diamond’s cost against its resale gap only sharpens the same conclusion: in luxury hard goods, holding value is the realistic ceiling, and appreciation is the exception that scarcity manufactures.