The Gemological Institute of America (GIA), long considered the “supreme court” of diamond grading, just made a move that has the entire jewelry industry buzzing. By phasing out detailed 4Cs grading for lab-grown diamonds and shifting to a “Premium” vs “Standard” system, GIA is redrawing the lines of diamond certification.
At first glance, it seems like GIA is handing even more ground to IGI (International Gemological Institute), which has been aggressively capturing market share in the booming lab-grown segment by offering traditional, highly detailed reports. Is GIA making a tactical mistake or is there a deeper logic at play?
A Closer Look: What’s Actually Changing
GIA will no longer issue full 4Cs reports for lab-grown diamonds. Instead, their reports will simply state if a diamond is “Premium” or “Standard.”
Technical criteria for these categories are still confidential, but the upshot is clear: most of the nuance and granularity is gone.
This change will be rolled out worldwide by the end of 2025, and existing GIA lab-grown 4Cs reports will be a relic of the past.
Meanwhile, IGI continues to offer the full 4Cs for both natural and lab-grown stones, and is openly marketing itself as the “consumer-friendly” lab for those wanting complete transparency.
Susan Jacques: The CEO Guiding GIA’s Strategic Shift
No discussion of GIA’s latest changes would be complete without mentioning Susan Jacques, who has served as the organization’s President and CEO during one of the most turbulent and transformative periods in diamond industry history. Jacques is widely recognized as a bold, strategic leader and one unafraid to make controversial decisions if she believes they serve GIA’s long-term vision and the greater good of the industry.
Industry insiders report that Jacques played a central role in the move away from detailed 4Cs grading for lab-grown diamonds, favoring a broader “Premium/Standard” framework. Her rationale, echoed in official statements, is rooted in safeguarding GIA’s authority and prestige in natural diamond certification at a time when the market is flooded with high-quality and low-cost synthetics. By drawing a sharper distinction between natural and lab-grown diamonds, Jacques is betting on the enduring allure and value of rarity, ensuring GIA remains synonymous with trust and legacy in a rapidly evolving gem landscape.
What’s Driving This Change? A Deep Dive into GIA’s Strategy
1. A Flood of High-Quality Lab-Grown Stones
Lab-grown diamond production—especially in India and China—has become so sophisticated that over 95% of lab-grown diamonds submitted for grading are D–F color and VS1–VVS clarity. The 4Cs are becoming a redundant exercise for these stones, since there’s almost no spread in grades.
2. Maintaining the Prestige of the GIA Brand
GIA’s reputation is built on its meticulous and authoritative grading of natural diamonds. The influx of near-perfect lab-grown diamonds makes it harder for GIA to maintain the sense of rarity and discernment associated with its reports. By stepping back from detailed grading of lab-grown stones, GIA reinforces the message:
“We are the gold standard for natural diamonds. Lab-grown are something else.”
This is a brand moat strategy: protect the crown jewel, even at the expense of a fast-growing revenue segment.
3. Market Segmentation and Consumer Clarity
GIA’s move might simplify things for mainstream buyers, many of whom feel overwhelmed by excessive detail. Now, a quick glance will tell them if a diamond is “Premium” or not. This “Apple-ification” of diamond grading creates an easy on-ramp for the masses but leaves detail-hungry buyers looking elsewhere.
4. Profit Motive or Missed Opportunity?
This is where things get interesting. Lab-grown grading is lucrative. The number of lab-grown stones submitted for certification is skyrocketing. GIA could easily have leaned into this, boosting profits and growing their market share.
But here’s the kicker:
By not capitalizing, GIA is either missing a huge financial opportunity or they know something the rest of the market doesn’t.
My Take: Is This a Blunder or a Masterstroke?
On the Surface: Giving Away the Store
From a business perspective, it looks like GIA is ceding massive ground to IGI. As more buyers turn to lab-grown diamonds for value and ethics, they also want the validation of a respected, third-party report. IGI is happy to provide it and as GIA steps back, IGI’s authority only grows. You could argue that GIA is opening the door for IGI to become the default lab-grown authority, both in the U.S. and globally.
Digging Deeper: Protecting Long-Term Brand Value
But GIA’s move may be less about short-term profit and more about safeguarding long-term trust. The natural diamond industry is experiencing seismic change:
Lab-grown stones are getting cheaper, flooding the market and blurring the line for consumers.
Natural diamond value depends on rarity, history and branding.
If GIA is seen as “the lab for everything,” including mass-produced synthetics, it risks diluting the cachet of its natural diamond reports. By keeping full 4Cs grading exclusive to natural stones, GIA draws a clear line in the sand and stakes its future on being the ultimate authority for rare, valuable, mined diamonds.
A Calculated Bet on the Future of Diamonds
GIA’s decision is a bet that natural diamonds will always retain a luxury, investment, and emotional value premium and that grading millions of identical, near-perfect lab-grown stones isn’t worth sacrificing their legacy.
At the same time, GIA’s new Premium/Standard categories allow them to remain “in the game” for lab-grown, just at arm’s length. They can still serve retailers and consumers who want reassurance of quality, without undermining their natural diamond brand.
The IGI Opportunity and a Word of Caution
IGI is poised to ride this wave, becoming the go-to name for full-lab-grown grading and capturing the segment of buyers who care about transparency, resale and detailed certification. For now, this seems like a winning hand.
But there is risk. If lab-grown diamonds become entirely commoditized, even detailed reports may lose value. Will buyers really care if their $400 one-carat is D or E color when there are thousands just like it? IGI’s fortunes may ride on how long consumers value that granularity.
Conclusion: A Bold Move in a Divided Market
GIA’s retreat from 4Cs grading of lab-grown diamonds is as much about psychology and brand strategy as it is about technical grading. It could go down as a defensive masterstroke or a rare GIA miscalculation.
Me personally I see the future of lab-grown vs natural diamonds like that, let’s say around 2040:
| Aspect | Lab-Grown Diamonds | Natural Diamonds |
|---|---|---|
| Market Share | Mainstream, 70%+ of jewelry sales | Niche, luxury, collector’s market |
| Price Trend | Falling, ultra-affordable | Stable/increasing for rare sizes/colors |
| Perceived Value | Beauty, size, sustainability | Rarity, heritage, long-term value |
| Resale Value | Low/none | High for rare stones; low for small/common |
| Main Buyer Motivation | Budget, ethics, design choice | Prestige, investment, uniqueness |
| Certification Leader | IGI, GCAL, HRD (volume, speed, price) | GIA (prestige, trust, investment) |
| Retail Approach | Offered by all jewelers, mass adoption | Boutique, specialty, high-end auctions |
| Marketing Focus | Eco-friendly, modern, customizable | Timeless, historic, romantic, exclusive |
| Future Innovations | Designer colors, nano-engraving, tech-enabled | Blockchain origin, provenance, legacy |
Of course, this is only speculation and my own personal opinion.
For now, the outcome is clear:
IGI becomes the top choice for detailed lab-grown certification.
GIA reinforces its dominance in natural diamonds, betting on long-term prestige over short-term profit.
Time will tell who made the smarter gamble.…
