2020 Lab-Grown Diamond Survey

A third of respondents did not know what a lab-created diamond was

In June 2020, LabGrownCarats commissioned a US consumer survey through Google Consumer Surveys. 33% of respondents said they did not know what a lab-created diamond was, and only 6% had considered buying one.

The findings showed a gap between awareness and potential interest. Some respondents said a lower price, environmental or climate benefits, or conflict- and corruption-free sourcing could persuade them to consider a lab-grown diamond.

This research records attitudes in 2020, when lab-grown diamond jewelry was still a much less familiar choice. For today's shopping prices, see our lab-grown diamond price research.

What could encourage people to consider a lab-grown diamond?

We asked which benefits could make respondents consider buying a lab-created diamond. The percentages below describe their responses, not measured savings or environmental performance.

Price was the most frequently cited of these reasons. Our interpretation was that clearer information could help more people consider the alternative: awareness of a product and interest in its benefits are different questions.

The survey's 30% price difference was part of the question, not a price forecast. Lab-grown diamond prices have changed considerably since then. Environmental outcomes also depend on production energy and practices; avoiding a diamond mine does not mean every part of production has no impact.

Awareness differed between men and women

Among men surveyed, 46% did not know what a lab-created diamond was. In the 25–44 age group, 56% of men were unfamiliar with lab-created diamonds, and no respondent in that subgroup reported having considered buying one.

That finding mattered to us because an engagement ring can be someone's first major diamond purchase. If a buyer has not heard of lab-grown diamonds, they cannot make an informed comparison of appearance, price, origin and long-term value.

We believed buyers needed accessible information rather than an assumption that they already understood the choice. Lab-grown diamonds would not suit everyone's priorities, but people should be able to decide consciously between the alternatives.

The responses also differed when people were asked about the listed reasons to consider buying. 59% of men and 43% of women said those reasons would not persuade them. That is a response to the benefits presented in the survey, not a finding that these respondents would never buy diamond jewelry.

Women were more responsive to the environmental and social benefits described. The published analysis reported relative differences of 65% for social benefits and 38% for environmental benefits compared with men. Those are relative comparisons, not percentage-point differences.

Younger respondents knew less, but were more open to buying

Awareness and willingness to consider a purchase did not move together. Younger respondents were less familiar with lab-created diamonds, yet the 25–34 group was the most likely to say they had considered buying one.

The groups overlap; for example, men ages 25–44 are also included in the results for men and all respondents.

Among 25–34-year-olds, 10% had considered buying a lab-created diamond, compared with 6% overall. Older respondents were generally more aware of lab-created diamonds, but less inclined to consider purchasing one.

Our interpretation was that the information gap differed by age. Some younger buyers had not encountered the category, while some older buyers might associate laboratory-grown diamonds with industrial uses rather than modern jewelry. That was our explanation of the pattern, not a separate question answered by the survey.

Price, sourcing and environmental priorities changed with age

For respondents ages 25–34, the sourcing, climate and environmental reasons were more persuasive than the lower price presented in the question. In the 35–44 group, price became the strongest of those reasons.

These differences helped explain why one sales message would not speak equally to every buyer. A lower price was compelling for many people, but others placed more weight on where the diamond came from and the effects of producing it.

Environmental benefits also mattered among older respondents, while climate and social considerations were less persuasive in the oldest groups. The wider pattern was that the balance of reasons changed with age, rather than every group prioritizing the same benefit.

What we learned

The strongest finding was not that everyone wanted a lab-grown diamond. It was that many respondents lacked the basic information needed to consider one, even though some of its potential benefits appealed to them.

For LabGrownCarats, that supported a practical approach to consumer education: explain what the material is, show how appearance and grades compare, give actual prices, and discuss sourcing clearly. A reader can then decide whether lab-grown or mined origin better fits their priorities.

Our introduction to lab-grown diamonds explains the material, while our research library brings together current price comparisons and our firsthand buying evidence.

About the survey

The survey ran across the United States from June 20 to June 25, 2020. It was conducted using Google Consumer Surveys and paid for by LabGrownCarats.

Responses were weighted by age, gender and regional location. The published research notes report a root mean squared error (RMSE) between 4.5% and 5.7%. This describes the reported survey method; it should not be read as a separate margin of error for every subgroup shown above.

For questions about the research or the full report, contact LabGrownCarats. When referring to these findings, cite the 2020 survey and its June 2020 fieldwork dates, rather than presenting them as current consumer attitudes.