As certain instruments return from a long-delayed maintenance abroad due to component pricing issues caused by the tariff situation in the US, some that still require maintenance have instead been replaced with newer advanced models that possess higher capacities of performance. (Kindly note that we currently do not offer gemological reports for rough or uncut rocks or minerals for 2025.)

A friendly reminder that our laboratory intentionally does not commercially buy or sell gemstones, nor are we connected to or affiliated with any currently active jewelry-selling business. While our in-house staff (G.G.) hold over a decade of prior experience in the jewelry trade, it remains our policy that no current employee of the laboratory engages in commercial gem trading with clients looking to have their items tested with us. We do this to actively prioritize impartiality in our professional assessments, as well as creating the absence of any vested interest in opinions, results or grading. 

Myth 1: 'Lab grown diamonds hold their value over time.'

Lab-grown diamonds began populating jewelry retail spaces more frequently in 2015. At that time, a good ballpark figure was to say that a typical 1 carat lab-grown diamond would cost anywhere between 10-16% less than a natural diamond counterpart with similar color and clarity traits.

Fast-forward to 2020, and the production of lab-grown diamond products for the jewelry industry has reached substantially higher levels. It would be common to see lab-grown diamonds go for around 45-55% less than their natural diamond counterparts with the same grade. This substantial drop had dealt a heavy blow to early investors of CVD and HPHT lab-grown diamonds, although the trend merely followed laws of supply and demand wherein improving technologies (that had also gotten cheaper with their widespread adoption) created the opportunity for many newcomers to go into the manufacturing business of LGD. It was a lucrative space that was becoming more and more accessible to producers.

As we jump forward to late 2024 and early 2025, observant buyers will now notice that prices for lab-grown diamonds have gone down even further. It would not be uncommon to be able to acquire a lab-grown diamond at a price around 90% cheaper than a natural diamond with equivalent 4C traits. Depending on the source, reports of 92-95% cheaper price tags have also surfaced, giving rise to a divide in the jewelry collector market’s reception of LGD’s. More affordable prices can sometimes blur the gap between commercial jewelry and fine jewelry items, however fans of lab-grown diamonds hyperfixate on the fact that these items are still diamonds- in the sense that they have the same essential chemical composition, crystal structure, brilliance and even hardness. 

Myth 2: 'Lab grown diamonds are “certified” by major laboratories.'

Many of the world's leading laboratories, such as the Gemological Institute of America, issue gemological reports as their official document type (even for natural diamonds and other gemstones). This may be read on their website statement here. Most of the jewelry industry has adopted the trade term ‘cert’ or ‘certificate’ when referring to these kinds of reports, due to the fact that such words have more of an impact from a purely marketing standpoint. 

While many laboratories do accept testing requests for lab-grown diamonds, it’s important to note that there may often be very substantial differences to the way lab-grown diamonds are described on reports in contrast to how natural diamonds are described. GIA for example, at least as of this article’s publication, has announced changes to the format and content of reports for lab-grown diamonds. One important change would be that they “will start using descriptive terms to characterize the quality of laboratory-grown diamonds” and “will no longer use the color and clarity nomenclature that GIA developed for natural diamonds.” - both statements quoted from their website announcements. This will supposedly go into effect in October of this year.

What does this mean exactly? While laboratory policies and systems are ever changing (even quick paced in the recent months), for now at least they have clarified that lab-grown diamonds formerly graded in the D-Z color range will now be much more simply classified as: “premium” or “standard,” based on GIA’s own assessment of clarity, color, and cut. Likewise any LGD that does not meet the criteria even for “standard”, will not receive a grading. Interested readers may inquire directly with GIA on this, as we are only basing this information from their public announcements on different platforms. Such policies may also change or be further clarified at the discretion of GIA itself of course.

Myth 3: 'Lab-grown diamonds are the same as imitations like cubic zirconia and moissanite.'

While this may be easier to debunk for experienced jewelry buyers, not everyone knows about the technical differentiation between lab-grown diamonds versus other kinds of “diamond alternatives” out there on the market.

Lab-grown diamonds are man-made or artificially created diamonds with the same essential chemical composition and crystal structure as the diamond mineral we all know of. While some differences remain (such as crystal habit, which is influenced by the growth method and machinery involved), traits such as Moh’s hardness (10), refractive index and adamantine luster are the same for both natural and lab-grown diamonds.

Now in contrast to this, there are what we call diamond “simulants”, also known as diamond “imitations”. These are in simple terms- materials that look like diamond (to the point where visually they can be very hard to distinguish apart using the naked eye), but do not possess the same essential chemistry or atomic structure as diamond. The most popular diamond simulants used today are cubic zirconia and moissanite, both of which are currently very much cheaper to buy or manufacture compared to lab-grown diamonds.

Cubic zirconia was the earlier of the two imitation types to be invented and popularized. In response to this, a very simple technology was adapted using thermal conductivity detection, in the effort to aid jewelers with the separation of cubic zirconia from diamond. It should be noted however that these ‘thermal conductivity pen testers’ cannot distinguish between moissanite, natural diamond and lab-grown diamond. 

Today, advanced spectrometric tests are typically the go-to necessary screening method used for the separation of lab-grown diamonds from natural diamonds. One cannot rely on those old diamond pen testers that were once invented for the easy detection of cubic zirconia or other older simulants.

Electronic or multi-testers that sometimes make use of a combination of thermal and electrical conductivity are occasionally useful for detecting moissanite, however they are not black-and-white tests as most people may believe. Many HPHT lab-grown diamonds for example have boron impurities that increase the electrical conductivity of the stone. This can easily confuse a multi-tester into thinking that an HPHT lab-grown diamond is a moissanite by mistake. Such is only one of the issues that should be considered when using even the newer types of pen testers today.

When in doubt, especially with high value purchases, it is always best to counter-check the item with a gemological laboratory that does not buy or sell diamonds and gemstones commercially. An impartial, third-party assessment is usually the most ethical and accurate choice for transparency in the jewelry trade today, which is why most of the largest laboratories in the world such as GIA, SSEF, Gem-A and HRD do not buy and sell gemstone items.

Some time during the later half of our working trip in Switzerland this 2024, we had the privilege of learning with pioneering gemologists from one of the most advanced international laboratories in Europe. Visiting the Swiss Gemological Institute or Schweizerisches Gemmologisches Institut (SSEF) in Basel, we took part in their intensive Scientific Gemology course program to further develop our in-house knowledge on the different types of laboratory spectrometers used in gemology. This undertaking was suggested to us by colleagues and friends we had met many years ago during our GIA days in Hong Kong.

The entire campus program was incredibly informative and their laboratory staff were all very well experienced and at the top of their respective fields. We were able to properly go through full processes with many of their instruments such as the Micro-Raman, FTIR and UV-Vis spectrometers, as well as gain insight into the workings of the LA ICP mass spectrometer as well. All of this was done with immense efficiency in order to assimilate as much technical learning as possible during our stay in the city of Basel.

The immersive lecture sessions and hands-on practicals given by Dr. Tashia Dzikowski-Hutter and Dr. Michael S. Krzemnicki (Director of SSEF), were the highlight of our month, giving us new groundwork to further our gemological prowess and capabilities as an independent laboratory here in Southeast Asia.

As we return to our normal day-to-day operations, the insight and techniques gained from this program will most definitely be supportive additions to our staff’s existing capabilities and knowledge base. To this day, members of our laboratory team have completed a suite of extensive courses and programs from the Gemological Institute of America | GIA, Gem-A, De Beers, AIGS, Gubelin, Christie’s and SSEF.