How much do watch buyers really understand about the specifications they are paying for? To find out, we surveyed 1,000 U.S. adults who had purchased a wristwatch within the previous 24 months. Respondents completed a seven-question online survey between July 25 and 31, 2026, through a national paid online panel.

The results reveal a significant gap between what consumers notice when buying a watch and what they understand about their watch specifications, from water resistance and crystal materials to movements and the differences between everyday watches and purpose-built dive watches.

The knowledge gaps were particularly striking: 73% misunderstood what a 100m water resistant rating means, while 60% could not identify the crystal material used on their watch.

73% of Buyers Misunderstand What a 100m Water Resistant Means

One of the most persistent misconceptions in watch buying concerns water resistance.

Many consumers interpret a 100m water-resistant rating to mean that a watch can safely be taken to a depth of 100 metres. That is not what the rating automatically guarantees.

Water-resistance ratings are based on controlled testing under specific laboratory conditions. ISO 22810 establishes requirements and test methods for water-resistant watches, while ISO 6425 applies to watches designed and tested as true diving watches.

A watch rated at 100m (10 ATM) has passed a controlled pressure test corresponding to that pressure level. However, real-world conditions are different. Movement underwater, temperature changes, impacts, and the age and condition of seals can all affect a watch's actual water resistance.

• As a result, a 100m-rated everyday watch should not automatically be interpreted as a watch designed for recreational diving to 100 metres. Manufacturers commonly provide more specific guidance about whether a model is appropriate for activities such as swimming or snorkeling.
• Our survey found that only 27% of respondents selected the most accurate interpretation: that the watch has been pressure-tested to the equivalent of 100 metres, but the rating does not automatically mean it is safe for recreational diving to that depth.
• The remaining 73% either selected an incorrect interpretation or said they did not know.

The most common misconception was particularly significant: 50% of all respondents believed that a 100m-rated watch can safely be taken to exactly 100 metres underwater.

What Buyers Think 100m Water Resistant Means

60% of Buyers Couldn't Identify Their Crystal

The crystal is one of the most important components affecting a watch's resistance to scratches and everyday wear, yet most respondents were unable to identify the material used on their primary watch.

• Watch crystals generally fall into three familiar categories: sapphire, mineral glass, and acrylic/Hesalite.
• Sapphire crystal is synthetic sapphire, typically rated around 9 on the Mohs hardness scale, making it highly resistant to scratches. Mineral crystal is tempered glass that offers a balance between durability, impact resistance, and cost. Acrylic, sometimes referred to as Hesalite or plexiglass, is softer and more susceptible to scratches but is inexpensive and can often be polished.

Each material involves trade-offs. Sapphire offers excellent scratch resistance, while mineral and acrylic crystals can have advantages in terms of impact behavior, cost, and ease of replacement or restoration.

Our survey found that only 35% of respondents correctly identified their watch's crystal as sapphire, mineral, or acrylic.

Meanwhile:

• 30% said they knew their watch model but did not know which crystal material it used.
• 30% said they did not know the crystal material at all.
• 5% identified another material.

That means 60% of buyers could not identify the crystal material on their watch.

Why Crystal Material Matters

• This knowledge gap is more than a technicality. Crystal hardness directly affects how a watch handles everyday wear.

Someone who frequently scratches a watch crystal, for example, may have benefited from choosing sapphire rather than mineral glass. Conversely, buyers who prioritize impact resistance or affordability may find other crystal materials more appropriate.

The important point is that consumers cannot make an informed trade-off if they do not know which material they are buying.

33% Have Made a Water-Resistance Mistake

Water resistance was not only misunderstood in theory. One-third of respondents reported exposing a watch to water in a situation that its stated water-resistance rating did not clearly cover.

The most frequently reported situation was showering or bathing, cited by 20% of respondents. Another 8% reported wearing a watch in a swimming pool, while 3% reported taking one into the sea or ocean. A further 2% reported another type of water exposure.

Where Buyers Exposed Their Watches to Water

These percentages describe reported exposure categories; respondents could select more than one situation.

• Real-world water exposure can be more demanding than laboratory testing. Heat, movement, chlorine, saltwater, and aging seals can all affect the integrity of a watch's water resistance.

Importantly, the survey did not measure whether these exposures actually caused damage. However, manufacturers routinely warn that water resistance can deteriorate over time as gaskets and seals age.

Buyers Prioritize Looks: Then Wish They Had Checked the Specs

When respondents were asked what influenced their most recent watch purchase, appearance and design came out on top.

• Six in ten respondents (60%) listed appearance or design among their top three purchase factors. Price followed at 45%, while brand reputation was selected by 40%.

Technical specifications were considerably less influential at the time of purchase:

• 25% selected movement.
• 15% selected water resistance.
• 5% selected crystal material.

Yet the priorities changed after buyers had lived with their watches.

40% said they wished they had checked the movement more carefully before purchasing. Another 30% wished they had paid more attention to price or value, while 25% wished they had considered water resistance more carefully.

Crystal material and accuracy were each identified by 20% of respondents as factors they wished they had examined more closely.

What Buyers Prioritized at Purchase vs. What They Wish They Had Checked

The contrast suggests a clear, looks first, specifications later pattern.

Consumers may initially be drawn to a watch because of its dial, case shape, finishing, or overall aesthetic. Once they own it, however, technical characteristics such as the movement, water resistance, and crystal can become more important.

• Only 5% said they later wished they had paid more attention to appearance, suggesting that aesthetics generally delivered what buyers expected. The greater regret centered on specifications that were less visible at the point of purchase.

The Trust Signals That Can Influence an Unfamiliar Watch Brand

Technical clarity also appears to influence how consumers evaluate unfamiliar watch brands. We asked respondents which types of information would make them more confident about purchasing from a brand they did not already know.

• The strongest response was transparent pricing, selected by 40% of respondents. Clear water-resistance information and detailed specifications each followed at 35%.

Another 30% wanted to see the exact movement name or type, while 30% also selected customer reviews.

Trust-Building Information for Unfamiliar Watch Brands

These findings point toward a broader principle: buyers appear to value specific, verifiable information over vague marketing claims.

• Customer feedback also remains important. The combination of reviews and detailed specifications suggests that buyers want both evidence from other customers and technical information from the brand itself.

Conclusion

The survey reveals a substantial gap between what watch buyers notice and what they understand.

Appearance remains the dominant purchase consideration, with 60% of respondents ranking design among their top factors. Yet technical specifications become more important once buyers own the watch. 40% wished they had examined the movement more carefully, while many also regretted overlooking water resistance, price/value, and crystal material.

The biggest knowledge gaps were particularly striking:

• 73% misunderstood the meaning of a 100m water-resistance rating.
• 60% could not identify their watch's crystal material.
• 33% reported exposing a watch to water in a situation they believed was beyond its stated rating.

For consumers, the lesson is simple: a watch should be evaluated on more than its appearance. Understanding the movement, crystal, water resistance, dimensions, servicing requirements, and overall value can help buyers choose a watch that fits their actual needs.

Better technical literacy does not necessarily make watches less attractive. It helps buyers understand what they are actually paying for.

Methodology

Margin of Error

For a simple random sample of 1,000 respondents, the maximum theoretical margin of error at a 95% confidence level is approximately ±3.1 percentage points.

However, this survey used a non-probability online panel rather than a true random sample. Therefore, the statistical error estimate should be treated as approximate and should not be interpreted as a formal confidence interval for the U.S. population.

Limitations and Potential Bias

The survey was conducted online using a paid panel. Although respondents were screened as watch owners who had purchased a wristwatch within the previous 24 months, the sample was not stratified to achieve national demographic representativeness.

• Accordingly, the findings should be interpreted as describing the respondents surveyed rather than all U.S. watch buyers.
• Respondents were not asked about income or other sensitive demographic characteristics. Question wording was designed to remain neutral and factual.

As with other opt-in panel studies, response bias is possible. For example, people with a stronger interest in watches may have been more inclined to participate in a survey involving technical specifications.

• The results should therefore be viewed as estimates of the surveyed sample, not definitive measurements of every watch buyer in the United States.