Overview Leaderboard Methodology
Industry Report

Luxury Jewelry Houses

High-end jewelers and maisons creating fine jewelry and watches, known for precious materials, heritage craftsmanship, and exclusive collections.

Brands tracked: 32
Brands analyzed: 32
Last updated: 2026-04-23
Model: OpenAI GPT-5
Prompts: 257
Total responses: 1,295
Top Brand Overall?
Cartier
98/100

Highest overall AI Visibility Score in this industry.

LBA Leader?
Tiffany & Co.
100

Highest score on the LBA metric in this industry.

Authority Leader?
Cartier
100

Highest score on the Authority metric in this industry.

TOM Leader?
Cartier
100

Highest score on the TOM metric in this industry.

Cartier is the default answer in AI responses for Luxury Jewelry Houses

Cartier and Van Cleef & Arpels together dominate AI responses for Luxury Jewelry Houses. Both brands consistently surface unprompted, with the model treating them as the default answers for most category queries. Brands outside the top two face a structural disadvantage: users are usually given these two before the model even considers alternatives.

Brand Leaderboard All 32 Luxury Jewelry Houses brands ranked

Ranked by overall AI Visibility Score (smoothed geometric mean of LBA, Authority, and TOM with an LBA-based floor on Authority and TOM, see methodology). Click any brand for the full report.

# Brand LBA Authority TOM Overall
1
Cartier
cartier.com
 96
100
100
98
2
Van Cleef & Arpels
vancleefarpels.com
 97
78
96
90
3
Bulgari
bulgari.com
 93
65
85
80
4
Tiffany & Co.
tiffany.com
 100
54
78
75
5
Harry Winston
harrywinston.com
 78
36
81
61
6
Boucheron
boucheron.com
 80
37
61
57
7
Graff
graff.com
 89
19
64
49
8
Chopard
chopard.com
 82
16
59
44
9
Chaumet
chaumet.com
 82
22
40
42
10
Mikimoto
mikimoto.com
 87
9
53
37
11
Piaget
piaget.com
 86
9
52
37
12
Buccellati
buccellati.com
 82
8
23
27
13
Chanel
chanel.com
 100
10
10
24
14
Messika
messika.com
 77
9
12
22
15
David Yurman
davidyurman.com
 81
8
8
20
16
Dior
dior.com
 81
8
8
20
17
Fabergé
faberge.com
 82
8
8
20
18
Jacob & Co.
jacobandco.com
 82
8
8
20
19
De Beers Jewellers
debeers.com
 79
8
8
19
20
Pomellato
pomellato.com
 78
8
8
19
21
Stephen Webster
stephenwebster.com
 78
8
8
19
22
Anita Ko
anitako.com
 74
7
7
18
23
FRED
fred.com
 74
7
7
18
24
Damiani
damiani.com
 69
7
7
17
25
Pasquale Bruni
pasqualebruni.com
 69
7
7
17
26
Repossi
repossi.com
 69
7
7
17
27
Roberto Coin
robertocoin.com
 71
7
7
17
28
Suzanne Kalan
suzannekalan.com
 72
7
7
17
29
Tasaki
tasaki-global.com
 72
7
7
17
30
Yoko London
yokolondon.com
 60
6
6
15
31
Annoushka
annoushka.com
 54
5
5
14
32
R
Rahaminov Diamonds
rahaminovdiamonds.com
 43
4
4
11

How is this calculated? Methodology

Every brand in this leaderboard is scored against the same set of 257 shared Luxury Jewelry Houses prompts. The same prompts, same model, same iterations. So differences in scores reflect actual differences in AI visibility, not differences in measurement.

Overall AI Visibility Score
Smoothed geometric mean of LBA, Authority and TOM. Authority and TOM are floored at LBA × 0.1 before the geometric mean (the same floor used in the per-metric cards above, so brand cards and the composite tell the same story). Formula: composite = ((LBA + 5)(Authority + 5)(TOM + 5))^(1/3) - 5. The floor keeps brands the model clearly recognises but doesn't yet recommend from collapsing to zero, while a single genuinely weak metric still pulls the composite down. Full methodology.
Shared industry prompts
For Authority and TOM, all brands in the industry are scored against the same 257 category prompts (e.g. "best SEO tools for agencies"). This makes brand-to-brand comparisons valid - everyone faces identical inputs. LBA prompts are per-brand because they ask brand-specific questions.
Latent Brand Association (LBA)
5 brand probes + 1 control prompt, each run 5 times in recall mode (no web search). LBA = quality × meta × stability × share × recognition × 100. Read the full LBA methodology →
LLM Authority
50 organic category prompts (discovery, comparison, problem and transactional intents), each run once in recall mode and once in retrieval mode. Score = frequency × log-decayed prominence × intent weight, then 50/50 averaged across the two modes. Read the full Authority methodology →
Top of Mind (TOM)
15 high-volume discovery prompts (sourced from Keywords Everywhere search-volume data), each run 5 times in pure recall mode (no web). Score = frequency × (0.5 + 0.5 × log-prominence), volume-weighted. Read the full TOM methodology →