Tudor’s recent surge in resale-market share shows how the Rolex-founded brand is thriving through autonomy and long-term discipline — proof that even a shadow can shape the light.
Tudor, the smaller brand within the Rolex group, is gaining ground in a cooling luxury-watch market. According to Chrono24’s Secondary Watch Market Report H1 2025, the share of Tudor watches in the secondary market rose 6.6 percent from the previous half-year — one of the strongest increases among major Swiss makers. Analysts attributed the growth to collectors “shifting focus from speculative trophy watches to established names with consistent value,” noting Tudor and IWC as the top performers as resale prices for flashier models level off.
Founded by Hans Wilsdorf in 1926 as a companion to Rolex, Tudor was created to deliver the same engineering standards at a more accessible price. Nearly a century later, that balance between prestige and pragmatism appears to be paying off.
Living in the light of a giant
Tudor’s chief executive Eric Pirson told the Financial Times how the company has evolved within that long shadow. “In 2016, we began a large programme of change for the brand, taking internal control of many services that in the past were covered by Rolex. We’re not independent, because we’re part of a group, but we’re very autonomous,” he said. That autonomy became tangible last year when Tudor inaugurated its own manufacturing site in Le Locle, consolidating movement production and assembly under its own roof.
The balance between proximity and separation defines Tudor’s modern identity. Rolex remains the emblem — an unmovable symbol of success whose design language changes only by millimeters. Tudor, meanwhile, has become the experimental sibling, testing materials such as carbon composite and exploring tool-watch territory through its Black Bay and Pelagos lines. Where Rolex trades on permanence, Tudor works in revision.
The market for modesty
Analysts often position Tudor in the same middle-luxury band as Longines and Seiko watches — brands that command credibility through craftsmanship and consistency rather than status pricing. According to Morgan Stanley and LuxeConsult’s Swiss Watch Industry Report 2024, all three occupy the mid-tier space showing the fastest global growth, driven by buyers who value mechanical integrity and long-term reliability over exclusivity.
Chrono24’s mid-year analysis situates Tudor’s performance within a broader recalibration of the luxury-watch sector. Demand for speculative models like the Rolex Daytona and the Patek Philippe Nautilus has cooled after the pandemic boom, while interest in durable, attainable pieces has risen. The platform’s analysts identified Tudor’s growth as “a reflection of collector confidence returning to long-term value,” suggesting that functionality now carries more prestige than scarcity.
Bloomberg echoed that assessment in its profile of the brand earlier this year, describing Tudor’s revival as “one of the fastest growth stories in Swiss watchmaking.” The report credited its disciplined pricing strategy, reliance on in-house calibres, and distribution limits that prioritize sustainability over hype. Together, those moves have positioned the label as a stabilizer inside an industry still adjusting to the comedown from speculative excess.
Both Rolex and Tudor are owned by the Hans Wilsdorf Foundation, a private trust that channels profits into philanthropic, educational, and environmental programs. The foundation’s model — rare in luxury — allows long-term planning without the pressure of public shareholders. For Tudor, it has also meant room to evolve while maintaining continuity.
That relationship mirrors patterns seen elsewhere in design and automotive circles, where secondary brands thrive by differentiation rather than imitation: COS beside H&M, Lexus within Toyota. Each defines itself against the scale and stability of its parent, translating shared values into a different register. Tudor’s register is functional credibility — a precision watch that feels lived-in rather than displayed.
Redefining recognition
The appeal is measurable. Deloitte’s Swiss Watch Industry Study 2024 found that younger consumers value “heritage and practicality” over exclusivity, a sentiment reflected in the growing share of tool-style watches across resale platforms. Tudor’s core audience aligns with that shift: design-literate buyers who want the reliability of Rolex craftsmanship without the symbolism of it.
Pirson has emphasized that Tudor will not move upmarket. “Tudor has one price segment and Rolex has one price segment. It’s not [the plan] to increase the price and change Tudor’s segment,” he told the Financial Times. The decision keeps a clear border between prestige and accessibility — a structural boundary that preserves both brands’ identities.
For Tudor, the shadow is not a limitation; it benefits from the light of Rolex’s heritage while operating with the freedom that comes with fewer expectations. That paradox has proved increasingly powerful in an age when understatement reads as authenticity. “We don’t promote Tudor by comparing it with Rolex,” Pirson said. “It’s very different compared with the past.”
Related on Ethos:
