The Diamond Market Explorer · 1888–2035
Perry Corp · Diamonds · Interactive

The Diamond Market Explorer

One machine ran the diamond business for a century: control supply, manufacture desire, keep the returns. This explorer traces how that machine was dismantled — and where the market, the price, and demand go from here. Five lenses, 1888 to 2035.

The whole story, in one place

The natural-diamond market is mid-transition: from a single-firm cartel that engineered scarcity and desire, to a competitive market where supply is fragmenting into government hands and an unlimited substitute sets the floor. These are the numbers that define it.

De Beers grip on rough
~90% → ~30%
1888 peak → 2024; ~17% projected by 2035
World rough output
~177 → ~118 Mct
2005 peak → 2024
Lab-grown, US engagement
12% → 52%
2019 → 2024 share of rings
Category marketing
~$360M → ~$36M
De Beers peak (real 2024) → NDC 2024
Sovereign rough trading
~0% → ~25%
excl. Russia/Alrosa · pre-2012 → 2035
Synthetic demand, by value
~$4B → ~$8B
2025 → 2035, mostly industrial

Choose a lens

01 · The Long Arc

An animated 1888–2035 timeline: De Beers' grip, sovereign share, rough price and supply, lab-grown's rise, and 26 events that moved the structure.

02 · Supply & the Price Floor

Every mine ever dug, by controlling company — then a forward model where the price is solved from supply vs. demand, mine by mine.

03 · Demand Futures

Two demand worlds: natural-diamond jewellery (by segment, geography and occasion) and synthetic-diamond value across all applications.

04 · 2030 Scenarios

The four worlds for natural diamonds — and the central question: could an alliance of governments rebuild the old model? Test it.

On the data (read me). These lenses were each built and validated separately, so a few overlapping series use slightly different vintages or bases — e.g. De Beers' grip is its corrected trading share in the timeline, while the supply lens colours mines by controlling shareholder; world production differs by a few Mct between sources. The headline figures above are the standardised, reconciled set. Everything here is a scenario explorer, not a forecast: sourced figures are flagged inside each lens, estimates as estimates, and cross-referenced against the De Beers Insight and Bain reference reports. All dollar figures are real 2024 dollars unless an event description cites a specific historical nominal amount. Knowledge current to mid-2026.
Reconciled headline figures & sources

Primary references: De Beers Diamond Insight Reports 2014–2023; Bain & Company Global Diamond Industry / Report 2011, 2018, 2019, 2021–22 — all public, cross-referenced June 2026.

FigureValueSource
De Beers share of world rough~85–90% (1980s) → 29.5% (2019) → ~30% (2024)De Beers / Paul Zimnisky
World rough production~177 Mct (2005) → ~118–120 Mct (2024)USGS MCS; Kimberley Process
Lab-grown, US engagement rings12% (2019) → 46% (2023) → 52% (2024)The Knot / IDEX
Lab-grown wholesale pricedown ~85–90% in a decadeEdahn Golan; Bain–AWDC
Category marketing~$200M De Beers peak (~$360M real) → NDC ~$36M (2024), ~$22M (2025)JCK; The Diamond Press
De Beers divestmentAnglo American exiting; Botswana & Angola bidding; in process mid-2026Miningmx; National Jeweler
The Long Arc, 1888–2035. Press play, or drag the scrubber. The top chart is demand and pricing power; the bottom is supply and structural power. Watch the grip line fall and the sovereign line rise — the whole thesis is in those two curves. The projected segment (post-2026) traces a central restructure path — natural easing to a premium floor while lab-grown grows and total demand roughly holds; the full upside/downside range lives in the Demand Futures and 2030 Scenarios lenses.
Sources & assumptions
All $ figures real 2024. “De Beers grip” is its corrected trading share, adjusted for sovereign splits (ODC, Namdia, Endiama). Sovereign share counts African state traders selling rough directly and excludes Russia’s Alrosa, which is state-owned but counted here as a producer. Supply series cross-checked to De Beers Diamond Insight Reports (2021 production = 128 Mct, DIR 2022), Bain, GIA, USGS & the Kimberley Process. Pre-1950 figures and the 2026–2035 segment are estimates; the projection assumes ODC reaching 40–50% of Debswana and the Diavik/Gahcho Kué closures. A scenario explorer, not a forecast.
Supply & the Price Floor. Two modes. Historic stacks every mine ever dug, coloured by the company that ran it. Forward solves where the price clears — each mine sells at its own price, so cost alone can't tell you who survives. The price is an output, not an input. Dollar/carat figures are ≈ real 2024.
Natural-diamond demand futures — a set of hypotheses. The traditional base (engagement) skews young and is ceding to lab-grown, while wealth sits with older cohorts. The strategic question: can natural pivot from the young-and-shrinking to the old-and-wealthy with new occasions, fast enough to offset the erosion? Every figure here is an explicit, editable hypothesis — not a forecast.
Scenario presets
Core erosion to lab-grownMed
How fast natural engagement demand cedes to LGD.
China recoveryPartial
Weak · partial · full return toward the 2015 peak.
India & frontier growthMed
India, SE Asia, Latin America, Africa demand.
Premiumisation (luxury)Med
Brand-led value lift at the Maison top end.
New-occasion creationModest
Anniversary, retirement, decade-birthday occasions (uncertain — shown hatched).
Category marketingMed
Investment in demand creation — gates how feasible new demand is.
Hypothesis model. Base ≈ $70B natural-diamond jewellery retail (real 2024) — total diamond jewellery ≈$80B less the lab-grown share by value. Segment, geography and occasion splits are illustrative starting estimates; hatched bands are speculative demand-creation and genuinely uncertain. Not a forecast.

Where the margin sits across the chain

Operating margin by value-chain segment, 2021E
Rough / mining
22–24%
Cutting & polishing
5–7%
Retail — large brands
13–15%
Retail — small (~65% of mkt)
6–8%
The mining (rough) end and large-brand retail capture the margin; cutting/polishing and small retail are thin — which is why downstream brand, not the stone, holds the value. Source: Bain & Company, Global Diamond Industry 2021–22, Fig 2.

Four worlds for natural diamonds at 2030

Once the lab-grown battle is settled, a deeper question remains: do enough people still desire a culturally relevant product to sustain the sector? Two axes — whether the category grows (the war) and whether it converges to a coloured-gemstone structure (the battle) — give four futures.

Q1 · Won both
The Broad Revival

Category marketing works and new markets open. Naturals claw back ground and create fresh demand pools. The full chain prospers.

War won · new markets · full-chain prosperity
Q2 · Won the war, lost the battle
The Premium Flywheel

New high-end markets open, but only at the very top. The structure converges to coloured-gemstone — yet premium demand absorbs enough volume.

Global ultra-luxury · rarity premium · ASM expands
Q4 · Muddled through
The Segmented Steady State

Branding slows the decline but never drives growth. Permanently smaller — but stable. The classic muddle-through.

Neither won nor lost · permanently ~half size
Q3 · Lost both
The Rarefied Relic

Marketing failed, no new markets opened. Naturals contract into a top-heavy, expertise-driven niche. The full price is paid.

War lost · deep contraction · ASM dominates

Could an alliance of governments rebuild the old model?

As Anglo American exits De Beers — Botswana seeking majority control, Angola a further stake — the producing assets are consolidating into government hands. So the natural thought experiment: if supply becomes fully government-controlled, could a coalition of producer states become the new De Beers? It depends entirely on which levers the alliance will pull. Test each version.

Supply control
Demand creation
Pricing power
Captures its own returns?
Verdict
No price-support powerFull price-support power

A marketing-only alliance already exists — roughly the Natural Diamond Council — and it is demonstrably not enough. A pricing-and-supply alliance would come closer to old De Beers, but it hits a wall the original never faced: it can ration its own rough, not the substitute. Hold the natural price up and the contested volume simply flows to lab-grown. The cartel lever still exists — it just no longer reaches the whole market.

01

Supply went sovereign

De Beers' grip fell ~90% → ~30%; the single channel ended ~2000. The biggest producers are now states or state JVs. No one can withhold to defend price.

02

An unlimited substitute

Lab-grown can be made at scale by anyone; prices fell ~85–90%. You cannot engineer scarcity against a physically identical product with near-infinite supply. The industry's own reference reports under-called it — Bain (2019) forecast lab-grown at 5–15% of value by 2030; it reached ~52% of US engagement rings by 2024.

03

Demand became a free-rider

With supply split among rivals, no producer captures enough return on category marketing to fund it. Spend collapsed from ~$200M to a fraction.

The sober & the hopeful

A competitive market is still worth winning

The era of control is over and no realistic alliance fully rebuilds it. But competition is not decline — it's a different game, played on what a lab cannot replicate: real rarity, genuine provenance, cultural meaning. The old model defended a price; the new opportunity is to earn one.

Read the full scenario essay: The Natural Diamond Market at 2030 →

The four worlds and the alliance comparison are an analytical planning frame, not predictions; underlying figures are the reconciled set in the Overview. A scenario explorer, not a forecast.

Stay in touch — and work with me

If this was useful, leave your details and I'll keep you posted as the analysis develops. If you're after specific consulting or advisory on the diamond market — strategy, scenario modelling, or a bespoke version of this explorer built on your own data — tell me below or email me directly.

Prefer email? Write to ryan@perrycorp.org.

Your details go only to Ryan Perry / Perry Corp, are used solely to respond to your enquiry, and are never sold or shared. Email to request deletion at any time.

Follow the analysis as it develops Follow on LinkedIn
Built by Ryan Perry / Perry Corp. A scenario explorer, not a forecast — figures compiled from public sources; long-run share and category-spend series are indicative reconstructions from reported anchor points; forward paths are illustrative.
Sources & references
Primary industry references: De Beers Diamond Insight Reports 2014–2023; Bain & Company Global Diamond Industry / Global Diamond Report 2011, 2018, 2019, 2021–22.
Production & supply: USGS Mineral Commodity Summaries; Kimberley Process; De Beers / Anglo American; GIA; Paul Zimnisky.
Demand & lab-grown: The Knot / IDEX; Edahn Golan; Rapaport; McKinsey; Bain–AWDC.
Category marketing & corporate: JCK; The Diamond Press; Miningmx; National Jeweler.
All public. Figures cross-referenced against the De Beers and Bain reference reports (June 2026); per-figure sourcing and confidence flags held in the project datalake.
Scroll to Top