Omega vs. Rolex: Who Makes Better Watches?
Although the Omega vs. Rolex debate is a common one in the luxury watch world, most enthusiasts are able to appreciate both brands. Watch collectors that truly hate one brand and love the other seem to be in the minority. In fact, many of them (myself included) own both brands. Each marque has its strengths, so in this article we’ll break down the relative merits of Omega vs. Rolex as objectively as we can.
Omega vs. Rolex: Quick Guide
| Category | Which Brand Wins | Note |
| Movement | Tie | Both brands make very reliable movements with long service intervals, guaranteed to run within tight specs. Omega’s Master Chronometers allow deviation between +0 and+5 seconds per day, while Rolex allows -2 to +2. Watches with Omega’s Spirate system have an even tighter tolerance: +0 to +2. Finishing between the two brands is comparable. |
| Value Retention | Rolex | Rolex watches tend to retain their value better than any other brand. |
| Magnetic Resistance | Omega | Modern Rolexes are highly resistant to magnetism, but Omega still dominates here. Every Master Chronometer can resist at least 15,000 gauss. |
| Affordability | Omega | You pay a premium for the Rolex name, no way around it. Dollar for dollar, it’s hard not to say Omega wins the “value” game. $4,000 can easily buy you a cool pre-owned Omega Speedmaster, but that barely gets you an old beat-up Rolex Datejust. |
| Bracelet | Rolex | Rolex’s Easy-Link and Glidelock clasps are widely beloved by collectors. Plus, their Oyster and Jubilee bracelets are the most recognizable bracelet designs on the market. Omega’s bracelets are perfectly good too, though. |
| Thinness | Rolex | As a rule of thumb, Rolex watches are often about 1.5mm thinner than comparable Omegas. |
| Serviceability | Rolex | Ask any watchmaker what their favorite brand of movement to work on is, and you’ll probably hear “Rolex.” |
| Availability | Omega | You’ll likely spend time on the Rolex waiting list if you want a steel sports model. But almost anything except a Snoopy Speedmaster should be readily available from an Omega retailer. |
| Highest Complications | Omega | Rolex deserves some respect for revolutionizing the annual calendar complication with the Sky-Dweller. But Omega’s Chrono-Chime watches–the world’s first chronograph repeaters–are completely bananas. Omega also makes tourbillon watches, which Rolex has never done. |
| Bezel Feel | Rolex | When you spin the bezel of an Omega dive watch, it doesn’t feel cheap. But it doesn’t feel as nice as a Rolex. |
Omega vs. Rolex: History of the Rivalry
Louis Brandt founded his eponymous watch brand in 1848 in La Chaux-de-Fonds, Switzerland, giving it a significant head start over Rolex. The company officially adopted the Omega name in 1903, capitalizing on the success of its revolutionary Omega Calibre movement developed in 1894.
Wilsdorf & Davis was founded in 1905, and became Rolex three years later. They would remain in Omega’s shadow for decades. The Oyster really put Rolex on the map in the late 1920’s, but Omega continued to sell more chronometers than Rolex until 1970. An interesting footnote of Omega vs. Rolex history is that Rolex even once registered the trademark “Omigra” but never used it.
Impact of the Quartz Crisis
The Omega vs. Rolex battle was leaning Omega’s way until the so-called “quartz crisis” hit in the mid-1970s. Luxury watch brands scrambled to stay relevant and competitive in the burgeoning quartz watch era. Several quartz Rolex models do exist, but for the most part, Rolex stayed the course and actually went slightly upscale. That worked, and as a result, Rolex exceeded pre-crisis chronometer output by 1980.
More on Rolex:
All About the Rolex Milgauss
Rare Rolex Watches: A Collector’s Guide
Do Rolex Watches Tick? Yes–Here’s Our Guide to Rolex Beat Rates
The Rolex v. Beckertime Lawsuit: Implications for the Watch Industry
A Collector’s Guide to the Rolex GMT-Master II Ref. 16710
Meanwhile, Omega seemed to take some cost-cutting measures like using stamped parts on their unloved Caliber 1000 movements in the 1970s. You can get all sorts of random Seamasters with non-screwdown crowns from the 1970s for under $1,000 today. And honestly, they’re not bad watches; I have one and it runs great. But I wouldn’t pay Rolex money for it.
When Rolex surpassed Omega in sales in the 1970s, they never looked back. Omega wouldn’t reach pre-crisis chronometer production levels again until 2006, and Rolex outsells Omega almost three-to-one today.
Are Omega Movements Better Than Rolex?
Plenty of people think that Omega makes better movements than Rolex, but most watchmakers tend to prefer working on Rolexes, and find them to be even more robust. Omega uses co-axial escapements, which some regard as one of the greatest advances in modern watchmaking history. In theory, they extend service intervals and provide increased accuracy. In my years of owning Rolexes and co-axial Omegas, though, the service intervals and timekeeping are comparable.
Both Omega and Rolex movements are finished pretty decently, but not extravagantly. I would give Rolex a slight edge in terms of both durability and thinness. Plus, the in-house 4131 chronograph movement found in the Rolex Daytona has a vertical clutch mechanism, which offers smoother operation than the horizontal clutches found in movements like the Omega 3861. But Omega currently dominates Rolex in the magnetic resistance department–every Omega that says “Master Chronometer” is capable of resisting magnetic fields up to 15,000 gauss.
So, really, when it comes to Omega vs. Rolex movements–or Omega vs. Rolex on the whole for that matter–it’s really just a matter of preference. And the best option, obviously, is to own both.
More on Omega:
2024 Omega Watch Releases
The Omega Constellation: A Timeline from Pie Pan to Present Day
Two-Tone Omega Speedmaster Professional Models: A Collector’s Guide
All the Omega Speedmaster Bezel Scales
Are Omega Watches a Good Investment?
