Chopard vs. IWC: How Two Luxury Watch Brands Approach Sustainability Differently

Chopard and IWC Schaffhausen have taken visibly different routes to sustainable watchmaking. Chopard has built its reputation on ethical material sourcing, becoming the world's largest purchaser of Fairmined gold, while IWC has pursued a broader portfolio spanning certified supply chains, renewable energy, and waste reduction. This comparison lays out what each brand has actually committed to, and gives you the tools to judge whether any watchmaker's green claims hold up.

Chopard's Commitment to Ethical Sourcing

Chopard's sustainability story is, above all, a story about gold. The Geneva-based maison describes itself as being on "a journey to sustainable luxury," and the centerpiece of that journey is its sourcing practice. According to reporting by Kapoor Watch Co., Chopard's gold is mined in Peru and Colombia, from mines that uphold fair and ethically correct working conditions, prohibit child labor, and follow environmentally responsible practices. The same standards apply to its Fairmined diamonds and other gemstones, and the brand says the entire process is designed to produce a minimal carbon footprint.

The scale of this commitment is notable. WatchTime reports that Chopard is the world's largest purchaser of Fairmined gold, a designation that carries weight in an industry where provenance of raw materials is, as the same report puts it, a central factor in watch-world sustainability. Fairmined certification is a third-party standard for gold from artisanal and small-scale mining operations that meet requirements on working conditions and environmental management.

Chopard's co-president and creative director Caroline Scheufele has framed the initiative in terms of supply-chain knowledge: "Genuine luxury presupposes that you know the conditions along your supply chain." She adds that customers take pride in knowing the origins of the pieces they wear.

What the available reporting does not cover, however, is Chopard's performance on the other two pillars this comparison examines: energy and manufacturing processes, and circularity or waste reduction. That is not a claim that Chopard lacks such initiatives—only that the sources gathered here document its ethical sourcing in detail and say little about the rest.

IWC Schaffhausen: A Holistic Approach to Sustainability

IWC's approach spreads across all three pillars. On material sourcing, the Schaffhausen-based manufacturer achieved the Responsible Jewellery Council's Chain of Custody certification for its watch components, a voluntary standard certifying that the gold and platinum in its supply chain are traceable and responsibly sourced. A GreenCo analysis notes that in 2020, IWC was one of the few major brands committed to complying with the RJC's Code of Practices and certified against it.

On materials innovation, IWC launched TimberTex straps in 2021. Produced in Italy, these straps use 80% plant-based fibers sustainably sourced from European forests—a plant-based alternative to conventional leather straps.

On energy, IWC reports having switched to purchasing 100% renewable energy globally. The company frames this as an extension of a long-standing philosophy: IWC says that economic growth using renewable energy and social responsibility have formed the foundation of its mission from the beginning.

On circularity and waste, IWC reports having eliminated single-use plastics at its headquarters and boutiques, and set a target—stated as on track for the end of 2022—of phasing out purchases of non-FSC-certified forestry products such as paper, cardboard, wood, and furniture. The Forest Stewardship Council label signals that forest products come from responsibly managed sources.

Underpinning all of this is IWC's reporting practice. In 2018, the brand launched sustainability reporting in accordance with GRI standards, which IWC describes as the first and most widely adopted global standards for sustainability reporting, offering detailed international guidance for disclosures that are meaningful to stakeholders. Chief marketing officer Franziska Gsell summarized the company's stance: "We continue to move ahead in our sustainability journey, always questioning what more we can do in material innovation, energy use and societal impact."

Luxury Watch Sustainability Initiatives: Chopard vs. IWC

The table below compares the two brands across the three pillars of this analysis. Reading it side by side reveals the core distinction: Chopard's documented strength is concentrated in one pillar, executed at scale, while IWC's documented commitments span all three, backed by structured reporting.

Two caveats belong beside this table. First, these entries reflect what the brands and trade press have reported, not independent verification. Second, the empty Chopard cells reflect the scope of available reporting, not an absence of initiatives. A buyer who prioritizes traceable, Fairmined gold above all will find Chopard's documented record compelling; one who weighs renewable energy and packaging waste more heavily will find more documented ground with IWC.

How to Evaluate Sustainability Claims Without Falling for Greenwashing

Because neither brand's record can be taken at face value, the practical skill is knowing what to check. The clearest signal is third-party certification: IWC's RJC Chain of Custody certification and Chopard's Fairmined purchases are verifiable external standards, not self-declared labels. Look specifically for certifications such as RJC, Fairmined, and FSC, each of which involves an outside body setting and checking requirements.

The second indicator is structured, published reporting. IWC's decision to report against GRI standards matters because those standards provide detailed metrics and guidance at an international level, making disclosures comparable and meaningful rather than purely promotional. A brand that publishes a sustainability report with defined frameworks invites scrutiny; one that relies on marketing copy does not.

The third indicator is measurable targets with dates attached. IWC's stated goals—phasing out non-FSC-certified forestry products by the end of 2022, doubling annual corporate volunteering hours against a 2020 baseline—are the kind of specific, checkable commitments that distinguish planning from aspiration. Vague pledges such as "committed to the planet" without baselines or deadlines are the classic signature of greenwashing.

Finally, look for supply-chain transparency. As Scheufele's framing suggests, genuine luxury means knowing the conditions along the supply chain. A brand that can tell you where its gold was mined and under what conditions is making a claim you can investigate; one that cannot is asking for trust without evidence.

Making an Ethically Informed Luxury Watch Purchase

Consumers should prioritize brands that demonstrate transparency, hold third-party certifications, and publish measurable targets in their sustainability reports. Neither Chopard nor IWC is definitively "more sustainable"—their strengths lie in different areas, and the right choice depends on which pillar matters most to you.

The measurable indicator to apply before any purchase: look for readily available, detailed sustainability reports and specific third-party certifications such as RJC, Fairmined, or FSC on a brand's official website or in reputable reporting. If a brand's environmental claims cannot be traced to a certification, a dated target, or a structured report, treat them as marketing until proven otherwise.

Sources

• Eco-Friendly Luxury Watches: Timepieces with a Green Heart — Kapoor Watch Co. | Blogs
• How Green is My Watch? How Watch Brands Are Embracing Sustainability — WatchTime
• Greenco ESG
• IWC LAUNCHES SUSTAINABILITY REPORTING IN ACCORDANCE WITH GRI STANDARDS
• IWC publishes Sustainability Report 2022 and announces collaboration with Gisele Bündchen — Richemont