About rating

The Watch Observer editor’s contribution

Every week, the editorial team of The Watch Observer will test for you, and for several days, some new high-range quality watches.
The results of these tests, accessible from the section ‘Tests’ of the website, will be introduced to you through three angles :

- an article, which will recount the meeting between the journalist and the watch he personally tested. With his joys, regrets, feelings…;
the "Editor’s opinion”, in the form of an objective evaluation rate out of 100 points, issued from an evaluation grid that is common to all the tested watches;
- “exclusive photos” produced "in house", in order to offer you another glimpse on the tested watches.


The Watch Observer’s mission: pragmatism and editorial independence

The tests made by our "testers / editors" are pragmatic : each journalist puts himself in the potential buyer’s shoes who enters a dealer in order to try the watch he has been spotted for a few days.
But with a big difference : our tests last several days and are undertaken in real conditions of a daily life.

Thus, the sharpened opinion of our specialists gives the watch amateur as well as the novice some objective markers and accurate points of comparison among a prolific watch making production.

Totally independent from the manufactures (our journalists remain anonymous), they will supply a rational and enlightened dimension to your future buying and will guide you in your choices.


The Watch Observer’s "testers / editors"

The Watch Observer built up a team of 10 editors in order to make the tests that are issued. The specifications required for their choice are simple and transparent :

INDEPENDENCE = our testers / editors are not affiliated, closely or not, to any brand : they are totally independent from the manufactures ;
COMPETENCE AND SKILL = they already have in their favor various thorough watch making reviews published on the French or foreign forums or on their own blogs ;
OBJECTIVITY = even if each of them has his own favorite brands and models, they all agreed to test each timepiece that has been entrusted to them with a new and objective look (under the control of the Chief editor) ;
PASSION = they are inveterate watch collectors for a long time ;
SHARING = they take part to The Watch Observer’s adventure for their own pleasure : for testing each week for you new watches (novelties, prototypes, classical) and for sharing their enthusiasm.


The Watch Observer’s evaluation grid

This grid is made up of 6 generic items that make a total of 100 points.

In order to offer you a rigorous and transparent evaluation of the tested watches, each generic item pointed with the symbol "detail" decomposes itself in rated sub-items.

For instance, click on the item “Finishing” (/20)
A pop-up menu will give you all the details of the repartition of the obtained points by the watch.
For example, will appear:


Some essential precisions to understand the rating

- Control of the movement by the manufacture / horological awards (/3) : some brands proceed inside of the producing process to some movement tests that equips their watches ; others do not. These tests, as well as the eventual gained awards (such as C.O.S.C. certification) are additional pledges of the movement’s reliability and thus credited as such.

- Power reserve ability (/2) : a watch that is rated 0/2 has a power reserve ability of less than 42 hours. Starting from 42 hours, the more the power reserve is important, the higher is the mark.

- Complications (/5) : the more complications are offered by a watch and the higher the mark it gets. An internal scale has been established, crediting the watch according to the difficulties of the complications : the function “date” is not as much credited as the function “chronograph”, which is itself less credited than the “minute repeater” for example.

- Finishing (dial, case and buckle) : the rate is attributed according to the quality of the execution, the used materials and the combination of the effects (mirror, brushed polishing, micro sand blasting, etc).

- Crystal quality: a mineral crystal will be less well marked than a dual-face crystal with anti-reflective coating or a domed plexiglass when it is consistent with the watch.

- Water resistance (/3) : the rate depends on the depth to which you can take your watch. The deeper you go under the level of the sea, the better is the mark. 


The Watch Observer’s bore bias

- You will only find on this website tests of watches that are among the best of the market.

- You will only find on The Watch Observer website articles on watches that our testers / editors have personally tried for several days. Our editor does not work on photos nor press books, even if they are used as sources of information.

- The Watch Observer gives you the occasion to express yourself by commenting each published Test and by rating each watch that has been shifted through.
Thank you for taking part to the website’s life with a positive sharing mind.


The Watch Observer’s warnings

- Option “Compare 2 watches”
The Watch Observer gives you the possibility to juxtapose, in order to compare them, the “Manufacturer data” + “the Editor’s opinion” + “the Users’ rating” for two watches that have been shifted through by our testers / editors. And you can multiply theses comparisons. Do not deprive yourselves !
However, be careful regarding the interpretation you will make and the conclusions you will draw : every watches do not have the same vocation…

- Cannot find an article on a specific watch ?
The watches that are absent of this website should not be considered as of bad quality. 
Maybe the brands did not want to entrust them to us for a test.
Or that we did not have yet the time to try them…
So do not draw quick conclusions !

Have a great read !

Pierre Gisclard
Chief editor / CEO
Email : pierre.gisclard(at)thewatchobserver.com