Comparing Tudor and Rolex
Welcome to the Barrington Watch Winders podcast. Today, we’re taking a closer look at one of the most fascinating sibling rivalries in the world of horology - Rolex and Tudor.
Rolex, of course, needs no introduction. It’s one of the most recognisable luxury names on the planet, a brand that’s become a symbol of prestige and success. But what about Tudor, often thought of as Rolex’s younger brother?
For decades, Tudor carried the label of the “poor man’s Rolex.” Yet today, it has carved out an identity of its own - bold, versatile, and increasingly respected among collectors. In this episode, we’ll uncover how these two Swiss maisons diverge in history, design, and value - and why Tudor is no longer living in Rolex’s shadow.
Shared Origins
The story of Tudor begins in 1926, when Hans Wilsdorf - the visionary behind Rolex - registered the name as a trademark. His idea was simple but brilliant: to create a watch that carried the same reliability and durability as a Rolex, but at a more modest price point. He wanted fine Swiss timekeeping to be within reach of a wider audience.
The brand name itself was inspired by English history - the Tudor dynasty. Its earliest symbol was the Tudor Rose, later replaced by the shield we see today. That shield became more than a logo; it stood for strength, dependability, and a bold identity.
In its early years, Tudor leaned heavily on Rolex’s reputation. The watches were fitted with Rolex’s famous Oyster case and bracelets, instantly granting them credibility and technical assurance. Buyers knew they were getting the essence of Rolex quality - but in a watch that was more approachable, both in spirit and in price.
Different Paths
As time went on, Rolex and Tudor began to follow very different paths. Rolex established itself at the very top of the luxury market, with every movement crafted in-house and designs that came to symbolise prestige and achievement.
Tudor, by contrast, was created to be more accessible. For years it relied on reliable ETA calibres, but since 2015 has developed strong in-house movements that bring it ever closer to its older sibling - while still offering excellent value.
The differences are clear in style as well. Rolex stays traditional, working mainly with stainless steel and precious metals. Tudor experiments - with bronze, titanium, and ceramic - and embraces bolder, sportier designs.
Even marketing tells the story: Rolex builds prestige quietly, while Tudor pushes boundaries with its “Born to Dare” campaign, fronted by icons like David Beckham and Lady Gaga, reaching a new generation of collectors.
Mechanics & Quality
When it comes to what lies beneath the dial, Tudor has made remarkable strides in recent years. Its modern in-house calibres are COSC certified, delivering chronometer-grade accuracy and an impressive 70-hour power reserve. For many collectors, this places Tudor right alongside Rolex in terms of mechanical reliability and day-to-day performance.
But Rolex, as ever, continues to set the benchmark. Its movements are not only COSC certified but also tested to the brand’s own Superlative Chronometer standard, guaranteeing precision to within plus or minus two seconds a day. Add to this technical innovations like the Chronergy escapement, which improves efficiency, and the Parachrom hairspring, designed to resist shocks and magnetism, and it’s clear that Rolex still leads when it comes to horological refinement.
Beyond the movements themselves, both Tudor and Rolex excel in creating robust timepieces. Every Tudor watch offers at least 100 metres of water resistance, while Rolex applies the same rigorous standards across most of its collections. Where Rolex edges ahead is in the fine details: the flawless finishing on the case, the smooth action of the crown, and bracelet innovations like the Easylink and Glidelock systems, which make adjustments effortless.
So while Tudor may not quite match Rolex in polish or in the last word of innovation, it comes surprisingly close in real-world performance. For many enthusiasts, that balance - exceptional mechanics at a more approachable price - is what makes Tudor such a compelling proposition today.
Price & Prestige
Price is one of the clearest dividing lines between these two brands. A Tudor typically begins around two to three thousand dollars, offering a stable presence on the pre-owned market and a strong reputation for value.
Rolex, on the other hand, usually starts at more than double that figure - and that’s just at retail. On the secondary market, Rolex models often trade well above list price, a reflection of the brand’s desirability and scarcity.
The difference becomes even more dramatic in the auction world. Tudor’s record sale sits in the six-figure range - impressive in its own right - but Rolex plays in an entirely different league. Paul Newman’s own Daytona fetched a staggering 17.8 million dollars, a reminder of just how powerful the Rolex name is among collectors.
In short, Rolex represents prestige, investment potential, and exclusivity. Tudor, meanwhile, delivers exceptional accessibility and value - a watch that captures the spirit of Swiss craftsmanship without the barrier of astronomical cost.
Closing
From shared origins under Hans Wilsdorf to the very different paths they follow today, Rolex and Tudor remain two sides of the same story. Rolex stands for prestige, tradition, and investment power - the pinnacle of refinement. Tudor, meanwhile, is bold, versatile, and accessible, offering collectors a spirited alternative without sacrificing reliability.
These are not just watches - they are two distinct expressions of a single vision, crafted for different wrists but united by the same heritage. Whether you choose the crown of Rolex or the shield of Tudor, you are wearing a piece of horological history that continues to shape the modern watch world.
Thank you for joining us here at Barrington Watch Winders. Until next time, keep your watch wound - and your curiosity ticking.
