Wrist Watch

Upper Middle’s “Watch Watching Survey” (sponsored by Bezel) looked at the reasons members of the Oat Milk Elite buy luxury timepieces and the brands they use to send signals about themselves. Our data suggests that those signals are both context – and specifically professional context – dependent and broadly legible. To see someone’s watch is to get a sense of their ambitions, successes, and family economics.

To put it slightly punnily, watches help us present a face to the world – one that’s probably a bit less self-effacing than the one we usually use¹.

BUYING WATCHES

Most well-to-do Americans own at least one watch. Three-quarters (75%) reported owning at least one “nice watch” (broadly defined). Among those that do, most (70.59%) reported having purchased a watch for themselves and many (53.93%) reported received a watch as a gift – usually from partners (26.2%) or parents (12.83%). A meaningful minority (14.97%) reported having inherited a watch, a pathway correlated with both higher wealth and professional degrees (ρ ≈ +0.21).

Purchase motivations split along professional lines. Although 53% of respondents say they’d buy a watch simply because they “saw something they really liked,” actual behavior is more structured. Finance and consulting respondents overwhelmingly own self-purchased watches (70%) and are most likely to say they’d buy after a windfall (41%). Doctors and lawyers are far more likely to receive watches as gifts – often at graduation. Academic, nonprofit, and creative respondents are more likely (18%) to inherit watches and to cite taste as their sole purchase criterion.

Brand affiliation patterns reflect these differences. Business operations, strategy, and sales respondents have the highest Rolex ownership (35%), with strong showings for Omega (18%), Tag Heuer (16%), Seiko (16%). Finance respondents mirror these patterns but under-index on affordable brands like Timex and Casio. Tech workers skew toward Casio and G-Shock, while doctors under-index on Rolex and over-index on Tag Heuer (27%). Lawyers cluster in mid-luxury, favoring Omega and Seiko. All kinds of people wear Apple Watches², making them the least culturally or financially telling kind of timepiece for members of the professional class.

That said, all watch purchases are somewhat correlated to income. The likelihood of selecting “Personal Milestone” as a purchase motive rises sharply in the $150K–$199K band (~32%), remains elevated at $200K–$499K (~30%), and peaks among those with $1M–$2.5M in net worth (~38%). In other words, people begin buying symbolic watches not at the top of the income curve but when they feel they have crossed a threshold of legitimacy.

WEARING WATCHES

Respondents wear watches to send context-dependent messages. The consistency of responses to answers about which watches signal taste (Cartier, JWC, Vacheron Constantin) and which watches signal income (Rolex, Omega, Patek Philippe) drive home this point. Brands connote specific combinations of cultural and financial capital. 

Watches thought to imply success are more often deployed in professional settings, while watches associated with taste appear more often in social ones. Owners of Rolex (28% of Finance/Consulting/Business; 21% of Finance specifically) and Omega (20% of Medicine/Law; 16% of Finance/Consulting/Business) – report wearing their watches disproportionately in evaluative environments. By contrast, the few Academic/Public Service/Creative respondents who own luxury watches predominantly wear them to special events (67%) and, like owners of inherited watches, rarely wear them to work.

Geography and gender moderate signaling patterns. Respondents in coastal metros (NY, CA, MA, DC) boast markedly higher ownership rates of well-known luxury brands – especially Rolex and Cartier. Male respondents over-index on Rolexes and Omegas, which they are far more likely to wear in professional settings as, it would seem, legitimizing accessories or metallic comfort blankets.

WATCHING WATCHES

Interestingly, respondents’ watch preferences for themselves differ predictably from their watch preferences for others³. When selecting which watches they personally preferred, respondents leaned toward classic and refined watches. When selecting which watches made them think they’d like the wearer, they selected markedly more fun (think: Snoopy) and heritage timepieces.

Discrepancies in personal and social watch selection data imply that respondents choose watches for themselves that align with an aspirational identity – competent, established, upwardly mobile – while preferring other people wear watches that project either cultural fluency or approachability. The personal preference is distinction; the interpersonal preference is understatement.

CONCLUSION

Watches operate not simply as accessories but as markers of achievement and identity. Brand preferences map cleanly to profession and income because watches don’t just make a personal statement. They make professional, financial, and cultural statements as well.

And while watch consumption might seem like self-indulgence, there may be a practical edge to it. In 2011, Robert Nelissen demonstrated that visible luxury markers – watches included – reliably elicit greater deference and cooperation. In that light, the result of the Upper Middle survey suggest that those who buy watches to mark an achievement or milestone also use them to smoothing the path toward the next achievement or milestone.

Taken together, the patterns in this survey show watches functioning as compact expressions of ambition and class position – objects that let people display who they’ve become while hinting at the circles they hope to enter next.

WHO WATCHES THE WATCHMEN?

5) Other watchmen.
4) Watchwomen.
3) Hiring managers negotiating the watchmen’s salaries.
2) The watchmen’s greedy children.
1) Barracudas⁴.