Goldiam International Ltd · GOLDIAM
₹175 Cr
₹218 Cr
₹156 Cr
₹135 Cr
₹85 Cr
₹178 Cr
₹135 Cr
₹120 Cr
₹133 Cr
₹202 Cr
₹148 Cr
₹166 Cr
₹137 Cr
₹280 Cr
₹199 Cr
₹230 Cr
₹193 Cr
₹320 Cr
₹235 Cr
—
20-quarter listed-company comparison
Lab Grown Diamonds Stocks in India
Lab Grown Diamonds: Renaissance Global Ltd owns the largest revenue base AND the fastest current growth.
01 · the index people search for
Nifty Lab Grown Diamonds Index — Constituents & Performance
The Lab Grown Diamonds companies below are the listed Indian Lab Grown Diamonds universe this page tracks — the same constituent set people search for as the Nifty Lab Grown Diamonds index. Every figure is equal-weighted across those companies, so one large constituent cannot set the reading. Each number carries its own as-of date.
02 · the sector itself · before any single company
How has Lab Grown Diamonds moved against NIFTY 500?
The line below covers up to 5.2 years and opens on the 5Y view; the buttons cut it shorter. Over the most recent two of them this sector is 89% ahead of NIFTY 500. Earnings across its companies grew 18% on average over the last four reported quarters. It has been ahead of NIFTY 500 on a rolling three-month view for 11 weeks running.
FADING · −1 in 4w✓Price and the fundamentals both up2 of 3 companies ahead of NIFTY 500 by 5% or more over three months
RS ↑11w · 3/3 >200d (+0) · 2/3 lead (−1) · EPS 3/3↑
Lab Grown Diamonds, equal-weighted, based at 200
NIFTY 500, same base, same start
trailing 12-month earnings per share rising
falling
Lab Grown Diamonds, equal-weighted, based at 200
NIFTY 500, same base, same start
trailing 12-month earnings per share rising
falling
Lab Grown Diamonds, equal-weighted, based at 200
NIFTY 500, same base, same start
trailing 12-month earnings per share rising
falling
Both lines start at 200 in the same week, so the distance between them is the whole story: the sector line is an equal-weighted index of its 3 companies. The bars underneath are trailing 12-month earnings per share, one bar per reported quarter, each member rebased to 100 at the start and the sector taking the median — so a price line pulling away from flat bars is a re-rating, not earnings. A bar turns red when that figure is lower than the quarter before. Rules are fixed and applied identically everywhere on this site: ahead by 5% or more over three months, or behind by 20% or more over a year while earnings grew 20% or more. Hover any point to read both values and the gap. This is a description of what the numbers did, not advice.
03 · sector relative strength, before individual stocks
Is Lab Grown Diamonds outperforming NIFTY 500?
Lab Grown Diamonds has outperformed NIFTY 500 by 10.7% over the last 52 weeks. Over 13 weeks the gap is a lead of 6.6%. 3 of 3 covered companies currently beat NIFTY on Mansfield relative strength, so leadership inside the sector is selective. Renaissance Global Ltd is the strongest against the sector itself at -2.3%. Readings are as of 2026-07-19.
+6.6%Sector vs NIFTY 500 · 13 weeks
+10.7%Sector vs NIFTY 500 · 52 weeks
3/3Stocks leading NIFTY 500
0/3Stocks leading sector
Sector metric: 11.0 as of 2026-07-19 · CONSOLIDATION · falling.
The central tension: current leadership is concentrated, so durability matters more than rank.
Start with scale. Then earnings trajectory. Then business quality. Only after those three agree should price leadership carry much weight.
Bottom line
Lab Grown Diamonds has outperformed NIFTY 500 by 10.7% over 52 weeks and 6.6% over 13 weeks. 3 of 3 covered companies beat NIFTY on Mansfield relative strength, while 0 of 3 beat the sector itself. Renaissance Global Ltd leads with revenue of ₹2,812 crore, based on 3 of 3 comparable companies through Mar 2026.
Companies
3
complete canonical membership
Combined market value
₹22.2K Cr
International Gemological Institute Limited
Revenue growing
3/3
positive TTM year-on-year growth
Beating NIFTY 500
3/3
positive Mansfield relative strength
Comparing 3 of 3
04 · research priority, made explicit
4-Factor Sector Score
An additive sector-relative research score. The four displayed point contributions always equal the total: Growth & earnings (35), Capital efficiency (25), Valuation (20), and Relative strength (20). Missing or stale evidence is absorbed inside the affected factor, never applied as a hidden adjustment.
Growth & earnings · 35%Capital efficiency · 25%Valuation · 20%Relative strength · 20%
Goldiam International Ltd has the strongest current balance of earnings trajectory, business quality, valuation and price confirmation, with 92.6% evidence confidence.
How this score is built, and what the marks mean
Missing observations are not scored as bad. Their missing weight lowers confidence and pulls the final score toward neutral. PEG is not shown when the ratio cannot mean anything: the company must be making a profit, its price-to-earnings must be positive, and its three-year earnings growth must fall between 5% and 60%. Dividing a price multiple by a loss, or by growth measured off a tiny base, produces a number that looks precise and tells you nothing. Under relative strength, one mark per week shows the last 12 weeks: a mark is filled where the company led NIFTY 500 by 5% or more over the 13 weeks ending that week, which is the same test used everywhere on this site. Price stage places the company on the same six-step curve the sector itself is placed on — basing, turning, breaking out, leader, fading, asleep — read from how many weeks running it has led NIFTY 500 and whether that lead is widening or shrinking. It describes where the PRICE stands, not the earnings trajectory and not a recommendation, and it is left blank for a company whose weekly history is too short or too stale to read.
| Company | Score | Price stage | Growth & earnings/35 | Capital efficiency/25 | Valuation/20 | Relative strength/20 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1Goldiam International LtdGOLDIAM | 61.5/100Mixed-positive evidence93% evidence | FADING | 22.5/35 Revenue 25.1% · PAT 45.3% · OPM change 1 pp 88% evidence | 20.0/25 ROCE 23.9% · OPM 21% 100% evidence | 12.3/20 P/E 33.2× · PEG 0.38 85% evidence | 6.7/20 RS sector -3.1% · RS bench 29.1% · 1Y 8.4%5 of 12 weeks ahead 100% evidence |
| Exact sum: 22.5 + 20 + 12.3 + 6.7 = 61.5 · Decision use: Balanced evidence: keep at normal research priority and require another comparable period before raising conviction. | ||||||
| 2International Gemological Institute LimitedIGIL | 59.7/100Mixed-positive evidence72% evidence | FADING | 22.6/35 Revenue 21.7% · PAT 24.2% · OPM change 2 pp 95% evidence | 22.0/25 ROCE 69.2% · OPM 60% 76% evidence | 10.0/20 P/E 25× · PEG — 0% evidence | 5.1/20 RS sector -4.4% · RS bench 2.2% · 1Y -12.7%4 of 12 weeks ahead 100% evidence |
| Exact sum: 22.6 + 22 + 10 + 5.1 = 59.7 · Decision use: Balanced evidence: keep at normal research priority and require another comparable period before raising conviction. | ||||||
| 3Renaissance Global LtdRGL | 49.1/100Mixed-negative evidence74% evidence | TURNING | 25.0/35 Revenue 35.1% · PAT 23.3% · OPM change 0 pp 83% evidence | 6.8/25 ROCE 8% · OPM 7% 95% evidence | 9.3/20 P/E 12.6× · PEG — 35% evidence | 8.0/20 RS sector -2.3% · RS bench 0.1% · 1Y 3.1%5 of 11 weeks ahead 70% evidence |
| Exact sum: 25 + 6.8 + 9.3 + 8 = 49.1 · Decision use: Balanced evidence: keep at normal research priority and require another comparable period before raising conviction. | ||||||
05 · what price has already done
Market action
Goldiam International Ltd has the strongest one-year price move in Lab Grown Diamonds at +8.4%. It also leads on Mansfield relative strength against NIFTY at +29.1%. 3 of 3 covered companies are above zero on that measure. Every line covers 313 weekly closes through 2026-07-31.
Price and relative strength
Every company, the sector's own index and NIFTY 500 all start level on the left edge of the window, so only the distance between the lines counts — the highest line has risen the most since then, and the chart at the top of this page is drawn the same way. It opens on one year; the buttons beside it stretch that to three or five.
How far ahead of or behind NIFTY 500 each company has been running, measured against its own recent average of that comparison, so the flat line at zero IS NIFTY 500: above it the company is beating the market, below it the market is beating the company. It opens on one year.
The same measure taken against Lab Grown Diamonds itself instead of the whole market, so the flat line at zero is the sector: above it the company is beating its own peers, which is the sharper test of the two. It opens on one year.
06 · compare level, then change
Revenue Scale & Growth Durability
Renaissance Global Ltd has the highest Revenue among the 3 Lab Grown Diamonds companies compared here, at ₹2,812 crore. International Gemological Institute Limited is next at ₹1,364 crore. The same company also holds the highest Revenue growth, at 35.1%. 3 of 3 companies report a comparable reading, the latest through Mar 2026.
What the numbers say: Renaissance Global Ltd is the scale leader at ₹2,812 crore, 106.2% ahead of International Gemological Institute Limited. Renaissance Global Ltd's growth is 35.1% from a ₹2,812 crore base, with 15 reported observations in the 20-quarter window. Treat the growth leader as an acceleration candidate, not as equally proven scale.
LeaderRenaissance Global Ltd · ₹2,812 crore
Gap106.2% versus #2 · International Gemological Institute Limited
Persistence5/8 recent comparable periods
Coverage3/3 companies · 45 observations
Investor read: Renaissance Global Ltd is the scale benchmark; Renaissance Global Ltd is the acceleration watch. Promote the challenger only if growth persists and converts into margin and returns.
This conclusion weakens if: Renaissance Global Ltd's growth falls below Renaissance Global Ltd's for two consecutive comparable reports while operating margin also compresses.
Revenue is compared on a common reported-currency basis. Growth is year-on-year, so seasonality does not masquerade as progress.
Revenuelargest
Revenue growthfastest growers
Revenue · company comparison
3/3 level · 3/3 change
On every company-comparison chart on this page: solid lines show level, dotted lines show change when “Both” is selected, and a missing report breaks the line rather than being invented.
All-company data · latest reported quarter
In every all-company table on this page, each figure is the company’s latest single reported quarter. The rankings above them use trailing-twelve-month or current-market values, so a company can legitimately show a different number in each.
| Company | Revenue | Revenue growth | Reported |
|---|---|---|---|
| Renaissance Global Ltd RGL⚠ unverified | ₹773 Cr | 50% | Mar 2026 |
| International Gemological Institute Limited IGIL | ₹371 Cr | 23% | Jun 2026 |
| Goldiam International Ltd GOLDIAM | ₹235 Cr | 18% | Mar 2026 |
Full 20-quarter history · every available company
Revenue · reported quarter history
International Gemological Institute Limited · IGIL
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
₹250 Cr
₹278 Cr
₹260 Cr
₹250 Cr
₹265 Cr
₹305 Cr
₹301 Cr
₹304 Cr
₹320 Cr
₹369 Cr
₹371 Cr
Renaissance Global Ltd · RGL⚠ unverified
—
—
—
—
₹440 Cr
₹724 Cr
₹499 Cr
₹473 Cr
₹442 Cr
₹655 Cr
₹537 Cr
₹445 Cr
₹412 Cr
₹710 Cr
₹514 Cr
₹530 Cr
₹546 Cr
₹963 Cr
₹773 Cr
—
Revenue growth · reported quarter history
Goldiam International Ltd · GOLDIAM
—
—
—
-13%
-51%
-18%
-13%
-11%
56%
13%
9.6%
38%
3.0%
39%
34%
39%
41%
14%
18%
—
International Gemological Institute Limited · IGIL
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
6.0%
9.7%
16%
22%
21%
21%
23%
Renaissance Global Ltd · RGL⚠ unverified
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
0.5%
-9.5%
7.6%
-5.9%
-6.8%
8.4%
-4.3%
19%
33%
36%
50%
—
07 · compare level, then change
Operating Economics & Margin Trend
International Gemological Institute Limited has the highest OPM among the 3 Lab Grown Diamonds companies compared here, at 60%. Goldiam International Ltd is next at 21%. The same company also holds the highest Margin change, at +2 percentage points. 3 of 3 companies report a comparable reading, the latest through Jun 2026.
What the numbers say: International Gemological Institute Limited leads both opm at 60% and margin change at +2 percentage points.
LeaderInternational Gemological Institute Limited · 60%
Gap185.7% versus #2 · Goldiam International Ltd
Persistence5/7 recent comparable periods
Coverage3/3 companies · 49 observations
Investor read: International Gemological Institute Limited sets the level benchmark; use the change leader as an inflection watch only after another comparable report confirms it.
This conclusion weakens if: The next two comparable reports reverse the current margin change signal.
Operating margin compares operating profit with revenue. Improvement is measured in percentage points, not percentage growth.
OPMhighest
Margin changefastest expanders
Operating margin · company comparison
3/3 level · 3/3 change
All-company data · latest reported quarter
| Company | OPM | Margin change | Reported |
|---|---|---|---|
| International Gemological Institute Limited IGIL | 60% | +2.0 pp | Jun 2026 |
| Goldiam International Ltd GOLDIAM | 21% | +1.0 pp | Mar 2026 |
| Renaissance Global Ltd RGL⚠ unverified | 7.0% | 0.0 pp | Mar 2026 |
Full 20-quarter history · every available company
OPM · reported quarter history
Goldiam International Ltd · GOLDIAM
13%
23%
18%
19%
27%
18%
17%
19%
21%
20%
16%
18%
22%
22%
20%
18%
20%
24%
21%
—
International Gemological Institute Limited · IGIL
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
51%
62%
49%
59%
57%
64%
58%
58%
60%
64%
60%
Renaissance Global Ltd · RGL⚠ unverified
11%
8.7%
5.6%
7.1%
8.0%
7.0%
7.0%
7.0%
7.0%
8.0%
8.0%
8.0%
8.0%
7.0%
7.0%
7.0%
7.0%
6.0%
7.0%
—
Margin change · reported quarter history
Goldiam International Ltd · GOLDIAM
−3.4 pp
−1.5 pp
+1.8 pp
−0.3 pp
+13.4 pp
−5.5 pp
−1.1 pp
−0.2 pp
−5.5 pp
+2.0 pp
−1.0 pp
−1.0 pp
+1.0 pp
+2.0 pp
+4.0 pp
0.0 pp
−2.0 pp
+2.0 pp
+1.0 pp
—
International Gemological Institute Limited · IGIL
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
+6.0 pp
+2.0 pp
+9.0 pp
−1.0 pp
+3.0 pp
0.0 pp
+2.0 pp
Renaissance Global Ltd · RGL⚠ unverified
+5.1 pp
+2.4 pp
+0.0 pp
−0.6 pp
−3.1 pp
−1.7 pp
+1.4 pp
−0.1 pp
−1.0 pp
+1.0 pp
+1.0 pp
+1.0 pp
+1.0 pp
−1.0 pp
−1.0 pp
−1.0 pp
−1.0 pp
−1.0 pp
0.0 pp
—
08 · compare level, then change
Profit Scale & Acceleration
International Gemological Institute Limited has the highest Net profit among the 3 Lab Grown Diamonds companies compared here, at ₹611 crore. Goldiam International Ltd is next at ₹170 crore. Goldiam International Ltd has the highest Profit growth at 45.3%, so level and change sit with different companies. 3 of 3 companies report a comparable reading, the latest through Jun 2026.
What the numbers say: International Gemological Institute Limited leads with ₹611 crore of TTM profit, 259.4% above Goldiam International Ltd. Goldiam International Ltd shows 45.3% growth from a ₹170 crore profit base. Compare the size of the base and persistence before ranking acceleration above profit scale.
LeaderInternational Gemological Institute Limited · ₹611 crore
Gap259.4% versus #2 · Goldiam International Ltd
Persistence7/7 recent comparable periods
Coverage3/3 companies · 45 observations
Investor read: International Gemological Institute Limited sets the level benchmark; use the change leader as an inflection watch only after another comparable report confirms it.
This conclusion weakens if: The next two comparable reports reverse the current profit growth signal.
Net profit is the residual after operating costs, interest and tax. Growth off a loss or near-zero base is excluded from the fastest-grower rank.
Net profitlargest
Profit growthfastest growers
Net profit · company comparison
3/3 level · 3/3 change
All-company data · latest reported quarter
| Company | Net profit | Profit growth | Reported |
|---|---|---|---|
| International Gemological Institute Limited IGIL | ₹166 Cr | 31% | Jun 2026 |
| Goldiam International Ltd GOLDIAM | ₹37 Cr | 61% | Mar 2026 |
| Renaissance Global Ltd RGL⚠ unverified | ₹30 Cr | 30% | Mar 2026 |
Full 20-quarter history · every available company
Net profit · reported quarter history
Goldiam International Ltd · GOLDIAM
₹20 Cr
₹40 Cr
₹23 Cr
₹21 Cr
₹19 Cr
₹29 Cr
₹16 Cr
₹17 Cr
₹23 Cr
₹32 Cr
₹18 Cr
₹22 Cr
₹22 Cr
₹50 Cr
₹23 Cr
₹34 Cr
₹31 Cr
₹68 Cr
₹37 Cr
—
International Gemological Institute Limited · IGIL
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
₹78 Cr
₹126 Cr
₹78 Cr
₹110 Cr
₹114 Cr
₹141 Cr
₹127 Cr
₹130 Cr
₹135 Cr
₹180 Cr
₹166 Cr
Renaissance Global Ltd · RGL⚠ unverified
—
—
—
—
₹16 Cr
₹28 Cr
₹20 Cr
₹14 Cr
₹10 Cr
₹28 Cr
₹21 Cr
₹15 Cr
₹11 Cr
₹24 Cr
₹23 Cr
₹7 Cr
₹20 Cr
₹33 Cr
₹30 Cr
—
Profit growth · reported quarter history
Goldiam International Ltd · GOLDIAM
—
—
—
-13%
-5.0%
-28%
-30%
-19%
21%
10%
13%
29%
-4.4%
56%
28%
55%
41%
36%
61%
—
International Gemological Institute Limited · IGIL
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
46%
12%
63%
18%
18%
28%
31%
Renaissance Global Ltd · RGL⚠ unverified
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
-38%
0.0%
5.0%
7.1%
10%
-14%
9.5%
-53%
82%
38%
30%
—
09 · compare level, then change
Return On Capital Employed
International Gemological Institute Limited has the highest ROCE among the 3 Lab Grown Diamonds companies compared here, at 69.2%. Goldiam International Ltd is next at 23.9%. Renaissance Global Ltd has the highest ROCE change at +2.2 percentage points, so level and change sit with different companies. 3 of 3 companies report a comparable reading, the latest through Jun 2026.
What the numbers say: International Gemological Institute Limited leads ROCE at 69.2%, 45.3 percentage points above Goldiam International Ltd. Renaissance Global Ltd has the strongest latest improvement at +2.2 percentage points. Read the leader beside the density of its reported history: a sparse high return is a candidate; a repeated high return is evidence of durability.
LeaderInternational Gemological Institute Limited · 69.2%
Gap189.5% versus #2 · Goldiam International Ltd
PersistenceNot enough history
Coverage3/3 companies · 33 observations
Investor read: International Gemological Institute Limited sets the level benchmark; use the change leader as an inflection watch only after another comparable report confirms it.
This conclusion weakens if: The next two comparable reports reverse the current roce change signal.
ROCE asks how much operating return the business earns on the capital employed. Direction matters, but a single exceptional year should not be mistaken for durability.
ROCEhighest
ROCE changefastest improvers
Return on capital · company comparison
3/3 level · 3/3 change
Withheld from this chart: International Gemological Institute Limited (IGIL) — its two data sources disagree by up to 77% on reported income across 10 comparable periods, so its derived ratios are withheld. A figure two sources cannot agree on is not drawn — the gap is a decision, not missing data.
All-company data · latest reported quarter
| Company | ROCE | ROCE change | Reported |
|---|---|---|---|
| Goldiam International Ltd GOLDIAM | 16% | −4.1 pp | Mar 2026 |
| Renaissance Global Ltd RGL⚠ unverified | 11% | +2.2 pp | Mar 2026 |
Full 20-quarter history · every available company
ROCE · reported quarter history
Goldiam International Ltd · GOLDIAM
24%
—
27%
—
23%
—
16%
—
17%
20%
17%
21%
18%
25%
21%
26%
17%
26%
16%
—
Renaissance Global Ltd · RGL⚠ unverified
12%
13%
13%
—
13%
12%
13%
11%
13%
11%
11%
11%
10%
11%
8.9%
8.7%
9.6%
9.5%
11%
—
ROCE change · reported quarter history
Goldiam International Ltd · GOLDIAM
—
—
—
—
−0.9 pp
—
−10.8 pp
—
−5.9 pp
—
+1.0 pp
—
+1.3 pp
+4.9 pp
+3.1 pp
+5.0 pp
−1.3 pp
+0.4 pp
−4.1 pp
—
Renaissance Global Ltd · RGL⚠ unverified
—
—
—
—
+0.9 pp
−0.7 pp
+0.5 pp
—
−0.4 pp
−1.3 pp
−2.9 pp
−0.3 pp
−2.6 pp
+0.3 pp
−1.6 pp
−2.3 pp
−0.4 pp
−1.5 pp
+2.2 pp
—
10 · compare level, then change
Valuation Against Growth & Quality
Goldiam International Ltd has the lowest PEG among the 3 Lab Grown Diamonds companies compared here, at 0.38×. Renaissance Global Ltd has the lowest P/E at 12.6×, so level and change sit with different companies. 1 of 3 companies report a comparable reading, the latest through Mar 2026. Its PEG series carries 11 reported observations across the 20-quarter window.
What the numbers say: Goldiam International Ltd has the lowest comparable PEG at 0.38×. Only 1 of 3 companies have earnings and growth steady enough for the ratio to mean anything, so no broad “cheapest stock” conclusion is defensible unless the current multiple, own-history position and growth durability agree.
LeaderGoldiam International Ltd · 0.38×
GapNot enough peers
Persistence0/8 recent comparable periods
Coverage1/3 companies · 11 observations
Investor read: Treat valuation as permission to investigate, never as a standalone reason to buy.
This conclusion weakens if: The next two comparable reports reverse the current p/e signal.
PEG is shown only when earnings are positive and three-year EPS growth is between 5% and 60%. It is recomputed consistently as the trailing P/E divided by that growth rate — reported earnings, never an expected-earnings multiple. On Indian companies it is shown only where the two data feeds agreed. Where any of that fails the ratio is left out rather than printed: a P/E divided by a loss, or by growth measured off a tiny base, is a number that looks precise and means nothing.
PEGlowest PEG
P/Elowest P/E
Valuation · company comparison
1/3 level · 3/3 change
All-company data · latest reported quarter
| Company | PEG | P/E | Reported |
|---|---|---|---|
| Goldiam International Ltd GOLDIAM | 0.4 | 20.0 | Mar 2026 |
| International Gemological Institute Limited IGIL | — | 27.2 | Jun 2026 |
| Renaissance Global Ltd RGL⚠ unverified | — | 11.9 | Mar 2026 |
Full 20-quarter history · every available company
PEG · reported quarter history
Goldiam International Ltd · GOLDIAM
—
—
—
—
0.3
—
—
—
—
1.5
1.3
2.0
1.9
3.7
1.2
1.1
0.9
0.6
0.4
—
P/E · reported quarter history
Goldiam International Ltd · GOLDIAM
28.3
22.8
18.9
13.9
13.2
14.4
15.4
16.8
17.1
21.7
20.6
19.0
40.9
44.5
35.9
31.5
30.5
28.3
20.0
—
International Gemological Institute Limited · IGIL
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
35.1
30.0
28.3
26.0
27.2
Renaissance Global Ltd · RGL⚠ unverified
16.9
19.8
15.4
10.3
10.1
9.8
8.9
12.0
12.8
13.5
13.0
13.4
15.8
22.9
16.0
16.4
16.0
17.3
11.9
—
11 · before the conclusion, check the blind spots
What can make this comparison misleading?
This Lab Grown Diamonds comparison names 7 specific ways its own evidence can mislead, all listed below. All 3 companies here report on comparable dates, so no rank carries a stale marker. 1 draws at least one figure from a second feed with too little overlap to cross-check. 1 has second-feed figures withheld because the two sources disagree.
Keep these limits visible
- A high growth rate can be a low-base artefact. The page keeps level and change separate for that reason.
- A high ROCE can be temporary or flattered by a small capital base. Read it beside margin, cash conversion and reinvestment.
- The 4-Factor Sector Score ranks research priority, not portfolio action. Management quality, catalysts and risks need equally fresh evidence before capital is deployed.
- An “all companies” line chart preserves completeness, but rank changes should be checked against reporting dates before drawing a conclusion.
- 1 company draws at least one figure from a second data feed with too little overlapping history to cross-check against the primary source; it is marked unverified wherever that figure appears.
- 1 company is missing from the second-feed metrics by decision, not by absence: the two sources disagree, so nothing from the second is drawn. Read those rows as narrower evidence, never as a weaker business.
- Thin comparisons: Valuation have fewer than three usable current readings.
12 · evidence and freshness
How was this comparison built?
This comparison is built from the reported filings of 3 Lab Grown Diamonds companies, normalized to a common ₹ scale and a shared quarter axis of up to 20 quarters each. Fundamentals run through Jun 2026 and market data through 2026-07-31. A second data feed fills gaps only after identity and scale reconciliation, and missing observations are never interpolated.
FundamentalsThrough Jun 2026 · up to 20 quarters per company
Market dataThrough 2026-07-31 · weekly price and relative-strength history
Derived metricsGrowth, changes and PEG are calculated only when their inputs are comparable.
Score confidenceMissing and stale evidence reduces confidence and pulls the 0–100 research-priority score toward neutral.
Source standing1 cross-checked · 1 unverified · 1 withheld, of 3 graded companies.
How a second data feed is admitted, and what happens when it disagrees
A second feed is read only after its reported income is matched against the primary source on at least three overlapping periods. Where the two agree the figures fill silently. Where there is too little shared history to compare, the figures are still drawn — they are the only evidence there is — and marked ⚠ unverified everywhere they appear. Where the two are known to disagree, nothing from the second feed is drawn and the affected company is named under the chart it is missing from.
13 · questions investors ask, short speakable answers
Lab Grown Diamonds company comparison FAQs
These 23 answers restate the Lab Grown Diamonds comparison above in question form. Every one is computed from the same 3 companies and the same reported filings as the rankings and charts, current through Jun 2026. Price and relative-strength answers run through 2026-07-31. Nothing here is estimated, and none of it is a recommendation.
Is the Lab Grown Diamonds sector outperforming NIFTY 500?
Lab Grown Diamonds has outperformed NIFTY 500 by 10.7% over 52 weeks and 6.6% over 13 weeks. 3 of 3 covered companies beat NIFTY on Mansfield relative strength, while 0 of 3 beat the sector itself.
Which Lab Grown Diamonds company is largest by revenue?
Renaissance Global Ltd leads with revenue of ₹2,812 crore, based on 3 of 3 comparable companies through Mar 2026.
Which Lab Grown Diamonds company is growing fastest?
Renaissance Global Ltd has the fastest current revenue growth at 35.1%, across 3 of 3 comparable companies.
Which Lab Grown Diamonds company has the strongest 4-Factor Sector Score?
Goldiam International Ltd ranks first at 61.5/100 with 92.6% evidence confidence. The score prioritizes research; it is not a buy recommendation.
Which Lab Grown Diamonds company has the lowest comparable PEG?
Goldiam International Ltd has the lowest comparable PEG at 0.38, among 1 of 3 companies whose earnings and growth are steady enough for the ratio to mean anything.
How much history does this Lab Grown Diamonds comparison include?
The page compares up to 20 reported quarters per company for fundamentals, returns and valuation, ending Jun 2026. Missing observations remain blank rather than being estimated.
How is the 4-Factor Sector Score calculated?
The four visible contributions add directly: growth and earnings up to 35 points, capital efficiency up to 25, valuation up to 20, and relative strength up to 20. Missing or stale evidence moves only the affected contribution toward neutral.
What is the Nifty Lab Grown Diamonds index?
The Nifty Lab Grown Diamonds index tracks India's listed Lab Grown Diamonds companies as a single basket. This page follows the same 3 companies and equal-weights them, so every company's weekly return counts once whatever it is worth, and the reading belongs to the Lab Grown Diamonds sector rather than to its largest constituent. Figures are as of Jun 2026.
Which are the best Lab Grown Diamonds stocks in India?
Ranked by this page's four-factor score, Goldiam International Ltd places first among 3 listed Lab Grown Diamonds companies, followed by International Gemological Institute Limited. That is a ranking of published data — earnings, quality, valuation and market behaviour as of Jun 2026 — and not a recommendation; Sector Alpha is not registered with SEBI as an investment adviser.
How many Lab Grown Diamonds stocks are listed in India?
This comparison covers 3 listed Lab Grown Diamonds companies in India, each above the size floor the site applies, with 20 quarters of reported figures per company where the filings exist. The full ranked list is on this page, as of Jun 2026.
Which Lab Grown Diamonds company is the biggest?
Renaissance Global Ltd is the largest, with trailing-twelve-month revenue of ₹2,812 crore, ahead of International Gemological Institute Limited at ₹1,364 crore. That covers 3 of 3 companies with comparable reporting through Mar 2026.
Which Lab Grown Diamonds company has the best profit margins?
International Gemological Institute Limited has the highest operating margin at 60%, from 3 of 3 comparable companies. International Gemological Institute Limited shows the biggest recent improvement, at +2 percentage points. A high margin matters most when it is holding or rising, not when it is peaking.
Which Lab Grown Diamonds company makes the most profit?
International Gemological Institute Limited earns the most, at ₹611 crore of trailing-twelve-month net profit, from 3 of 3 comparable companies. Goldiam International Ltd has the fastest profit growth at 45.3%, though growth off a small or recovering profit base overstates how much has actually changed.
Which Lab Grown Diamonds company earns the highest return on capital?
International Gemological Institute Limited leads on return on capital employed at 69.2%, across 3 of 3 companies. Read it beside the length of its reported history: a high return that repeats for years is evidence of a durable business, while a single high reading can be a small capital base or one good year.
Which Lab Grown Diamonds stock is the cheapest?
On PEG — where a LOWER number is cheaper — Goldiam International Ltd screens cheapest at 0.38×. Only 1 of 3 companies have earnings and growth steady enough for the ratio to mean anything, so this is not a sector-wide "cheapest stock" verdict. Cheap on a multiple is a reason to investigate, never a reason to buy on its own.
Is the Lab Grown Diamonds sector beating the market?
Lab Grown Diamonds has outperformed NIFTY 500 by 10.7% over the last 52 weeks and 6.6% over 13 weeks, measured on an equal-weight index of its current members. Inside the sector, 3 of 3 covered companies are beating the market on their own. Sector strength does not transfer evenly to every stock in it.
Which Lab Grown Diamonds stock has the strongest price momentum?
Goldiam International Ltd has the strongest relative strength against NIFTY 500. Relative strength answers last, after growth, quality and valuation: price can move well before the fundamentals confirm it, and sometimes without them confirming at all.
Which Lab Grown Diamonds company scores highest for research priority?
Goldiam International Ltd scores 61.5 out of 100 with 92.6% evidence confidence, from 22.5 points on growth and earnings, 20 on capital efficiency, 12.3 on valuation and 6.7 on relative strength. This ranks what deserves work next. It is not a buy recommendation, and management quality, catalysts and risk still need separate research.
How many Lab Grown Diamonds companies does this comparison cover, and over what period?
It compares 3 listed companies over up to 20 reported quarters of fundamentals, ending Jun 2026, plus weekly price and relative-strength history. Membership is the full sector list — nothing is dropped for having thin data.
What is the total market cap of the Lab Grown Diamonds sector?
The 3 Lab Grown Diamonds companies on this page carry ₹22,190 crore of combined market value. International Gemological Institute Limited is the largest at ₹15,275 crore, about 69% of the sector's total on its own. Market value moves with price, so this reading is dated 2026-08-05.
How is the Lab Grown Diamonds sector performing?
3 of the 3 covered Lab Grown Diamonds companies are beating NIFTY 500 on Mansfield relative strength. The sector itself is 10.7% ahead of NIFTY 500 over 52 weeks on an equal-weight index of its current members. Readings are as of 2026-08-05.
Why are some values on this page blank?
A blank means that company did not report a comparable figure for that period, so nothing is shown. Missing observations are never interpolated, carried forward, or replaced with a similar-looking accounting line, and a company with missing evidence has its research score pulled toward neutral rather than being scored as bad.
Is this investment advice?
No. Every figure here is a deterministic calculation from reported company filings and market data, published for research. It contains no recommendation to buy or sell any security, does not account for your circumstances, and is not a substitute for advice from a licensed adviser.