Thomas Sabo vs Tiffany & Co.:Which is more popular?
In September 2026, Tiffany & Co. had more branded searches than Thomas Sabo among jewellery brands in Australia. Tiffany & Co. had about 74,000 branded searches, while Thomas Sabo had 5,400. Tiffany & Co. made up 17% of all jewellery brand searches we track, and Thomas Sabo accounted for 1.2%. When we asked ChatGPT and Google AI Overviews about jewellery brands, Tiffany & Co. appeared in three of the five answers and Thomas Sabo in none.
Who do people search for more?
Tiffany & Co., about 14 searches for every 1 for Thomas Sabo
Who does AI mention more?
Tiffany & Co., mentioned in 3 of 5 answers, Thomas Sabo in 0
Who does AI recommend more?
Tiffany & Co., the only one of the two named
Follow Thomas Sabo vs Tiffany & Co. and get free monthly updates on what changed
By continuing you'll get index updates and occasional product news from Brandwave. Unsubscribe any time. Privacy
Top jewellery brands in ChatGPT and Google AI Overviews
In three ChatGPT questions and two Google AI Overviews, Tiffany & Co. was mentioned in three out of five: in one of the three ChatGPT answers and in both Google AI Overviews. Thomas Sabo did not appear in any of the five answers.
Most recommended by AI
Brands get a higher ranking if they are mentioned earlier in the answers.
Mentioned by AI
Each dot is one answer, filled in when that answer mentions the brand.
- Tiffany & Co.3 of 5Named in 1 of 3 ChatGPT answersNamed in 2 of 2 Google answers
By Charlotte3 of 5Named in 2 of 3 ChatGPT answersNamed in 1 of 2 Google answers
Temple of the Sun3 of 5Named in 3 of 3 ChatGPT answersNamed in 0 of 2 Google answers
Swarovski2 of 5Named in 1 of 3 ChatGPT answersNamed in 1 of 2 Google answers
Arms of Eve2 of 5Named in 2 of 3 ChatGPT answersNamed in 0 of 2 Google answers
Sarah & Sebastian2 of 5Named in 1 of 3 ChatGPT answersNamed in 1 of 2 Google answers
Mejuri2 of 5Named in 1 of 3 ChatGPT answersNamed in 1 of 2 Google answers
Cushla Whiting2 of 5Named in 1 of 3 ChatGPT answersNamed in 1 of 2 Google answers
Pandora1 of 5Named in 1 of 3 ChatGPT answersNamed in 0 of 2 Google answers
Thomas Sabo0 of 5Named in 0 of 3 ChatGPT answersNamed in 0 of 2 Google answers
See every answer about jewellery brands
5 answers
Asked ChatGPT
“Which jewellery brand should I buy from in Australia?”
Asked ChatGPT
“What are the best jewellery brands in Australia?”
Asked ChatGPT
“Which jewellery brand makes a good gift?”
Searched Google, AI Overview
“jewellery”
Searched Google, AI Overview
“jewellery brands”
Not named in any answer:
Brands are shown in the order each answer named them. The survey took place in Australia on October 26, 2026.
Is Thomas Sabo or Tiffany & Co. more popular in search?
This chart shows how often people search Google for Thomas Sabo and Tiffany & Co. by name. Each line represents a brand's share of searches for all 12 jewellery brands we track, month by month, from searches in Australia.
Share of searches by month for Tiffany & Co., Thomas Sabo. The figures are in the table below the chart.
View monthly share of searches table
| Month | Swarovski | Tiffany & Co. | By Charlotte | Arms of Eve | Sarah & Sebastian | Pandora | Mejuri | Natasha Schweitzer | Temple of the Sun | Lucy Folk | Thomas Sabo | Cushla Whiting |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 2025 | 33.6% | 15.1% | 12.3% | 8.3% | 10.1% | 8.8% | 4.5% | 1.7% | 2% | 2% | 1.3% | 0.33% |
| Nov 2025 | 33% | 12.1% | 14.7% | 12.1% | 8.1% | 8.6% | 5.4% | 1.3% | 1.6% | 1.3% | 1.3% | 0.25% |
| Dec 2025 | 37.6% | 13.7% | 11.3% | 9.2% | 9.2% | 9.4% | 3.4% | 1.2% | 1.8% | 1.5% | 1.2% | 0.2% |
| Jan 2026 | 33.8% | 15.2% | 12.4% | 8.3% | 12.4% | 7.2% | 3.7% | 1.7% | 2% | 1.7% | 1.4% | 0.33% |
| Feb 2026 | 36.3% | 16.3% | 10.9% | 7.3% | 10.9% | 7.7% | 4% | 1.5% | 1.8% | 1.8% | 1.2% | 0.35% |
| Mar 2026 | 30.9% | 17% | 13.9% | 9.3% | 11.3% | 6.6% | 4.1% | 1.9% | 1.9% | 1.5% | 1.2% | 0.37% |
| Apr 2026 | 30.4% | 16.7% | 13.6% | 9.1% | 11.1% | 7.6% | 5% | 1.8% | 1.8% | 1.5% | 0.99% | 0.36% |
| May 2026 | 35.1% | 15.7% | 12.9% | 7% | 10.5% | 7.9% | 4.7% | 1.7% | 1.7% | 1.4% | 0.94% | 0.34% |
| Jun 2026 | 35.6% | 16% | 13.1% | 8.7% | 8.7% | 7.6% | 3.9% | 1.4% | 2.1% | 1.4% | 0.95% | 0.35% |
| Jul 2026 | 32.4% | 17.7% | 11.9% | 7.9% | 9.7% | 8.4% | 5.3% | 1.9% | 1.9% | 1.1% | 1.3% | 0.38% |
| Aug 2026 | 29.6% | 16.2% | 13.2% | 8.9% | 10.8% | 9% | 5.9% | 1.8% | 1.8% | 1.2% | 1.2% | 0.42% |
| Sep 2026 | 31.1% | 17% | 13.9% | 9.3% | 9.3% | 8.5% | 4.2% | 1.9% | 1.9% | 1.2% | 1.2% | 0.37% |
How has the Thomas Sabo and Tiffany & Co. comparison changed over the last 12 months?
3 findings
- Tiffany & Co. was ahead of Thomas Sabo in every measured month of the 12 months ending September 2026.
- Across the 12 months ending September 2026, Thomas Sabo’s share of searches among jewellery brands in Australia moved from 1.3% to 1.2%, and its estimated monthly branded searches moved from 6.6K to 5.4K.
- Across the 12 months ending September 2026, Tiffany & Co.’s share of searches among jewellery brands in Australia moved from 15.1% to 17%, and its estimated monthly branded searches held steady at 74K.
How did search popularity change for Australia jewellery brands in September 2026?
2 changes
In September 2026, Tiffany & Co. gained share of searches among jewellery brands in Australia, from 16.2% to 17%.
Estimated monthly branded searches for Thomas Sabo in Australia fell 18.2% over 12 measured months, from 6.6K to 5.4K in September 2026.
How are branded searches counted?
2 search terms
Brandwave collects information about searches that people make online using Thomas Sabo’s and Tiffany & Co.’s names. When viewed over time, estimated search volumes for these branded terms can be used to understand whether interest in the brands is growing, holding steady, or fading.
Thomas Sabo
1 branded search term
- thomas sabo
Tiffany & Co.
1 branded search term
- tiffany and co
Other head-to-heads among jewellery brands
Put your own brand in this comparison
Brandwave tracks your branded demand next to the rival you actually watch, with your campaigns, spend and outcomes on the same timeline.