← Reference Guides
Understanding Cut Pages

Graded Cuts

Which shapes have independent cut quality grades · What GIA and AGS cover · What to do when there is no grade

A graded cut is a diamond whose overall cut quality has been independently assessed and assigned a grade by a recognized gemological laboratory. The grading standards are rigorous, methodology-based, and consistent across stones submitted to the same lab. A graded cut is the gold standard because it removes subjectivity and salesmanship from the quality assessment — the grade is what it is, regardless of what a retailer claims about the stone.

The uncomfortable reality for most diamond buyers is that the majority of diamonds sold — every oval, every cushion, every emerald, every pear, marquise, princess, Asscher, radiant, and heart cut — are not graded for cut quality. GIA, the most widely used and trusted grading lab, assigns an overall cut grade exclusively to the standard round brilliant. For every other shape, the GIA grading report contains polish and symmetry grades, but no assessment of whether the stone's proportions produce good light return.

The grading landscape by lab and shape
ShapeGIA cut gradeAGS cut gradeBuyer alternative
Round Brilliant (standard 58-facet)✓ Excellent–Poor✓ Ideal–PoorBest-graded shape; use GIA or AGS report
Princess✓ AGS grades someEvaluate depth, table, symmetry; use AGS when available
OvalProportion evaluation + ASET/IdealScope imaging
CushionProportion evaluation; request light performance tools
EmeraldDepth %, table %; in-person evaluation essential
AsscherDepth %, table %; clarity evaluation crucial
PearProportion evaluation; ratio, depth, bow-tie assessment
MarquiseProportion evaluation; ratio, depth, bow-tie assessment
RadiantProportion evaluation; similar to cushion methodology
HeartIn-person evaluation; symmetry critical for shape integrity
Old EuropeanGIA grades as modified round; no cut grade issued
Old MineGIA grades as antique; no cut grade issued
Rose CutNo current grading standard; rely on craftsmanship assessment
BaguetteStep cut; clarity evaluation more important than cut grade
GIA vs. AGS — the two primary grading systems
GIA Gemological Institute of America Scale: Excellent / Very Good / Good / Fair / Poor Applies to: Round brilliant only Available since: 2006 Fancy shapes: Polish + Symmetry only Most widely used; largest submission volume Industry standard for resale and financing AGS American Gem Society Laboratories Scale: 0 (Ideal) / 1 / 2 / 3–4 / 5–7 / 8–10 AGS 0 ≈ GIA Excellent Applies to: Rounds + some fancy shapes Performance-based methodology Light performance modeling via raytracing Fewer submissions; premium on cut quality focus Preferred by some precision-cut dealers
GIA and AGS use different methodologies and scales, but both represent rigorous independent assessment. AGS's performance-based system models actual light behavior using computer raytracing — a more physical approach than GIA's proportion-based model. Both assign their top grades to the same general range of stones.

When a cut grade is not available — which is the case for virtually every fancy shape — buyers have three practical substitutes. First, proportion evaluation: checking that depth percentage, table percentage, and length-to-width ratio fall within accepted ranges for that shape. These specifications are listed on every cut page on this site. Second, light performance imaging: tools like ASET (Angular Spectrum Evaluation Tool), IdealScope, and proprietary platforms from dealers such as Whiteflash, Brian Gavin, or James Allen provide photographs or computer models showing actual light return. Third, in-person observation: evaluating the stone under various lighting conditions — diffuse overhead light, directional light, candlelight — is the ultimate arbiter of whether a stone performs the way you need it to.

Some online retailers have begun using their own proprietary cut quality assessments for fancy shapes. These can be useful but should be approached with appropriate skepticism — they are developed by the same parties who benefit from the sale. Third-party tools (ASET imaging, Sarine Light) are preferable because they are produced by independent instruments rather than by the seller's own evaluation team.

Key takeaway

If you are buying a round brilliant, a cut grade from GIA or AGS is available and should be your first checkpoint. If you are buying any other shape, there is no equivalent third-party cut grade — and you should treat every retailer's claim about cut quality with appropriate scrutiny. Proportion ranges, ASET imaging, and in-person evaluation are your best tools. The absence of a cut grade is not a flaw of the stone; it is a gap in the grading infrastructure that buyers need to understand and work around.

Sources & further reading