Which of these appear to be a better stone?

[lakerkobe]

I posted asking about value and pricing, but I figured that is a question that likely won't get answered. So instead, please let me know which of these is likely the better stone. Thanks in advance for your advice.


Stone 1:

EGL certified

.90 carat
Round Brilliant
6.27 - 6.23 x 3.81 mm
Depth - 61.0%
Table - 56.0%
Crown - 14.9%
Pavilion - 42.5%
Girdle - Thin to Medium Facted
Culet - None

Finish - Good
Symmetry - Good
Clarity - SI1
Color - I
Fluorescence - None




Stone 2:

EGL certified

.92 carat
Round Brilliant
6.21 - 6.18 x 3.87 mm
Depth - 62.5%
Table - 56.0%
Crown - 15%
Pavilion - 43%
Girdle - Medium Facted
Culet - None
Finish - Very Good
Symmetry - Very Good
Clarity - SI2
Color - G
Fluorescence - None
Graining - Nil
NOTES: TOLKOWSKY IDEA CUT

 

[NoonersMom]

Laker - The first one scores a 0.7 on the HCA, the second one scores a 1.0 on the HCA. I thought I read that stones around the 0.6 range make for a better pendant or earing. Hopefully one of the more knowledgable PSers will chime in. Either way, at the very least you know that they are both performers.

Do you have an ideal scope image? That is one of the additional tools that will help you narrow it down.