How much reliance do you place on HCA score?

[majes888]

What factors, if any, diminish the importance of the HCA score? Color grade, clarity and type of inclusions, fluorescence, etc?



Basically, I'm trying to decide between 2 diamonds:

1.25, F, S12, excellent cut, no fluorescence and HCA score of 2.3 - $8600

https://myapps.gia.edu/ReportCheckPortal/getReportData.do?&reportno=2126224096&weight=1.25

---------------------------------

1.24, G, S12, excellent cut, faint fluorescence and HCA score of 1.3 - $7100

https://myapps.gia.edu/ReportCheckPortal/getReportData.do?&reportno=2136853700&weight=1.24

-----------------

The latter diamond is about $1500 less expensive, has a superior HCA score but its one grade down in color and has faint fluorescence. Also, although both diamonds are S12, the latter is not as clean as the first diamond.

 

[04diamond<3]

It really depends on your personal taste. Though the 2.4 is a lower score, to you it may look better. And honestly, I'd rather have something that scored a hair over 2.0 than a dirty diamond! Personally, I like smaller tables. But again, up to you.

** I really wouldn't weigh your whole decision on the HCA because it's meant to be a tool that helps you narrow down your search. There are a lot of hearts and arrows ("ideal") cut stones that score over 2.0 as well.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

I would want an eyeclean stone, so I would eliminate one that wasn't regardless of it's HCA score or any other factor. Both of these stones have potential if they are eyeclean from the top (and sides if it isn't going in a halo or bezel setting). You need idealscope images to determine which is better.

 

[bunnycat]

I would want an eyeclean stone, so I would eliminate one that wasn't regardless of it's HCA score or any other factor. Both of these stones have potential if they are eyeclean from the top (and sides if it isn't going in a halo or bezel setting). You need idealscope images to determine which is better.

ditto- they're both SI2, so confirming if one or both are eyeclean would be a good first line of action. An idealscope image to look at their light performance would be your best bet for making a decision after that. As has been said, they've both got some potential so it may just come down to your preference. The color doesn't affect the sparkle, but if one of them has been cut better than the other one (in terms of all the angles working together well) then the Idealscope image will help with that.

Has someone told you that the second one is not eyeclean are were you basing that off the comments on the report since it had more notation?

 

[majes888]

Thanks for your responses! The 1.25 is eye clean to me, even though it has a small indented natural near the table. The 1.24 has an inclusion I'm able to see without a loupe.

04diamond, why do you prefer a smaller table?

 

[bunnycat]

Thanks for your responses! The 1.25 is eye clean to me, even though it has a small indented natural near the table. The 1.24 has an inclusion I'm able to see without a loupe.

04diamond, why do you prefer a smaller table?

It's a preference thing. With tables nearing 60 and depths in the same vicenity, you're probably going to trade a little fire (spectral light) for extra white light return. It's one of the flavors of diamonds. Some lean to fire and some lean to brilliance (white light), and some shoot for in the middle.