Apple Watch sets new US record, now owned by 30% of iPhone users

AppleInsiderAppleInsider
Posted:
in Apple Watch edited October 2022
New research claims that the Apple Watch has achieved its highest half-year "attach rate," or the percentage of iPhone users who also have an active Watch.

Credit: Andrew O'Hara, AppleInsider
Credit: Andrew O'Hara, AppleInsider


Apple Watch has repeatedly dominated the whole smartwatch industry, having exceeded 100 million active users in Q2 2021.

Now while Apple Watch has seen a lot of variation quarter by quarter, Counterpoint Research says that its half-year result for H1 2022 in North America is its highest attach rate ever. That's the proportion of iPhone users who have an Apple Watch attached.

"Apple Watch reached its highest attach rate in a first half yet in North America, hitting 30%, up from 10% in 2015," a Counterpoint spokesperson told AppleInsider. "Apple Watch revenues compared to iPhone revenues in North America have also been on the rise as Apple Watch becomes more popular."

While the H1 figure is 30%, Counterpoint's full report shows more variation in the quarterly breakdown. For the most recent quarter, Q2 2022, Apple Watch's attach rate was 29% -- where for Q1 2022, it was 36%.

Back in Q4, 2020, Counterpoint says it reached as high as 40% attach rate for the quarter. Apple's closest competitor, Samsung, managed 14% in Q3 2021, but in the current quarter is on a 9% attach rate.

The attach rate fluctuates through the year as, for example, new iPhones are released and buyers may not immediately elect to buy an Apple Watch as well.

"While Apple gains a trickle of customers from the Android ecosystem every year, its key smartphone markets have reached or are near saturation," says Counterpoint Research. "This places Apple Watch at the center of Apple's hardware strategy as the company looks for top-line revenue growth."

Read on AppleInsider
«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 27
    red oakred oak Posts: 1,104member
    A better way to analyze attach rates is using installed bases, not quarterly sales.  People buy iPhones and Watches on different timetables 

    Using those metrics, the attach rate is approx: 

    150 million Watches / 1.1 billion iPhones = 13.6% 


    tokyojimudewmeHrebwatto_cobramuthuk_vanalingam
  • Reply 2 of 27
    iOS_Guy80iOS_Guy80 Posts: 878member
    red oak said:
    A better way to analyze attach rates is using installed bases, not quarterly sales.  People buy iPhones and Watches on different timetables 

    Using those metrics, the attach rate is approx: 

    150 million Watches / 1.1 billion iPhones = 13.6% 



  • Reply 3 of 27
    dewmedewme Posts: 5,663member
    red oak said:
    A better way to analyze attach rates is using installed bases, not quarterly sales.  People buy iPhones and Watches on different timetables 

    Using those metrics, the attach rate is approx: 

    150 million Watches / 1.1 billion iPhones = 13.6% 


    I don't know if one way of looking at attach rate is necessarily better than another. Both ways provide useful information but over different time windows. If you're actively doing something to try to boost attach rate, like modifying your marketing mix in some way (which includes product changes), looking at the delta in a smaller time window may give you more immediate feedback about the effectiveness of your campaign.

    What strikes me as a bit counterintuitive with respect to the iPhone-Apple Watch attachment is that over the last few Apple Watch releases Apple has actually made the watch more autonomous and less reliant on the iPhone. That would seemingly result in a decrease or slower rate of growth in the attach rate. This may lend more credence to your interpretation of what is a better way of looking at the attach rate for this particular pair of products. 

    My gut feeling here is that the Apple Watch has simply become a more attractive product on its own and the attach rate with iPhone has less to do with iPhone and more to do with Apple Watch itself. The iPhone is still obviously a halo product that buoys up a wide range of other Apple products, and yes, you still need an iPhone to setup and make best use of an Apple Watch, but I think the Apple Watch is largely improving its attractiveness based on its own merits. If the hard iPhone dependency went away the Apple Watch would probably still do quite well.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 4 of 27
    HrebHreb Posts: 87member
    dewme said:
    I don't know if one way of looking at attach rate is necessarily better than another. 
    Ok but one of the ways directly contradicts AppleInsider's "now owned by 30% of iPhone users" headline.
    JFC_PAwatto_cobra
  • Reply 5 of 27
    XedXed Posts: 2,812member
    dewme said:
    red oak said:
    A better way to analyze attach rates is using installed bases, not quarterly sales.  People buy iPhones and Watches on different timetables 

    Using those metrics, the attach rate is approx: 

    150 million Watches / 1.1 billion iPhones = 13.6% 


    I don't know if one way of looking at attach rate is necessarily better than another. Both ways provide useful information but over different time windows. If you're actively doing something to try to boost attach rate, like modifying your marketing mix in some way (which includes product changes), looking at the delta in a smaller time window may give you more immediate feedback about the effectiveness of your campaign.

    What strikes me as a bit counterintuitive with respect to the iPhone-Apple Watch attachment is that over the last few Apple Watch releases Apple has actually made the watch more autonomous and less reliant on the iPhone. That would seemingly result in a decrease or slower rate of growth in the attach rate. This may lend more credence to your interpretation of what is a better way of looking at the attach rate for this particular pair of products. 

    My gut feeling here is that the Apple Watch has simply become a more attractive product on its own and the attach rate with iPhone has less to do with iPhone and more to do with Apple Watch itself. The iPhone is still obviously a halo product that buoys up a wide range of other Apple products, and yes, you still need an iPhone to setup and make best use of an Apple Watch, but I think the Apple Watch is largely improving its attractiveness based on its own merits. If the hard iPhone dependency went away the Apple Watch would probably still do quite well.
    As far as I know the Watch still requires the owner to also own an iPhone. That means that all Watch owners also own iPhones. This can't even be setup using an iPad at this point, AFAICT. This means that Apple Watch to iPhone use is effectively an easy sales of one divided by the sales to the other, multiplied by 100. Only Apple would have a better ratio with iCloud account linking to be able to weed out people with multiple iPhones and Watches, or even weed out iPhones used as single-used devices by companies, for example, to get more accurate ratios.


    watto_cobraapplebynature
  • Reply 6 of 27
    JFC_PAJFC_PA Posts: 946member
    Hreb said:
    dewme said:
    I don't know if one way of looking at attach rate is necessarily better than another. 
    Ok but one of the ways directly contradicts AppleInsider's "now owned by 30% of iPhone users" headline.
    “ "Apple Watch reached its highest attach rate in a first half yet in North America, hitting 30%, up from 10% in 2015," ”


    StrangeDayswatto_cobra
  • Reply 7 of 27
    dewmedewme Posts: 5,663member
    Xed said:
    dewme said:
    red oak said:
    A better way to analyze attach rates is using installed bases, not quarterly sales.  People buy iPhones and Watches on different timetables 

    Using those metrics, the attach rate is approx: 

    150 million Watches / 1.1 billion iPhones = 13.6% 


    I don't know if one way of looking at attach rate is necessarily better than another. Both ways provide useful information but over different time windows. If you're actively doing something to try to boost attach rate, like modifying your marketing mix in some way (which includes product changes), looking at the delta in a smaller time window may give you more immediate feedback about the effectiveness of your campaign.

    What strikes me as a bit counterintuitive with respect to the iPhone-Apple Watch attachment is that over the last few Apple Watch releases Apple has actually made the watch more autonomous and less reliant on the iPhone. That would seemingly result in a decrease or slower rate of growth in the attach rate. This may lend more credence to your interpretation of what is a better way of looking at the attach rate for this particular pair of products. 

    My gut feeling here is that the Apple Watch has simply become a more attractive product on its own and the attach rate with iPhone has less to do with iPhone and more to do with Apple Watch itself. The iPhone is still obviously a halo product that buoys up a wide range of other Apple products, and yes, you still need an iPhone to setup and make best use of an Apple Watch, but I think the Apple Watch is largely improving its attractiveness based on its own merits. If the hard iPhone dependency went away the Apple Watch would probably still do quite well.
    As far as I know the Watch still requires the owner to also own an iPhone. That means that all Watch owners also own iPhones. This can't even be setup using an iPad at this point, AFAICT. This means that Apple Watch to iPhone use is effectively an easy sales of one divided by the sales to the other, multiplied by 100. Only Apple would have a better ratio with iCloud account linking to be able to weed out people with multiple iPhones and Watches, or even weed out iPhones used as single-used devices by companies, for example, to get more accurate ratios.


    Nothing to argue about either way. I guess what I’m saying is that using “attachment” a way to define the relationship between iPhone and Apple Watch is in my opinion a nearly meaningless metric if you’re showing how sales of one product helps to pull through sales of another product. That’s how I’ve always used attachment in products I’ve worked on. 

    There is definitely a ratio between the number of iPhones sold and the number of Apple Watches sold. Describing it as attachment is too much of stretch for me because we can’t assume iPhones are helping to pull through Apple Watch sales. I think people buy an Apple Watch because they want an Apple Watch and live with the dependency on the iPhone. I prefer both working together, but owning an iPhone didn’t compel me to get the Apple Watch beyond the halo effect from iPhone and Apple’s ecosystem. 
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 8 of 27
    danoxdanox Posts: 3,257member
    Me too once they offer blood pressure monitoring….
  • Reply 9 of 27
    chasmchasm Posts: 3,502member
    red oak said:
    A better way to analyze attach rates is using installed bases, not quarterly sales.  People buy iPhones and Watches on different timetables 

    Using those metrics, the attach rate is approx: 

    150 million Watches / 1.1 billion iPhones = 13.6% 


    Maybe this is a better way, maybe its not. Your figure sounds about right to me for overall iPhone-to-Watch ownership, but the important thing that your figure and Counterpoint’s figures tell me is that more iPhone owners are adding Apple Watch to the mix as time goes on.

    Prior to the Apple Watch, I spent many years as a dedicated watch-hater. I was gifted one when they debuted, and I very promptly fell in love with it. Now, I can’t imagine not having it on my wrist. I’ve bought three of them since it debuted: the Series 0, Series 3, and the Series 7 for Xmas.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 10 of 27
    XedXed Posts: 2,812member
    chasm said:
    red oak said:
    A better way to analyze attach rates is using installed bases, not quarterly sales.  People buy iPhones and Watches on different timetables 

    Using those metrics, the attach rate is approx: 

    150 million Watches / 1.1 billion iPhones = 13.6% 


    Maybe this is a better way, maybe its not. Your figure sounds about right to me for overall iPhone-to-Watch ownership, but the important thing that your figure and Counterpoint’s figures tell me is that more iPhone owners are adding Apple Watch to the mix as time goes on.

    Prior to the Apple Watch, I spent many years as a dedicated watch-hater. I was gifted one when they debuted, and I very promptly fell in love with it. Now, I can’t imagine not having it on my wrist. I’ve bought three of them since it debuted: the Series 0, Series 3, and the Series 7 for Xmas.
    1) I'd love to see stats on actual Watch to iPhone ratios. Thinking about various environments and grouping I'm in I think that it would likely fall somewhere between 13% and 30%, but that's only my anecdotal assumptions based on memory.

    2) I was a dedicated watch wearer... until I got a cellphone. That had the time so there was no need for a watch. Then the Apple Watch came out and I was again wearing something on my wrist, but that's because it was a lot more than a chronometer. I suspect a lot more people will go that route as the features grow, and I even hope that it eventually moves from portrait to landscape mode to take advance of the space on the wrist.
    watto_cobrachasm
  • Reply 11 of 27
    lorca2770lorca2770 Posts: 72member

    I, finally, went from my AW 4 to the 8. I do not regret it. What a difference…and on top I got some dollars back B)

    watto_cobrachasm
  • Reply 12 of 27
    chadbagchadbag Posts: 2,023member
    red oak said:
    A better way to analyze attach rates is using installed bases, not quarterly sales.  People buy iPhones and Watches on different timetables 

    Using those metrics, the attach rate is approx: 

    150 million Watches / 1.1 billion iPhones = 13.6% 


    Are there 1.1 Billion active iPhones out there?  150 million active watches?  I don’t know the answer so am asking what your numbers represent. 

    If active then it would show the number of active iPhone users who also use the Apple Watch, approximately (as a percentage).  

    If the numbers are not active but total sold I am not sure how useful they are.  

    I am an active watch and iPhone user.  AW4 and XS Max  for phone.  Both to be replaced in the next 12 months if I can swing it.  But obviously not bought either one for me in a while. 
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 13 of 27
    iOS_Guy80iOS_Guy80 Posts: 878member
    Another consideration, if is the backward compatibility of the newer watches with older iPhones. Also, the newer iOS systems provide more functionality with the newer watches. That might have something to do with the higher attach rate this year versus past years.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 14 of 27
    waveparticlewaveparticle Posts: 1,497member
    Xed said:
    dewme said:
    red oak said:
    A better way to analyze attach rates is using installed bases, not quarterly sales.  People buy iPhones and Watches on different timetables 

    Using those metrics, the attach rate is approx: 

    150 million Watches / 1.1 billion iPhones = 13.6% 


    I don't know if one way of looking at attach rate is necessarily better than another. Both ways provide useful information but over different time windows. If you're actively doing something to try to boost attach rate, like modifying your marketing mix in some way (which includes product changes), looking at the delta in a smaller time window may give you more immediate feedback about the effectiveness of your campaign.

    What strikes me as a bit counterintuitive with respect to the iPhone-Apple Watch attachment is that over the last few Apple Watch releases Apple has actually made the watch more autonomous and less reliant on the iPhone. That would seemingly result in a decrease or slower rate of growth in the attach rate. This may lend more credence to your interpretation of what is a better way of looking at the attach rate for this particular pair of products. 

    My gut feeling here is that the Apple Watch has simply become a more attractive product on its own and the attach rate with iPhone has less to do with iPhone and more to do with Apple Watch itself. The iPhone is still obviously a halo product that buoys up a wide range of other Apple products, and yes, you still need an iPhone to setup and make best use of an Apple Watch, but I think the Apple Watch is largely improving its attractiveness based on its own merits. If the hard iPhone dependency went away the Apple Watch would probably still do quite well.
    As far as I know the Watch still requires the owner to also own an iPhone. That means that all Watch owners also own iPhones. This can't even be setup using an iPad at this point, AFAICT. This means that Apple Watch to iPhone use is effectively an easy sales of one divided by the sales to the other, multiplied by 100. Only Apple would have a better ratio with iCloud account linking to be able to weed out people with multiple iPhones and Watches, or even weed out iPhones used as single-used devices by companies, for example, to get more accurate ratios.


    I think this is due to iPad does not have GPS. 
    Alex_V
  • Reply 15 of 27
    waveparticlewaveparticle Posts: 1,497member
    danox said:
    Me too once they offer blood pressure monitoring….
    It is extremely difficult to do. Blood circulation is the most genius design by nature. Scientists figured out that our heart pumps blood very lately. Because it reveals itself only through the pulse. 
    Alex_V
  • Reply 16 of 27
    XedXed Posts: 2,812member
    waveparticle said:
    Xed said:
    dewme said:
    red oak said:
    A better way to analyze attach rates is using installed bases, not quarterly sales.  People buy iPhones and Watches on different timetables 

    Using those metrics, the attach rate is approx: 

    150 million Watches / 1.1 billion iPhones = 13.6% 
    I don't know if one way of looking at attach rate is necessarily better than another. Both ways provide useful information but over different time windows. If you're actively doing something to try to boost attach rate, like modifying your marketing mix in some way (which includes product changes), looking at the delta in a smaller time window may give you more immediate feedback about the effectiveness of your campaign.

    What strikes me as a bit counterintuitive with respect to the iPhone-Apple Watch attachment is that over the last few Apple Watch releases Apple has actually made the watch more autonomous and less reliant on the iPhone. That would seemingly result in a decrease or slower rate of growth in the attach rate. This may lend more credence to your interpretation of what is a better way of looking at the attach rate for this particular pair of products. 

    My gut feeling here is that the Apple Watch has simply become a more attractive product on its own and the attach rate with iPhone has less to do with iPhone and more to do with Apple Watch itself. The iPhone is still obviously a halo product that buoys up a wide range of other Apple products, and yes, you still need an iPhone to setup and make best use of an Apple Watch, but I think the Apple Watch is largely improving its attractiveness based on its own merits. If the hard iPhone dependency went away the Apple Watch would probably still do quite well.
    As far as I know the Watch still requires the owner to also own an iPhone. That means that all Watch owners also own iPhones. This can't even be setup using an iPad at this point, AFAICT. This means that Apple Watch to iPhone use is effectively an easy sales of one divided by the sales to the other, multiplied by 100. Only Apple would have a better ratio with iCloud account linking to be able to weed out people with multiple iPhones and Watches, or even weed out iPhones used as single-used devices by companies, for example, to get more accurate ratios.
    I think this is due to iPad does not have GPS. 
    I'm not saying you're wrong, but I'm not understanding how GPS would affect the ability to setup up an Apple Watch with a Watch app.
  • Reply 17 of 27
    crowleycrowley Posts: 10,453member
    Xed said:
    waveparticle said:
    Xed said:
    dewme said:
    red oak said:
    A better way to analyze attach rates is using installed bases, not quarterly sales.  People buy iPhones and Watches on different timetables 

    Using those metrics, the attach rate is approx: 

    150 million Watches / 1.1 billion iPhones = 13.6% 
    I don't know if one way of looking at attach rate is necessarily better than another. Both ways provide useful information but over different time windows. If you're actively doing something to try to boost attach rate, like modifying your marketing mix in some way (which includes product changes), looking at the delta in a smaller time window may give you more immediate feedback about the effectiveness of your campaign.

    What strikes me as a bit counterintuitive with respect to the iPhone-Apple Watch attachment is that over the last few Apple Watch releases Apple has actually made the watch more autonomous and less reliant on the iPhone. That would seemingly result in a decrease or slower rate of growth in the attach rate. This may lend more credence to your interpretation of what is a better way of looking at the attach rate for this particular pair of products. 

    My gut feeling here is that the Apple Watch has simply become a more attractive product on its own and the attach rate with iPhone has less to do with iPhone and more to do with Apple Watch itself. The iPhone is still obviously a halo product that buoys up a wide range of other Apple products, and yes, you still need an iPhone to setup and make best use of an Apple Watch, but I think the Apple Watch is largely improving its attractiveness based on its own merits. If the hard iPhone dependency went away the Apple Watch would probably still do quite well.
    As far as I know the Watch still requires the owner to also own an iPhone. That means that all Watch owners also own iPhones. This can't even be setup using an iPad at this point, AFAICT. This means that Apple Watch to iPhone use is effectively an easy sales of one divided by the sales to the other, multiplied by 100. Only Apple would have a better ratio with iCloud account linking to be able to weed out people with multiple iPhones and Watches, or even weed out iPhones used as single-used devices by companies, for example, to get more accurate ratios.
    I think this is due to iPad does not have GPS. 
    I'm not saying you're wrong, but I'm not understanding how GPS would affect the ability to setup up an Apple Watch with a Watch app.
    He's wrong.  As always.
  • Reply 18 of 27
    temperortemperor Posts: 77member
    Xed said:
    As far as I know the Watch still requires the owner to also own an iPhone. That means that all Watch owners also own iPhones. This can't even be setup using an iPad at this point, AFAICT. This means that Apple Watch to iPhone use is effectively an easy sales of one divided by the sales to the other, multiplied by 100. Only Apple would have a better ratio with iCloud account linking to be able to weed out people with multiple iPhones and Watches, or even weed out iPhones used as single-used devices by companies, for example, to get more accurate ratios.


    Nope, you can setup an Apple Watch for someone else, as long as a family member has an iPhone … So you could buy for your children an AW cellular and set it up for them, or for you parents ….
  • Reply 19 of 27
    waveparticlewaveparticle Posts: 1,497member
    Xed said:
    waveparticle said:
    Xed said:
    dewme said:
    red oak said:
    A better way to analyze attach rates is using installed bases, not quarterly sales.  People buy iPhones and Watches on different timetables 

    Using those metrics, the attach rate is approx: 

    150 million Watches / 1.1 billion iPhones = 13.6% 
    I don't know if one way of looking at attach rate is necessarily better than another. Both ways provide useful information but over different time windows. If you're actively doing something to try to boost attach rate, like modifying your marketing mix in some way (which includes product changes), looking at the delta in a smaller time window may give you more immediate feedback about the effectiveness of your campaign.

    What strikes me as a bit counterintuitive with respect to the iPhone-Apple Watch attachment is that over the last few Apple Watch releases Apple has actually made the watch more autonomous and less reliant on the iPhone. That would seemingly result in a decrease or slower rate of growth in the attach rate. This may lend more credence to your interpretation of what is a better way of looking at the attach rate for this particular pair of products. 

    My gut feeling here is that the Apple Watch has simply become a more attractive product on its own and the attach rate with iPhone has less to do with iPhone and more to do with Apple Watch itself. The iPhone is still obviously a halo product that buoys up a wide range of other Apple products, and yes, you still need an iPhone to setup and make best use of an Apple Watch, but I think the Apple Watch is largely improving its attractiveness based on its own merits. If the hard iPhone dependency went away the Apple Watch would probably still do quite well.
    As far as I know the Watch still requires the owner to also own an iPhone. That means that all Watch owners also own iPhones. This can't even be setup using an iPad at this point, AFAICT. This means that Apple Watch to iPhone use is effectively an easy sales of one divided by the sales to the other, multiplied by 100. Only Apple would have a better ratio with iCloud account linking to be able to weed out people with multiple iPhones and Watches, or even weed out iPhones used as single-used devices by companies, for example, to get more accurate ratios.
    I think this is due to iPad does not have GPS. 
    I'm not saying you're wrong, but I'm not understanding how GPS would affect the ability to setup up an Apple Watch with a Watch app.
    To setup Apple Watch you need a device that has both cellular and GPS. 
  • Reply 20 of 27
    XedXed Posts: 2,812member
    temperor said:
    Xed said:
    As far as I know the Watch still requires the owner to also own an iPhone. That means that all Watch owners also own iPhones. This can't even be setup using an iPad at this point, AFAICT. This means that Apple Watch to iPhone use is effectively an easy sales of one divided by the sales to the other, multiplied by 100. Only Apple would have a better ratio with iCloud account linking to be able to weed out people with multiple iPhones and Watches, or even weed out iPhones used as single-used devices by companies, for example, to get more accurate ratios.
    Nope, you can setup an Apple Watch for someone else, as long as a family member has an iPhone … So you could buy for your children an AW cellular and set it up for them, or for you parents ….
    The parent buying the AW and setting it up is still the owner in that scenario. Again, you need an iPhone to setup up the Watch which means that the Watch is still dependent on an iPhone to set up, which is the limitation that dewme was addressing in his comment.
Sign In or Register to comment.