The myth of “everything homemade”
Two words are enough to electrify a conversation between enthusiasts: “in-house”. A sesame that is both technical and symbolic, which has become a powerful argument at store counters and on forums. However, behind the aura of the term, the reality is more nuanced, more industrial, and often more interesting than the marketing promise. Because in watchmaking, the obsession with absolute autonomy is a modern concept; for more than a century, Switzerland prospered through the art of assembling expertise, establishment, where each village shaped a piece of the puzzle.
Defining “in-house” unvarnished
What is an “in-house” movement, really? It is a caliber designed, developed, prototyped, industrialized and produced mainly within the house which displays it on its dial. The key word is “mastery”: mastery of design, tolerances, processes, tests, the supply chain of critical components and after-sales service.
“Mostly” does not mean “everything, absolutely everything”. Even the most integrated manufacturers rely on specialists for certain parts (barrel springs, rubies, sometimes balance springs or anti-shocks). Modern requirements mainly concern the escapement, the balance spring, the plates/bridges, the machining and the assembly: if the brand controls these components and their development, the name “in-house” makes sense. Conversely, a custom rotor on a Sellita or ETA base is not enough.
The concrete criteria to examine
- Design: architecture, kinematics, sizing carried out internally.
- Production: machining of plates/bridges, wheels and key components in the brand’s workshops (or direct subsidiaries).
- Escapement and hairspring: property of the technology (silicon, alloys, geometries), not just the assembly.
- Industrialization: longevity tests, lubrication, reproducible tolerances, dedicated tooling.
- Certification and adjustment: COSC, METAS or clear and measurable proprietary protocols.
- After-sales service: availability of parts and long-term repairability under in-house control.
Drafts, co-development and partners: the other way
Between total independence and simple interlocking, a vast territory exists: that of high-quality drafts and co-development. ETA and Sellita provide robust foundations; Vaucher (Parmigiani), La Joux-Perret (Citizen Group) and Kenissi (initiated by Tudor, partner of Chanel and Breitling) offer modern calibers, sometimes exclusive to a brand. We then speak of “exclusive” or “co-developed”: the brand participates in the specification, sometimes in the engineering, and secures a version of its own, without owning the entire chain.
- Kenissi: high inertia movements and crossing bridges delivered to Tudor, Chanel (12.1/12.2) and Breitling (B20).
- Vaucher: fine and neat base for Hermès (H1837), Richard Mille and others.
- La Joux‑Perret: efficient chronos and automatics for demanding independents.
Is it less noble? Not necessarily. The main thing remains the quality of engineering, production and control. Swiss watchmaking is an ecosystem; knowing how to orchestrate the best talents is part of excellence.
When “non-in-house” rhymes with legend
History is full of icons built on external foundations. The Rolex Daytona has long kept pace with a modified Zenith El Primero. Patek Philippe has produced legendary chronographs derived from Lemania. Audemars Piguet, Patek and Vacheron shared the sublime JLC 920 for legendary ultra-thin models. The label does not dictate greatness: the result does.
What this changes on the wrist
- Precision and innovations: silicon hairsprings, anti-magnetism, optimized escapements, METAS certification or in-house protocols… serious “in-house” is often illustrated by tangible advances.
- Reliability and service: controlling your caliber means guaranteeing parts and procedures over decades. But a solid partner (Kenissi, Vaucher) also offers this serenity.
- Identity and finishes: a signature architecture, a sculpted column wheel, a lyre-shaped bridge… the in-house allows you to anchor an aesthetic language.
- Value: The label can support price and resale, provided the movement proves its maturity. A “new” caliber needs time to prove itself.
Reading between the lines: the checklist
- “Base X with in-house finishes” ≠ in-house. It’s honest if it’s assumed.
- “Exclusive movement” does not imply in-house manufacturing: ask who is manufacturing what.
- “Assembled in Switzerland” says nothing about the design. Question the source of the escapement/spring.
- Look for measurable data: amplitude, real power reserve, precision tolerances, certifications (COSC, METAS), magnetic resistance.
- Transparency: exploded plans, workshop photos, patents, technical documentation are good signals.
Manufacture, group, independence: the gray areas
Another subtlety: a caliber can be “in-house” on a group scale. Omega relies on the industrial power of the Swatch Group for its Co‑Axial Master Chronometer: it is not “bought outside”, it is developed and produced within the wider company. Conversely, a small, truly independent brand can sign a real in‑house with confidential volume, with intelligent compromises (external spiral, for example). In both cases, honesty of speech matters as much as material reality.
Verdict: beyond the label
An “in-house” movement is a commitment: that of a brand to control its beating heart, to sign it technically as well as aesthetically. It is a demanding, expensive, sometimes long path. But it is neither a totem nor a prerequisite for pleasure. Fine watchmaking has always combined internal know-how and exceptional external skills. Let’s demand facts, let’s value transparency, and let the watch speak: amplitude on the chronocomparator, daily rigor, beauty of detail. The rest is just literature, and sometimes that’s just fine.
