India’s listed jewellers built ₹4.4 lakh crore of offline brand. Their websites are not part of that work.
We ran our public audit against every publicly-listed Indian jewellery company — seven houses, referred to throughout this report by their market-cap rank (House 01 = largest). By our methodology the median Sheenhaus Score is 43/100. None of the six measurable houses scored above 60. The largest by market cap returned HTTP 403 to our automated request and could not be scored. What follows is what the data we could collect shows.
A category that has not noticed the web changed.
Range 24–60 across 6 measurable houses. The largest by market cap returned HTTP 403 to our automated request and was not scored.
Every auditable house ships some combination of WordPress, Shopify, Wix or similar — visible in the page source within seconds of opening Inspector.
`.php`, `?id=27`, `/wp-content/`. A small detail. Premium buyers read it as a signal of the rest.
When a buyer asks ChatGPT or Claude for the best Indian jeweller in 2026, the model relies on JSON-LD schema to read each brand. Most of the sample is invisible to it.
The whole sample sits in the lower half of the scale.
Each band groups the houses by their composite score. A score of 70+ is what we’d expect of a brand that has commissioned its site; below 50 is where the digital surface actively undermines the offline brand. The whole listed-jewellery sample sits in the lower two-thirds of the scale.
Hover a band to see the houses in it.
The same patterns repeat across every house.
Each row shows the percentage of the auditable sample exhibiting that sign. The patterns at the top are not isolated lapses — they are how the category builds websites. Click any sign to read why it costs the brand.
- 01Built on a template / page-builder stack100%
- 05Exposed CMS scaffolding in URLs83%
- 02Popups, modals, or chat widgets at arrival50%
- 06Too many font weights — type system not under control50%
- 12Missing structured data for AI discoverability50%
- 03Autoplay video in the hero33%
- 07Bloated contact form (4+ fields)33%
- 04Stock photography from common providers0%
- 08Heavy use of 'Solutions' / generic B2B copy0%
- 09Testimonial carousel or homepage hero rotator0%
- 10Page loads slowly on cellular0%
- 11Same hero photograph reused across pages0%
The audit, side by side with the balance sheet.
Sort by audit score, market capitalisation, or quarterly sales. The gap between the financial size of the offline brand and the craft of its digital presence is the brief, in one row.
- House 01By market cap · publicly listedMarket cap₹362.2k crQuarterly sales₹26,920 crSheenhaus ScoreNot measured · blocked
- House 02By market cap · publicly listedMarket cap₹36.4k crQuarterly sales₹10,275 crSheenhaus Score245 signs
- House 03By market cap · publicly listedMarket cap₹11.9k crQuarterly sales₹2,839 crSheenhaus Score524 signs
- House 04By market cap · publicly listedMarket cap₹8.1k crQuarterly sales₹875 crSheenhaus Score603 signs
- House 05By market cap · publicly listedMarket cap₹7.3k crQuarterly sales₹1,768 crSheenhaus Score285 signs
- House 06By market cap · publicly listedMarket cap₹7.2k crQuarterly sales₹681 crSheenhaus Score533 signs
- House 07By market cap · publicly listedMarket cap₹7.1k crQuarterly sales₹3,544 crSheenhaus Score344 signs
The category is collectively undefended.
The brand that closes this gap first — not with a flashier site, but with the kind of restrained, considered, AI-readable digital presence its showrooms already are — will own the category online for a decade. We’d like to help build it.
We audited the homepage of each company on 23 May 2026 using the same heuristics that power the public /audit tool. Financial figures are from Screener.in for the most recent quarter. Scores are computed from twelve weighted detectors outlined in our twelve signs diagnostic. Houses are anonymised throughout this report and referred to only by their market-cap rank (House 01 = largest). The largest by market cap returned HTTP 403 to our automated request and could not be scored — the same behaviour visitors see when sharing the URL on Slack or WhatsApp.
The Sheenhaus Score is one studio’s composite metric, not an industry standard. Any brand named here that disputes a specific measurement is welcome to write to hello@sheenhaus.com — we will publish a correction or a clarification within fourteen days.
This report is editorial commentary on publicly accessible websites. All company names, brand marks and trademarks remain the property of their respective owners and are used here under nominative fair use for the purpose of comparative analysis. The report does not constitute investment, legal or financial advice. Audit results reflect a single point-in-time measurement on the date noted above; current state may differ.