"How much should you spend on an engagement ring?"

I'm not surprised. The only 'should' is what you want to spend and what you can afford to spend. A giant diamond isn't proof of anything except a giant pile of available cash. If you have it an want to spend it that way, lovely. But not everyone does.

Spending two / three months salary is not a "thing". It is most certainly not an etiquette guideline. It is from a marketing campaign in the 1980s by DeBeers to sell more diamonds.

It's crazy how effective that campaign was. To this day, it is still widely accepted - many people believe it is a requirement / rule.

I'm in the 11% group and it took FH 3 years to save for it. The two month's salary thing is a bit much when you have other debts to deal with.

My husband spent quite a bit on my ring. I never would have expected him to spend as much as he did but he chose the setting, wanted it in platinum and chose the diamond. It's not a huge diamond (1.2c), but it's a non-conflict diamond with really good c's. When I told him I was shocked at how much he spent, He just shrugged and said that he wanted me to love my ring forever. I do love it but I would have loved anything he chose.

He didn't go into debt to pay for my ring, he used savings. I really don't understand going into debt for a ring. I think that most brides, like me, would love whatever ring their fiance's choose.

I think I would have been aggravated if DF had spent over $1000 on my ring. I think he spent about half that, and it's exactly what I wanted, I love it. It's a nice stone, but honestly any bigger and I probably wouldn't have liked it. It's around 2/3 ct solitaire.

FH spent $65 on my original ring, rose gold and green amethyst. It was stolen (uninsured because $60), and I am now wearing my mom's ring my dad paid $300 for in 1978. I'm definitely not surprised by the under $1k number, especially with the number of recent college grads that are underemployed (including FH and I).

I'm in the under 1k sub. I don't know what the ring is actually worth, I haven't had it appraised, and I probably won't. I know what FH paid for it, and it's still about twice what I think he should have paid for an engagement ring. BUT it's gorgeous and I love it. Anything bigger or different just wouldn't suit me. I tried to convince him I didn't need an engagement ring at all, but he wanted me to have one, and it's perfect. You can find beautiful rings in any budget, if you know what to look for.

Try to buy from a wholesaler! My ring should have cost around 9,000 but FH paid 3500 for my ring, down payment for the matching band, and its insured!

That's surprising to me too actually, I would have thought that $1K-$3k would be the highest, but that probably has something to do with my area too (Southern CA). The statement that people are moving away from diamonds to other gemstones though is a great point, I didn't consider that. I think mine was about $1,500 and a lot of that price was due to the more intricate setting. I feel like the stone itself if fairly normal though

Well we all know that love is only measured by how much you're willing to spend on a ring.

::sarcasm::

I'm not surprised. When you look at population vs. wealth distribution, a larger percentage of the population just *can't* spend over $1000 on a ring, and that's without taking into account fiscally conservative people of higher incomes. My own ring for my first marriage was $40.

I would've expected 2-3k to be the largest percentage. That said, I wonder how family rings fit into this? Mine is valued/insured at twice what my fiance paid, because he used metals and stones from family rings so didn't have to buy those.

I unfriended one of my friends on Facebook because of this article. She actually said "Pft. If someone bought me a $1,000 ring the answer would be no. I have purses more expensive than that." Bye Felicia.

Whooaaa Amber that is a shitty attitude. Clearly she has her priorities in line....

@Lizzy...yeah. She was asked how much she thinks is reasonable for someone to spend on a ring. She said "it's the two carats that matters. So probably like 10k." If you're basing your marriage on the price tag of an engagement ring, I'll expect a status about a divorce a few years later.

I don't believe that there is a specific amount that should be spent. We all have diff incomes.

Im shocked too that less than 1k was the highest. That is what I wanted FH to spend though just because we have two children and spending a lot of money seemed so crazy to me. When I got the ring I knew he went over. That day I heard what he paid and my heart dropped. He spend 7 times what I told him to spend, he knew i didn't want us to spend that much! But now that I have it I'm defiantly happy!

I'd actually be interested in comparing what people think should be spent to what is actually spent. I'm curious to see if the numbers line up.

I'm in the 19% group, and we were super lucky because the ring we found looked EXACTLY like one I'd designed online, but for about $1000 cheaper.

I think you should spend however much you're comfortable with spending. No reason to bankrupt yourself over a ring!

I'd have to say that I'm surprised by the less than 1K. Even small diamonds tend to cost more than that. But, I do know that gemstones are gaining popularity. I mean, it ultimately comes down to what FH is willing and wants to spend. I know what my ring appraised for (for insurance purposes,) and I definitely wouldn't have told him my ring needed to be in the 4% range! Hell no! And, maybe he didn't pay that, but I would've said yes to a $500 ring. I love my ring, of course, but it doesn't make my relationship any different. These charts are always problematic.