I’ve had Snapchat since I was 13, so I’ve been using it for around four years.

Despite using it for around four years, I’d never properly gone through all the privacy and safety settings. I knew I could control things like my location, but I’d never really thought about what I was actually sharing or who could see it. So, I decided to have a proper look.

1. Snap Map – Your Friends Can See Where You Are

Snap Map is probably the feature that would surprise parents the most. Depending on your settings, friends can see your location on a map through your Bitmoji. You can choose specific friends, share with your friends more widely, or use Ghost Mode to hide your location.

What I don’t think many parents realise is just how detailed Snap Map can actually be. It’s not just a map showing your general area. When someone shares their location with you, their Bitmoji can appear around the exact area they’re in, and Snapchat can even show a little house symbol when it looks like they’re at home.

As a teenager using Snapchat, seeing this doesn’t really feel unusual because we’re so used to it. Checking someone’s location can be as normal as checking if they’ve replied to you. But when I actually stopped and thought about what that information could reveal, it did feel quite scary.

You can zoom right into the map around someone’s location, meaning it can sometimes become quite obvious which house or building they’re at. From actually using Snap Map myself, I’ve also noticed that you can switch between different map views, including satellite and 3D views of the area. There is also a directions symbol which can give you options to open the location through mapping services like Google Maps or even copy the address.

That means what starts as simply checking where your friend is can potentially reveal much more about where they live or where they’re spending their time.

I think that’s the part parents might not realise. When a teenager says they have their “location on”, it doesn’t necessarily mean their friends can just see the general town they’re in. The map can be much more detailed than that.

Snapchat even has a ‘My Home’ feature where you can choose a home location that friends you’re sharing your location with can see. If you pay for Snapchat+, your home can even appear as a 3D building on the map.

There’s also a feature called Arrival Notifications. You can choose friends to automatically notify when you arrive somewhere, such as home, school or another saved location.

Depending on the location permissions you’ve chosen, Snapchat can also update your location in the background. That means selected friends could potentially see your location even when you aren’t actively using Snapchat.

The scary part for me isn’t necessarily sharing my location with a close friend or family member. I can actually see why that’s useful. It’s how easily you can forget exactly who you’re sharing it with.

Teenagers can build up quite big Snapchat friends lists. You might have your actual close friends, but also people from school you don’t really speak to anymore, friends of friends, someone you met once or somebody you added years ago and completely forgot about.

If your location settings include those people, you’re potentially sharing part of your daily routine with people you probably wouldn’t actually choose to text your address to.

I knew Snap Map existed before writing this, obviously, but I’d never really stopped to think about how much information someone’s location can give away. For a younger teenager who has added loads of people they only vaguely know, I think that’s something both them and their parents should definitely be aware of.

2. Find Friends – Adding Someone Feels Way Too Normal

Snapchat’s Find Friends feature recommends accounts that you might know. Snapchat can use things like your existing friends, location and activity to suggest accounts to you.

As someone who actually uses Snapchat, I think the bigger issue is how casual adding people can feel.

If someone appears and you have loads of mutual friends, you might just think, Oh, they probably go to my school, and add them. It doesn’t feel like you’re giving a stranger access to you because there seems to be some sort of connection.

That’s something I don’t think parents always realise. Teenagers don’t necessarily treat adding someone on Snapchat like a serious decision.

You might add someone because you’ve seen them around school, because your friend knows them, because you recognise their name or simply because they have loads of mutual friends with you.

But having mutual friends doesn’t actually mean you know that person.

Over time, this can also make your friends list much bigger than you realise. You might have people on there who you haven’t spoken to in years or who you never really knew properly in the first place.

That becomes more important when you remember that the same person could potentially also see your Stories or location depending on your settings.

You can also stop yourself from appearing in Find Friends, which is something I didn’t really think about before properly checking my settings.

For younger teenagers especially, I think it’s worth understanding that seeing somebody suggested to you doesn’t automatically mean they’re someone you should trust.

3. People Can See When You’ve Been Active

Another feature I’d barely thought about is the Activity Indicator. This can let other Snapchatters see that you’ve been active recently, although you can switch it off.

On its own, that doesn’t sound particularly scary. But it’s another example of how much information we give away without really thinking about it.

Someone might be able to see that you’ve been active recently, and if you’re sharing your location with them, they may also be able to see where you are.

When you’re used to Snapchat, these things don’t really feel private anymore. It’s just normal to know when someone’s online, where they are or whether they’ve opened something.

But when you put all of those little pieces of information together, somebody can potentially learn quite a lot about what you’re doing.

Even from a less serious point of view, sometimes you just want to go on Snapchat without somebody thinking, She’s active, why isn’t she replying to me?

I’d never actually gone into my settings specifically to check this before, which is strange considering how much I use the app.

4. Who Can Actually Contact You?

Snapchat lets you control who can contact you through Snaps, Chats and calls.

Snapchat does have protections designed to make it harder for strangers to contact teenagers, which is important. But from my experience, I think the thing parents might not realise is how quickly someone’s Snapchat friends list can grow.

You might add somebody because you met them once, they’re friends with your friend or you recognise their name from school. A few years later, your Snapchat can be full of people you barely actually speak to.

I think this matters because Snapchat is much more personal than simply following someone on another platform.

You’re not just liking someone’s public posts. Snapchat is mainly built around direct communication. People can send each other photos, videos, messages and calls.

When you’re younger, pressing “Add” doesn’t really feel like you’re giving someone access to you. It just feels like adding another person on Snapchat.

But depending on your settings, that person could potentially be able to contact you directly, see what you’re posting and possibly see other information you’re choosing to share.

That’s something I definitely didn’t think about when I first downloaded the app.

5. Snapchat’s AI Can Use Your Face

This was probably the setting that surprised me most.

Snapchat has something called My Selfie, which uses selfies to power generative AI features. Friends can potentially use your My Selfie likeness in AI-generated Snapchat content if your settings allow it.

There’s actually a setting called “Who Can Generate with My Selfie”, which you can change to “Only Me”. You can also stop My Selfie from appearing in ads delivered to you.

I use Snapchat filters and features without really thinking twice about them because that’s just part of using the app.

When Snapchat releases a new AI feature, I think most teenagers are probably more interested in trying it than reading through all the privacy settings behind it.

But finding an entire setting controlling whether friends can generate AI images featuring my likeness definitely made me stop and think.

I think parents might find this particularly surprising because AI features can just look like another funny filter or photo effect.

But when your actual face is involved, it feels slightly different.

I’m not saying the feature itself is automatically dangerous, but I definitely think teenagers should know who has permission to use their selfie in generated content.

If I’m only properly noticing this setting at 17, I doubt many younger teenagers are sitting down and reading through it before using the feature.

6. Your Story Could Be Showing More Than You Realise

Snapchat Stories are another feature that feels completely normal. You post a photo or video and the people you’ve allowed to view your Story can see it.

The problem is that after having Snapchat for years, it’s easy to forget who’s actually on your friends list.

You could have close friends alongside people you haven’t spoken to for two years, old classmates, mutual friends and people you barely know.

When you post something, you probably aren’t individually thinking about every single person who might see it.

A Story can also reveal more than you intended.

A picture might show where you are, what school you go to, where you’re spending the evening or even something recognisable outside your house.

As a teenager, you usually aren’t thinking, “I’m sharing personal information right now.” In your head you’re most likely thinking, “I’m just posting a picture.”

That’s what I think parents might not always realise. Something that looks like a random photo could accidentally give away quite a lot.

Even something small in the background could show the name of a school, a road, a shop or somewhere you regularly spend time.

Snapchat lets you customise who can see your Story, but I think the important part is actually remembering to check it.

Especially if you’ve had the same Snapchat account for years.

7. Your Snapchat Account Contains More of Your Life Than You Think

Two-factor authentication, or 2FA, is probably the least exciting feature I’ve looked at, but it might be one of the most important.

It adds an extra security step when logging into your Snapchat account.

Before doing this article, I associated things like 2FA more with “adulty” online banking or email, rather than Snapchat.

But then I thought about what’s actually stored on Snapchat.

For some teenagers, Snapchat is basically a photo album of their entire teenage life.

Having someone get into that account would be much more serious than just losing access to an app.

There could be years of photos, private conversations and personal information stored there.

I also think teenagers sometimes see Snapchat as disposable because snaps disappear, but the actual account itself can contain loads of personal information.

That’s why 2FA suddenly seems much more important when you actually think about what you’d lose if somebody got into your account.

What I Actually Learnt

Going through my settings made me realise that Snapchat actually gives you more control than I thought – I’d just never bothered looking at most of it.

And I think that’s probably the main thing parents need to understand.

Most teenagers aren’t opening Snapchat thinking about privacy settings. We’re opening it to reply to someone, send a stupid picture, check a Story or keep a streak going.

When you’ve used something every day for years, features like seeing someone’s location or adding someone you’ve never properly met can start to feel completely normal.

That’s what I found slightly scary while writing this.

Some of these features didn’t shock me at first because I’m so used to them.

And I think that’s where there can be a gap between teenagers and their parents. Parents might know that their child has Snapchat, but that doesn’t necessarily mean they know what using Snapchat actually involves.

My parents have checked my phone from time to time, especially when I was younger, but the reality is that teenagers are usually pretty good at getting around things when they want to. We know which apps we use, where things are hidden and how different settings work, often better than our parents do. A parent checking a phone occasionally doesn’t necessarily mean they know what their teenager is doing online the rest of the time.

That’s why I don’t think constantly checking your teenager’s phone is really the answer. If somebody wants to hide something, they’ll probably find a way. It’s more important for parents to understand the apps their children are using and have conversations about things like location sharing, who they’re adding and what they’re posting.

At the same time, teenagers might know exactly how to use all of these features without ever really stopping to think about what information they’re sharing through them.

Snapchat does have safety features specifically designed for teenagers, but those features can’t make every decision for you. You still need to think about who you’ve added, who can see your location and what you’re sharing.

I don’t think the answer is parents spying on everything their teenager does on Snapchat or not allowing them to have the app, but I do think parents should actually understand the app their children are using. If I’ve been using Snapchat almost every day for years and still discovered settings I’d never really thought about, I can imagine there are plenty of younger teenagers – and their parents – who haven’t thought about them either.

Our content is created in good faith and reviewed regularly - if you spot an error, please contact corrections@sellcell.com. Read our Editorial Policy

The post 7 Scary Snapchat Features Parents Should Know About appeared first on SellCell.com Blog.

Introduction

The arrival of the iPhone 18 Pro and Pro Max has started the familiar annual upgrade cycle, with owners deciding whether Apple’s latest flagships offer enough to make them part with their current iPhone.

But which iPhones are owners actually giving up this time?

SellCell analyzed iPhone trade-in activity between September 9 and September 20, 2026, to find out which models are appearing most frequently as Apple’s latest Pro generation arrives.

And rather than being dominated by older handsets that have reached the end of a typical upgrade cycle, the results show some of Apple’s newest and most expensive iPhones right near the top.

The Most Traded-In iPhones Around the iPhone 18 Pro Launch

Figures based on SellCell iPhone trade-in activity recorded September 9–20, 2026. The 20 models shown accounted for 87.4% of all iPhone trade-in activity recorded during the period. Trade-in volume represents each model’s share of total iPhone trade-in activity.

Sitting at No.1 is the iPhone 17 Pro Max.

Apple’s year-old flagship accounted for 12.8% of all iPhone trade-in activity recorded during the period, compared with 9.7% for the second-place iPhone 16 Pro Max — a 3.1 percentage-point gap, equivalent to around 32% more activity.

The iPhone 15 Pro Max follows in third with 8.7%, while the iPhone 15 Pro and iPhone 14 Pro Max complete the top five, both at 5.6%.

There’s also a striking difference between Apple’s two iPhone 17 Pro models. The iPhone 17 Pro accounts for just 4.4% of activity, meaning the 17 Pro Max generated around 2.9 times as much trade-in activity as its smaller sibling.

Pro Max models dominate more broadly, too. Four of the five most traded-in iPhones are Pro Max devices, and those four generations — iPhone 17, 16, 15 and 14 Pro Max — together account for 36.8% of all iPhone trade-in activity recorded during the period.

Older iPhones haven’t disappeared from the trade-in market. The iPhone 13 ranks seventh with 4.7%, while the iPhone 12 and iPhone 11 also appear in the Top 20.

But the prominence of recent, premium models raises a more interesting question: why are owners already trading in iPhones that are only one or two generations old?

Why Are Owners Trading In Such New iPhones?

The most straightforward explanation is that some iPhone 17 Pro Max owners are simply annual upgraders, trading last year’s flagship towards the new iPhone 18 Pro or Pro Max.

There’s a financial reason to move quickly, too. A one-year-old flagship still has considerable value that can be put towards the next phone. And for owners still paying off their current iPhone, getting the best possible price could help cover more of the remaining balance before its resale value falls.

Waiting, meanwhile, can mean watching that value fall.

SellCell’s previous research into iPhone trade-in values around the iPhone 18 Pro launch found that 75% of the iPhones tracked across the previous three Apple launches lost trade-in value between announcement and release day. During the iPhone 17 launch, 92.6% of the models tracked fell in value over that short period.

Some owners may therefore be making a fairly simple calculation: trade in a recent flagship while it’s still worth more, rather than wait for the arrival of Apple’s latest Pro models to push its value down further.

Where they sell can make a sizeable difference too.

SellCell’s separate iPhone 18 Pro trade-in price comparison found that Apple’s offer for an iPhone 16 Pro Max was $170 below the highest price available through SellCell at the time of the research.

So whether an owner is upgrading to the iPhone 18 Pro, trying to recover as much as possible from a phone they’re still paying for, or simply selling before its value drops further, it pays to check what the handset is actually worth. Owners can compare current iPhone trade-in prices before deciding when and where to sell.

SellCell’s data can’t tell us the individual reason each owner is trading in, or confirm which phone they’re buying next. But these factors help explain why relatively new and valuable Pro Max models could be appearing so prominently in trade-in activity around the iPhone 18 Pro launch.

Conclusion

The most striking finding isn’t simply that a Pro Max tops the table. It’s that the phone at No.1 is only one generation old.

With the iPhone 17 Pro Max accounting for 12.8% of all trade-in activity — and four Pro Max generations appearing in the top five — owners of some of Apple’s newest and most valuable iPhones are already generating strong trade-in activity.

For some, that may simply be the annual jump to the iPhone 18 Pro or Pro Max. For others, trading now could be about getting as much value as possible from their existing phone before prices fall further.

SellCell’s data can’t tell us which motivation applies to each owner. But it does show that this year’s trade-in activity isn’t being led by people finally retiring old iPhones. Recent flagship owners are right at the front of the queue.

Methodology

SellCell analyzed iPhone trade-in activity recorded between September 9 and September 20, 2026, around the launch of the iPhone 18 Pro and iPhone 18 Pro Max.

The study ranks the 20 iPhone models generating the highest trade-in activity during the period. Together, those models accounted for 87.4% of all iPhone trade-in activity recorded.

Trade-in volume represents each model’s share of total iPhone trade-in activity, not its share of the Top 20 alone.

The data reflects trade-in activity recorded through SellCell. It does not identify which replacement handset an individual subsequently purchased.

Our content is created in good faith and reviewed regularly - if you spot an error, please contact corrections@sellcell.com. Read our Editorial Policy

The post Bye-Bye, iPhone 17 Pro Max? appeared first on SellCell.com Blog.

Introduction

If you’re planning to buy an iPhone 18 Pro, trading in your current iPhone is one of the easiest ways to take some of the sting out of the upgrade price.

And if you’re buying directly from Apple, trading in your old phone at the same time is the obvious option. It’s quick and convenient — but it might not get you the best price.

SellCell compared trade-in prices for 15 iPhones on September 14, 2026, looking at the top prices available through SellCell alongside quotes from Apple, Verizon, AT&T, Gazelle and ecoATM.

To keep things like-for-like, we compared equivalent phones on every site: the highest storage capacity available for each model, unlocked and in good condition.

Apple’s quotes were below SellCell’s top prices on every comparable iPhone we checked, with the difference reaching $170. And across all five alternatives, SellCell beat the next-best quote on all 15 models — by as much as $168.

Against individual trade-in options, the difference was even bigger, reaching $472 on a single iPhone.

SellCell vs. Apple, Verizon, AT&T, Gazelle and ecoATM

For each iPhone, we also identified the highest quote from Apple, Verizon, AT&T, Gazelle or ecoATM. This gives us the “next-best” price and means we’re comparing SellCell with the strongest alternative quote for each phone.

SellCell came out on top across all 15 iPhones.

The biggest cash advantage over the next-best quote was on the iPhone 16 Pro Max. SellCell’s top price of $780 was $168 higher than the closest alternative at $612.

The iPhone 14 had the biggest percentage difference, with $286 available through SellCell compared with a next-best quote of $203 — $83, or 40.9%, more.

Even on the newest phones, the differences were significant. SellCell’s $999 top price for the iPhone 17 Pro Max was $114 above the next-best $885 offer, while the iPhone 17 Pro was $110 ahead.

Trading Your Old iPhone With Apple? Check the Price First

Apple Trade In is probably the easiest option if you’re already ordering an iPhone 18 Pro or Pro Max from Apple. That doesn’t necessarily make it the best-paying one.

SellCell vs. Apple Trade-In Prices

The biggest difference was on the iPhone 16 Pro Max. Apple offered $610 for the handset, while the top price through SellCell was $780.

That’s an extra $170 for exactly the same iPhone.

An iPhone 15 Pro was worth $370 through Apple compared with $490.99 through SellCell, a difference of $120.99.

For the iPhone 14, Apple offered $195 compared with $286 through SellCell. That’s another $91 — or 46.7% more.

The gap doesn’t disappear with newer handsets either. Apple’s $885 offer for the iPhone 17 Pro Max was $114 below SellCell’s $999, while the iPhone 17 Pro was $785 with Apple compared with $895 through SellCell.

If convenience is your priority, Apple’s trade-in service has an obvious appeal. But when the difference can run to $100 or more, it’s worth knowing what your iPhone is worth before accepting the offer.

How Does Verizon Compare?

Apple isn’t always the first stop when upgrading. Plenty of iPhone owners will be looking at carrier quotes, particularly if they’re also considering a new contract or plan.

So how does Verizon stack up?

SellCell vs. Verizon Trade-In Prices

Verizon offered $705 for the iPhone 17 Pro Max compared with $999 through SellCell. That’s $294 less.

For an iPhone 16 Pro, Verizon’s $440 was $211 below SellCell’s $651.

There were some big differences further down the range too. An iPhone 14 was worth $131 with Verizon compared with $286 through SellCell — a $155 gap.

For the iPhone 11, Verizon offered $57. SellCell’s top price was $122, more than twice as much.

What About AT&T?

The AT&T figures produced some of the largest gaps in the study.

SellCell vs. AT&T Trade-In Prices

The iPhone 17 Pro is a good example. AT&T offered $595 compared with a top SellCell price of $895, leaving $300 between the two.

The difference on the iPhone 16 Pro Max was $270 — $510 through AT&T versus $780 through SellCell.

One of the biggest percentage differences came from the iPhone 13 Pro Max. SellCell’s top price was $356, while AT&T offered $125, a difference of $231.

Carrier trade-in promotions can work differently from straightforward cash buyback quotes. Some involve bill credits, particular plans or other eligibility requirements, so it’s important to look at the full deal being offered.

But before committing to one, knowing the market value of the phone you’re handing over gives you a useful point of comparison.

SellCell vs. Gazelle

Gazelle came closer to SellCell on several models, particularly some of the newer iPhones, but there were still some sizeable gaps.

SellCell vs. Gazelle Trade-In Prices

Gazelle offered $825 for the iPhone 17 Pro Max compared with $999 through SellCell, leaving a $174 difference.

For the iPhone 16 Pro Max, it was $612 versus $780 — $168 more through SellCell.

The iPhone 15 Pro had a $108.99 difference, with Gazelle offering $382 compared with $490.99 through SellCell.

And on the iPhone 11, Gazelle’s $55 offer compared with $122 through SellCell, a difference of $67.

SellCell vs. ecoATM: Up to $472 More

This is where the biggest single cash difference in the study appears.

SellCell vs. ecoATM Trade-In Prices

ecoATM offered $423 for the iPhone 17 Pro. SellCell’s top price was $895.

That’s a $472 difference.

There was another $400 between the two prices for the iPhone 16 Pro Max: $380 from ecoATM compared with $780 through SellCell.

An iPhone 15 Pro was worth $222 through ecoATM versus $490.99 through SellCell, leaving a $268.99 gap.

And an iPhone 14 owner could be looking at $114 from ecoATM compared with $286 through SellCell — $172 more.

The differences aren’t small, particularly when that money is going toward the cost of a new iPhone.

Why Your Old iPhone’s Value Matters at iPhone 18 Pro Launch

When Apple launches a new iPhone, most of the attention naturally goes on the price of the new handset.

But if you’re upgrading, there are two numbers that matter: what the new iPhone costs and what you can get for the one you already own.

If two places will give you $610 and $780 respectively for the same iPhone, choosing the second doesn’t just mean getting a better trade-in price. It means you’ve got another $170 to put toward the upgrade.

And this is particularly worth thinking about around launch.

Our previous iPhone 18 trade-in research looked at how quickly older iPhones can lose value around Apple’s announcement and release. That makes both when you sell and where you sell worth considering.

The figures here also show why it’s worth looking beyond the first trade-in price you’re offered. Even when we ignored the lower offers and compared SellCell only with the next-best quote available for each handset, SellCell was still ahead on every model we checked.

Conclusion

Trading an old iPhone with Apple while buying an iPhone 18 Pro is easy. For some people, that convenience will be worth it.

But it’s worth checking the numbers first.

Apple offered $610 for the iPhone 16 Pro Max compared with a top SellCell price of $780 — $170 less. There was a $120.99 difference on the iPhone 15 Pro and a $114 difference on the iPhone 17 Pro Max.

The wider market makes comparing prices even more important.

SellCell beat the next-best quote from Apple, Verizon, AT&T, Gazelle or ecoATM on every one of the 15 iPhones we analyzed, with the difference reaching $168.

Against individual buyers, the gap reached as much as $472.

So if you’re planning to upgrade to an iPhone 18 Pro or Pro Max, don’t automatically hand over your old phone at checkout. Check what it’s worth first and then look at selling your iPhone.

It could leave a lot more money in your pocket for the upgrade.

Methodology

SellCell recorded iPhone trade-in prices on September 14, 2026, covering the 15 most traded-in iPhone models through SellCell, from the iPhone 17 Pro Max to the iPhone 11.

For each model, we compared the top trade-in price available through SellCell with the quoted trade-in price for the equivalent handset from Apple, Verizon, AT&T, Gazelle and ecoATM.

To keep the comparison like-for-like, every quote was based on the highest storage capacity available for that iPhone model, unlocked and in good condition.

The “next-best” price is the highest quote recorded from Apple, Verizon, AT&T, Gazelle or ecoATM for each handset. This was then compared with SellCell’s top price to show how much more was available through SellCell versus the strongest competing quote.

Prices were those quoted at the time of the research and can change. Final trade-in values may vary depending on device condition and the terms or eligibility requirements of individual trade-in services.

Our content is created in good faith and reviewed regularly - if you spot an error, please contact corrections@sellcell.com. Read our Editorial Policy

The post iPhone 18 Pro Trade-In Warning: Apple Could Offer You Up to $170 Less for Your Old iPhone — Other Buyers Up to $472 Less appeared first on SellCell.com Blog.

Introduction

Apple’s next iPhone launch is approaching, and existing owners face a familiar problem: when should they trade in their old phone?

Selling early may secure a stronger price. However, most owners still need their old iPhone while waiting for the replacement to arrive. They may also need it to transfer photographs, messages, apps and other personal data.

New SellCell research shows how much this delay could cost.

SellCell surveyed 2,000 iPhone users and compared their intended trade-in behaviour with historical pricing from the iPhone 15, iPhone 16 and iPhone 17 launches.

The results reveal a clear trade-in trap. More than three in five users would wait until receiving and setting up their new phone. However, across the past three launches, three in four iPhones tracked lost value between Apple’s announcement and release day.

During the latest launch, one model lost $129 in only 10 days.

Main Findings

• 61.4% of iPhone users would wait until receiving and setting up their new phone before trading in the old one.
• 77.4% would delay selling or trading in because they need their existing iPhone for continued use or to transfer data.
• Across the iPhone 15, iPhone 16 and iPhone 17 launches, 117 of 156 iPhones tracked—75%—lost trade-in value between Apple’s announcement and release day.
• Ahead of the iPhone 17 release, 50 of 54 iPhones—92.6%—lost value in 10 days, with an average loss of $36.46.
• The iPhone 16 Plus 512GB recorded the largest cash loss, falling by $129 between announcement and release.
• The iPhone 15 Plus 128GB recorded the largest percentage fall, losing 20.2% of its trade-in value—from $440 to $351—in 10 days.
• 82.8% did not know some independent buyers offer price locks, which hold a phone’s value for an agreed period while it remains in use.
• 66.1% said a price lock would encourage them to arrange their trade-in earlier.

SellCell Research: The iPhone Trade-In Waiting Trap

Part One: SellCell Survey of 2,000 iPhone Users

To understand how iPhone owners approach an Apple launch, SellCell asked 2,000 US iPhone users four questions: when they would sell or trade in their existing device, why they might wait, whether they knew about trade-in price locks, and whether a price lock would make them act earlier. The charts below show the results.

Q1. When Do iPhone Owners Sell or Trade In Their Old Phone Around an Apple Launch?

• 40.9% would wait until after transferring their data to their new iPhone.
• 20.5% would trade in their old phone when the replacement arrives.
• Combined, 61.4% would keep their old phone until receiving and setting up its replacement.
• 23.1% would arrange the trade-in when ordering or preordering their new iPhone.
• 2.2% would act after ordering but before the new phone arrives.
• 5.9% would trade in before Apple’s announcement, on announcement day or between announcement and release.
• 7.3% would keep their old iPhone.

For most owners, the arrival of the replacement—not Apple’s announcement—is the point at which they feel ready to part with their old phone. Unfortunately, that means waiting through a period when trade-in prices can fall quickly.

Q2. Why Do iPhone Owners Delay Selling or Trading In Their Old Phone?

• 54.1% need to continue using their old iPhone until the new one arrives.
• 23.3% need it to transfer their data.
• Combined, these practical reasons account for 77.4% of responses.
• 8.2% would keep the old phone as a backup.
• 4.3% are concerned about their personal data or security.
• 3.7% want more time to compare buyers and find the best price.
• 2.0% would give it to a family member or friend.
• 1.0% are unsure how to erase or reset it safely.
• 1.0% feel selling it is too much effort.
• 0.9% said their old phone is usually broken or damaged.
• 1.2% would sell or trade in their old iPhone before buying the new one.

The overwhelming majority are waiting because they still need the device—not because they are unconcerned about price.

Q3. How Many iPhone Owners Know About Trade-In Price Locks?

• 82.8% did not know that some independent buyers offer a price lock.
• 17.2% were already aware of the option.

A price lock holds the value of a phone for an agreed number of days while the owner continues using it. Where available, it may allow someone to secure a valuation before sending the phone to the buyer.

Q4. Would a Price Lock Encourage Earlier Trade-Ins?

• 66.1% said a price lock would make them more likely to arrange their trade-in earlier.
• 33.9% said it would not change their behaviour.

This directly addresses the main reason owners delay: they do not want to be left without a phone.

Part Two: What Waiting Can Cost — SellCell’s Historic Price Analysis

To understand what this delay can mean in real money, SellCell analysed historic trade-in prices around the iPhone 15, iPhone 16 and iPhone 17 launches.

For every model and storage capacity tracked, we compared the highest available trade-in price on Apple’s announcement day with the highest available price on release day—typically just 10 or 11 days later.

Table 1: Trade-In Value Lost Between Apple’s Announcement and Release Day

Across the iPhone 15, iPhone 16 and iPhone 17 launches, 117 of 156 iPhones tracked lost trade-in value between Apple’s announcement and release day.

That means exactly 75%—or three in four—were worth less by release day.

The table shows that the most recent launch was particularly severe. Ahead of the iPhone 17 release, 50 of 54 iPhones tracked lost value in 10 days. The average loss across all models was $36.46.

The largest cash loss was $129, while the biggest percentage fall reached 20.2%.

Table 2: The Biggest Percentage Trade-In Value Losses Between Announcement and Release

All five of the biggest percentage losses occurred during the 10 days between the iPhone 17 announcement and release.

The iPhone 15 Plus 128GB recorded the largest proportional fall, dropping from $440 to $351—a loss of $89, or 20.2% of its trade-in value.

The iPhone 16 Plus 512GB recorded the largest cash loss, falling from $695 to $566—a loss of $129, or 18.6%.

This does not mean every iPhone will lose value in exactly the same way. However, the historic data shows that the short period between Apple’s announcement and release can be a particularly risky time to delay arranging a trade-in.

Conclusion

More than three in five iPhone users would wait until receiving and setting up their new phone before trading in their old one.

For most, the reason is entirely practical. They need the existing phone for everyday use or to transfer their personal data.

However, that wait can come at a cost.

Across the past three Apple launches, three in four iPhones tracked lost trade-in value between announcement and release day.

During the latest launch, 93% lost value in only 10 days. The average loss was $36.46, while the worst-hit model lost $129.

Consumers considering an upgrade should compare trade-in prices as soon as Apple announces its new iPhone rather than automatically waiting for release day

Where an appropriate price lock is available, it may offer a way to protect the phone’s value without immediately giving up the device when selling your iPhone.

Methodology

SellCell surveyed 2,000 US iPhone users in August 2026.

Respondents answered four closed questions covering:

• When they would sell or trade in their existing iPhone around an Apple launch.
• Their main reason for waiting.
• Their awareness of independent buyer price locks.
• Whether a price lock would encourage them to arrange their trade-in earlier.

Survey responses reflect stated intentions rather than verified purchasing or trade-in behaviour.

SellCell also analysed historical trade-in pricing from its network of independent buyers around the iPhone 15, iPhone 16 and iPhone 17 launches.

The announcement-to-release analysis compares the top available trade-in price for each model and storage capacity on Apple’s announcement day with its top price on release day.

All pricing figures are based on the top available trade-in price for a device in “Good” condition. Individual offers may vary according to the buyer, device condition and terms of the trade-in.

Our content is created in good faith and reviewed regularly - if you spot an error, please contact corrections@sellcell.com. Read our Editorial Policy

The post iPhone Warning: Your Old Phone Could Lose 20% Between Apple’s Announcement and Release appeared first on SellCell.com Blog.

Introduction

Apple is widely rumoured to be preparing its first foldable iPhone, with several analysts and industry reports suggesting the device could launch in 2026 at a price of around $2,000.

While foldables have become some of the most expensive devices on the market, their resale performance has received far less attention than their hardware innovation.

Industry sources including Reuters, Ming-Chi Kuo and Jeff Pu have all pointed towards a potential 2026 launch window, with several reports suggesting Apple’s first foldable device could debut alongside the iPhone 18 family. While Apple has not officially confirmed the product, expectations are growing that the company is preparing to enter the foldable smartphone market for the first time.

To find out whether consumers are getting value for that premium, SellCell analysed the resale performance of flagship smartphones 12 months after launch, comparing foldables and traditional smartphones across Apple, Samsung, Google, Motorola and OnePlus.

The study compares foldable and traditional flagship smartphones 12 months after launch, analysing value retention, depreciation rates and ownership costs across Apple, Samsung, Google, Motorola and OnePlus devices. It identifies the best and worst smartphone investments, the devices generating the largest monetary losses, and what a potential $2,000 foldable iPhone could be worth after one year based on current market trends.

Main Findings

• Foldable smartphones lose an average of 64.6% of their value within 12 months.
• Traditional smartphones lose an average of 55.3% of their value within 12 months.
• Foldable smartphone owners lose an average of $997.69 after one year.
• Traditional smartphone owners lose an average of $605.32 after one year.
• Foldable owners lose $392.37 more on average than traditional smartphone owners.
• Foldables retain 35.4% of their launch value after 12 months.
• Traditional smartphones retain 44.7% of their launch value after 12 months.
• Apple’s iPhone 16 lineup retained 51.5% of its value after 12 months.
• Motorola devices retained 24.5% of their launch value on average.
• The Samsung Galaxy Z Fold6 1TB lost $1,479.99 in value within 12 months.
• Five of the six largest monetary losses recorded in the study came from foldable devices.
• Nine of the ten best-performing devices for value retention were iPhones.
• The most expensive smartphones analysed were overwhelmingly foldable devices.
• Many of the most expensive devices also appeared among the biggest monetary losers.
• A hypothetical $2,000 foldable iPhone could lose as much as $1,292 in its first year if it follows current foldable depreciation trends.

Foldables vs Traditional Smartphones

Key Findings

• Foldables lost an average of 64.6% of their value after 12 months.
• Traditional smartphones lost 55.3%.
• Foldable owners lost $997.69 on average.
• Traditional smartphone owners lost $605.32.
• Consumers lost $392.37 more by choosing a foldable smartphone.
• Foldables retained just 35.4% of their launch value compared to 44.7% for traditional smartphones.

Foldable smartphone owners lost an average of $997.69 after 12 months, compared with $605.32 for traditional smartphone owners. Foldables also retained just 35.4% of their launch value, compared with 44.7% for traditional smartphones.

Which Brands Hold Their Value Best?

Key Findings

• Apple retained 51.5% of value after 12 months.
• OnePlus retained 46.8%.
• Google retained 40.8% with the Pixel 9 series and 37.0% with the Pixel 9 Fold series.
• Samsung retained 39.5% with the Galaxy S25 series and 35.7% with the Galaxy Z Fold6 / Flip 6 series.
• Motorola retained just 24.5%.

Apple achieved the strongest value retention of any major manufacturer analysed.

The Worst Smartphone Investments

Key Findings

• Motorola Edge (2024) lost 85.5% of its value.
• Motorola Razr+ (2024) lost 71.5%.
• Motorola Razr (2024) lost 69.6%.
• Samsung Galaxy Z Flip6 512GB lost 66.4%.
• Samsung Galaxy Z Fold6 1TB lost 65.5%.

Four of the five worst-performing devices in the study were foldables, while the Motorola Edge (2024) recorded the highest overall depreciation at 85.5%.

The Phones Consumers Lose the Most Money On

Key Findings

• Samsung Galaxy Z Fold6 1TB lost $1,479.99.
• Samsung Galaxy Z Fold6 512GB lost $1,269.99.
• Google Pixel 9 Pro Fold 512GB lost $1,193.00.
• Samsung Galaxy Z Fold6 256GB lost $1,184.99.
• Google Pixel 9 Pro Fold 256GB lost $1,148.00.

Five of the six largest monetary losses recorded in the study came from foldable devices. The Samsung Galaxy Z Fold6 1TB recorded the largest loss overall at $1,479.99.

The Most Expensive Phones Don’t Hold Their Value Best

Key Findings

• Foldables dominated the list of the most expensive smartphones analysed.
• Two devices launched with price tags exceeding $2,000.
• Many of the most expensive devices also appeared among the biggest monetary losers.
• The Samsung Galaxy Z Fold6 1TB combined one of the highest launch prices with the largest loss in the study.

Two devices launched above $2,000, and both ranked among the largest monetary losers in the study.

The Best Smartphone Investments

Key Findings

• Nine of the ten best-performing devices were iPhones.
• The iPhone 16 Pro Max ranked among the strongest performers.
• The iPhone 16 Plus and iPhone 16 Pro models also featured prominently.
• Apple dominated the top of the rankings.

Nine of the ten best-performing devices for value retention were iPhones, with the iPhone 16 Pro Max, iPhone 16 Plus and iPhone 16 Pro all ranking among the strongest performers.

Does Storage Capacity Affect Resale Value?

Key Findings

• Higher-capacity devices often generated larger monetary losses.
• Premium storage upgrades did not consistently retain value better than lower-capacity models.

Higher-capacity devices often generated larger monetary losses, but did not consistently retain value better than lower-capacity versions.

What This Means for Apple

The foldable market presents a very different challenge for Apple.

While Apple’s iPhone 16 lineup retained 51.5% of its value after one year, foldables as a category retained just 35.4%.

The category also generated the largest ownership losses in the study, with consumers losing almost $1,000 on average after 12 months.

As Apple prepares to enter the foldable market, one of its biggest challenges may not be hardware innovation but convincing consumers and the second-hand market that foldables deserve to hold their value.

If Apple can bring traditional iPhone-level value retention to a foldable device, it could help address one of the category’s biggest weaknesses.

What Could a $2,000 Foldable iPhone Be Worth After One Year?

Key Findings

• If a $2,000 foldable iPhone depreciated at the average rate of today’s foldables, it would be worth approximately $708 after 12 months.
• Under that scenario, owners would lose around $1,292 in value during the first year.
• If Apple achieved depreciation rates similar to the iPhone 16 range, the device could be worth around $1,030 after 12 months.
• That would equate to more than $300 less depreciation than a typical foldable smartphone.

While Apple has not confirmed pricing, several analyst reports have suggested a foldable iPhone could launch at around $2,000. To understand what that could mean for consumers, SellCell modelled how a hypothetical $2,000 foldable iPhone might perform after 12 months based on current smartphone resale trends.

If a foldable iPhone followed the depreciation patterns of today’s foldables, owners could lose around $1,292 within a year. However, if Apple achieved value retention similar to the iPhone 16 lineup, first-year depreciation could be more than $300 lower. That difference could become a key selling point in a category where ownership costs remain one of the biggest barriers to adoption.

Conclusion

Foldable smartphone owners lose almost $1,000 on average after 12 months, according to SellCell’s analysis of first-year smartphone depreciation.

While Apple emerged as the strongest-performing major brand, the most significant finding was the performance gap between foldables and traditional smartphones.

Consumers currently lose almost $1,000 on average when purchasing a foldable device, nearly $400 more than traditional smartphone owners.

With Apple expected to launch its first foldable iPhone in the near future, the company is about to enter a category that has so far struggled to retain value. The challenge for Apple won’t simply be building a great foldable phone — it will be proving that foldables can hold their value in a way that existing devices have failed to achieve.

Whether Apple can bring traditional iPhone-level value retention to a foldable device may ultimately determine whether foldables become a mainstream category or remain a niche premium product.

Methodology

SellCell analysed flagship smartphones launched within the last two years where a complete 12 months of resale data was available.

The study included devices from Apple, Samsung, Google, Motorola and OnePlus.

All devices were assessed using Good-condition resale values.

Launch MSRP was compared against median resale values exactly 12 months after release.

Percentage value lost, percentage value retained and monetary loss were then calculated for each device and category to identify the best and worst smartphone investments.

Our content is created in good faith and reviewed regularly - if you spot an error, please contact corrections@sellcell.com. Read our Editorial Policy

The post Can Apple Fix Foldables? appeared first on SellCell.com Blog.

Introduction

Brand loyalty in the smartphone market has long been dominated by Apple, but how does that loyalty look in 2026?

To find out, SellCell surveyed over 5,000 smartphone users across iPhone and Android phones in the USA, exploring whether users plan to stay with their current brand, what drives those decisions, and where switchers are heading next.

Compared to our previous Phone Brand Loyalty Surveys in 2021 and 2019, the latest data shows a clear shift: loyalty has increased across the board, while switching has declined.

Main Statistical Findings

• iPhone loyalty stands at 96.4%, up from 91.9% in 2021
• iPhone switching stands at 3.6%
• Android loyalty stands at 86.4%, with switching at 13.6%
• Android users are nearly four times more likely to switch than iPhone users
• Samsung loyalty stands at 90.1%, up from 74% in 2021
• Samsung switching stands at 9.9%
• Google loyalty stands at 86.8%, up from 65.2% in 2021
• Google switching stands at 13.2%
• The loyalty gap between iPhone and Android now stands at 10 percentage points
• Price and value are the biggest drivers of switching
• Technology is the second biggest driver
• Overall, loyalty has increased across all major brands since 2021

Brand Loyalty Over Time (2019–2026)

• iPhone loyalty has increased from 90.5% in 2019 to 91.9% in 2021, and now 96.4% in 2026
• Samsung loyalty fell from 85.7% in 2019 to 74.0% in 2021, before recovering to 90.1% in 2026
• Google followed a similar pattern, dropping from 84.0% in 2019 to 65.2% in 2021, then rebounding to 86.8% in 2026
• The data shows a clear dip in loyalty across Android brands in 2021, followed by a strong recovery in 2026
• Apple, by contrast, has shown consistent growth across all three studies
• Overall, loyalty is now at its highest recorded level across all major brands, with the market becoming more stable over time.

Data & Analysis

Chart 1 – iPhone: When you next upgrade your phone, what will you most likely do?

• 96.4% of iPhone users say they will stay
• 3.6% say they will switch
• This represents an increase from 91.9% loyalty in 2021, showing continued strengthening of Apple’s user base
• Switching has fallen to extremely low levels, with fewer than 1 in 25 users considering leaving
• Apple now has one of the most stable user bases across all major smartphone brands

Chart 2 – Android: When you next upgrade your phone, what will you most likely do?

• 86.4% of Android users say they will stay
• 13.6% say they will switch
• This means Android users are nearly 4x more likely to switch than iPhone users
• Despite this, loyalty is strong overall, though switching remains significantly higher than for iPhone users
• Android remains more fluid, but still shows strong overall retention

Chart 3 – Samsung: When you next upgrade your phone, what will you most likely do?

• 90.1% of Samsung users say they will stay
• 9.9% say they will switch
• This is a significant increase from 74% loyalty in 2021 (+16.1 percentage points)
• Samsung has reduced switching by a meaningful margin
• Samsung now sits between Apple and the broader Android average in terms of loyalty

Chart 4 – Google: When you next upgrade your phone, what will you most likely do?

• 86.8% of Google users say they will stay
• 13.2% say they will switch
• This is a strong recovery from 65.2% in 2021 (+21.6 percentage points)
• Despite this, switching remains relatively high
• Google has improved significantly, but still lacks the retention strength of Apple or Samsung

Chart 5 – iPhone: If you were to switch, which brand would you choose?

• 69.7% of iPhone switchers choose Samsung
• 20.2% choose Google Pixel
• 10.1% choose Motorola
• Even as iPhone loyalty has increased since 2021, Samsung remains the dominant alternative
• Switching remains rare and concentrated among a small number of brands

Chart 6 – Android: If you were to switch, which brand would you choose?

• 31.5% choose Samsung
• 26.8% choose iPhone
• 21.2% choose Google Pixel
• 11.5% choose Motorola
• Android users remain more evenly distributed across brands
• Apple captures more than 1 in 4 switchers, highlighting continued cross-ecosystem movement
• This aligns with Android’s lower overall loyalty compared to Apple

Chart 7 – iPhone: Why would you stay?

• 60.8% cite brand preference
• 17.4% cite ecosystem
• 10.0% cite ease of use
• 8.7% cite reliability
• 3.1% cite trust
• Brand and ecosystem account for 78.2% of reasons for staying
• The increase in loyalty since 2021 suggests ecosystem lock-in is strengthening further.

Chart 8 – Android: Why would you stay?

• 58.0% cite brand preference
• 23.5% cite reliability
• 9.3% cite ease of use
• 6.3% cite ecosystem
• 2.9% cite trust
• Brand and reliability account for 81.5% of responses

Chart 9 – iPhone: Why would you switch?

• 25.8% cite better value
• 24.7% say iPhones are too expensive
• 22.5% cite better technology
• 14.6% prefer Android
• 12.4% want a change
• Price and value account for over 50% of switching reasons
• Compared to 2021, cost appears to play a more prominent role in switching decisions

Chart 10 – Android: Why would you switch?

• 31.8% cite better value
• 27.1% cite better technology
• 23.5% want a change
• 11.5% want iOS
• 6.2% cite price issues
• Value and technology account for 58.9% of switching reasons
• More than 1 in 10 users explicitly want to move to Apple
• Compared to 2021, switching appears more driven by value than purely technology

Chart 11 – How long have you been using your current smartphone brand?

• 83.8% of iPhone users have stayed for more than 5 years
• Only 33.8% of Android users have done the same
• iPhone users are nearly 2.5x more likely to be long-term users
• This helps explain why Apple loyalty has increased further since 2021

Chart 12 – Switching likelihood based on when people plan to upgrade

• 23.1% of Android users upgrading within 6 months plan to switch
• This falls to 17.8%, 10.9%, and 9.4% over longer timeframes
• iPhone switching remains between 3–6% across all groups
• Compared to 2021, overall switching is lower, but upgrade timing remains the key trigger

Conclusion

iPhone loyalty now stands at 96.4%, up from 90.5% in 2019 and 91.9% in 2021 (+5.9 percentage points since 2019), while switching has fallen to just 3.6%, down from 9.5% in 2019.

The loyalty gap between iPhone and Android now stands at 10 percentage points (96.4% vs 86.4%), underlining the strength of Apple’s user retention.

Samsung has seen a strong recovery, with loyalty rising to 90.1% in 2026, up from 74% in 2021 and slightly above its 85.7% level in 2019, marking a full rebound and improvement over time.

Google has also recovered significantly, increasing from 65.2% in 2021 to 86.8%, slightly above its 2019 level (84.0%).

Despite these gains, Android users remain nearly four times more likely to switch than iPhone users (13.6% vs 3.6%), maintaining a clear gap in loyalty between the two ecosystems.

This is reinforced by long-term behaviour. 83.8% of iPhone users have been with Apple for more than 5 years, compared to just 33.8% of Android users, highlighting a far more deeply embedded and stable user base.

Looking across all three studies, the trend is clear. Loyalty dipped for Android brands in 2021, but has since rebounded, while Apple has continued to strengthen its already dominant position. At the same time, switching has declined across the market.

In simple terms, users are becoming increasingly locked into their chosen ecosystem. If a user is on iPhone, they are now even more likely to stay there than before — and the same trend is increasingly visible across Android brands.

As a result, the opportunity to win users from competitors appears to be narrowing. Instead, growth is increasingly dependent on attracting new users into each ecosystem, rather than winning them from competitors, particularly through lower-cost and entry-level devices.

Overall, the smartphone market is becoming more stable than in both 2019 and 2021, with stronger brand attachment and less frequent switching than ever before.

Methodology

The survey included over 5,000 respondents, with approximately equal representation between iPhone and Android users, in the USA (age 18+). This included a substantial sample of Samsung and Google users within the Android group, enabling reliable brand-level analysis. Responses were also segmented between those intending to stay with their current brand and those considering switching.

Participants were asked about their current smartphone brand, how long they have used it, whether they plan to stay or switch when they next upgrade, their reasons for doing so, and which brand they would choose if switching.

Two separate surveys were conducted for iPhone and Android users, with consistent question structures to allow direct comparison across ecosystems and against our previous brand loyalty studies in 2021 and 2019.

All respondents were shown the same question structure. Analysis was conducted post-survey to separate users based on whether they intended to stay or switch.

The 2026 results are directly compared to our previous studies to track changes in brand loyalty, switching behaviour, and consumer decision drivers over time.

Our content is created in good faith and reviewed regularly - if you spot an error, please contact corrections@sellcell.com. Read our Editorial Policy

The post Smartphone Loyalty Survey 2026: iPhone and Android Users Are More Loyal Than Ever appeared first on SellCell.com Blog.

Introduction

With Apple now officially unveiling the iPhone 17e, buyers are weighing whether the new budget model represents the strongest value option — or whether stretching to the standard iPhone 17 may still deliver better long-term resale performance.

Budget phones often look like the smartest buy at launch, but resale trends over the first year can tell a very different story. To assess what the new 17e could mean for buyers, this analysis compares MSRP against 12-month resale performance for the iPhone 16e versus Pixel a-series and Galaxy FE devices, before benchmarking those results against the standard iPhone 16.

Main Findings

• iPhone 16e (128GB) launches at $599 and averages about $291 after 12 months, retaining roughly 48.6% of its original price.
• Pixel 8a (128GB) launches at $499 and averages about $238 after 12 months — roughly 47.7% retained.
• Galaxy S24 FE (128GB) launches at $649.99 and averages around $236 after one year, retaining roughly 36.3%, the lowest retention among devices compared.
• Across storage tiers, iPhone 16e averages about 51.5% depreciation after 12 months, compared with Pixel 8a at around 52.8% and Galaxy S24 FE at roughly 63.5%.
• Standard iPhone 16 (128GB) launches at $799 and averages roughly $476 at 12 months, retaining about 59.6%, creating an approximate 10–11 percentage-point retention gap versus iPhone 16e.
• The difference between iPhone 16e and Galaxy S24 FE retention reaches roughly 12 percentage points at the one-year mark, while the gap between iPhone 16e and Pixel 8a remains close to one point.

Second Lens: Pound-for-Pound Depreciation (Value Lost per $100 Spent)

A second way to view depreciation is to measure how much value is lost relative to each $100 of original MSRP. This view removes price bias between devices and highlights how much value buyers actually lose relative to what they paid.

• iPhone 16 loses roughly $38–46 per $100 spent after 12 months depending on storage tier.
• Pixel 8a loses roughly $52–53 per $100 spent.
• Galaxy S24 FE loses roughly $63 per $100 spent.
• iPhone SE (3rd Gen) reaches up to about $66 lost per $100 spent.
• iPhone 16e loses roughly $48–55 per $100 spent across all configurations, with the higher end reflecting Apple’s 512GB tier, which is not offered on Pixel a-series or Galaxy FE models. When comparing only like-for-like 128GB and 256GB configurations, iPhone 16e falls to roughly $48–$51 lost per $100 spent versus Pixel a-series devices at around $52–$53 — meaning the iPhone 16e still edges Pixel on pound-for-pound resale value.
• For consistency, it’s also worth noting that iPhone 16 includes a 512GB configuration not offered by Pixel a-series or Galaxy FE devices; limiting the comparison to 128GB and 256GB tiers narrows the range further, reflecting even tighter pound-for-pound value retention for the standard iPhone model.

This second lens reinforces the main depreciation findings: iPhone 16 shows the strongest pound-for-pound value retention overall, while iPhone 16e leads within the budget category.

Charts and Main Findings

Budget comparison overview (12 months)

• iPhone 16e retains roughly 45–52% of MSRP after one year depending on storage configuration.
• Pixel 8a retains approximately 47–48% over the same timeframe.
• Galaxy S24 FE retains roughly 36–37% after 12 months.
• iPhone 16 benchmark retains roughly 60–61%, the highest retention shown.

iPhone 16e depreciation performance

• 128GB moves from $599 MSRP to about $291 at 12 months.
• 256GB moves from $699 to around $361 at 12 months.
• 512GB moves from $899 to roughly $406 after one year.
• Average depreciation across configurations sits around 51.5%.

Pixel a-Series depreciation

• 128GB moves from $499 MSRP to about $238 at 12 months.
• 256GB moves from $559 to around $261 at 12 months.
• Average depreciation sits just below 53%.

Galaxy FE depreciation

• 128GB moves from $649.99 MSRP to roughly $236 after 12 months.
• 256GB moves from $709.99 to about $261 at one year.
• Average depreciation reaches roughly 63.5%.

Apple vs Apple — iPhone 16e vs iPhone 16

• iPhone 16 (128GB) moves from $799 MSRP to roughly $476 at 12 months.
• Average depreciation across storage tiers sits around 41.6%.
• Retention gap between iPhone 16 and iPhone 16e is roughly 10–11 percentage points at one year.

Early depreciation indicators

• Pixel 9a shows mid-50% depreciation by month nine.
• Galaxy S25 FE shows early depreciation above 50% within three months.

Conclusion

Across matched 12-month comparisons, iPhone 16e leads the budget category on resale value retention, outperforming Pixel a-series and Galaxy FE rivals. However, the standard iPhone 16 retains more value overall and shows the strongest depreciation efficiency when measured on a pound-for-pound basis. For buyers considering a future iPhone 17e, the data suggests the 16e remains one of the strongest budget options, while the standard iPhone tier continues to offer the strongest long-term investment performance.

If depreciation trends hold, buyers choosing between a future 17e and standard 17 are likely to see the same pattern — the budget model may offer strong entry-level value, but the standard model is likely to remain the stronger long-term investment based on current resale trends and historical retention patterns.

Methodology

All figures are based on Mint-condition resale pricing compared against original MSRP. Twelve-month comparisons were prioritised to ensure like-for-like analysis across the budget segment. Value lost per $100 spent is calculated by dividing total depreciation by MSRP and multiplying by 100, allowing devices with different launch prices to be compared on an equal basis.

Our content is created in good faith and reviewed regularly - if you spot an error, please contact corrections@sellcell.com. Read our Editorial Policy

The post iPhone 17e Is Here — 16e Beats Budget Rivals on Resale by Up to 12% appeared first on SellCell.com Blog.

Introduction

Trade-in rankings usually reflect a broad mix of devices at different stages of their lifecycle, with many models appearing months or even years after launch rather than immediately. That’s what makes the rise of the iPhone 17 Pro Max particularly unusual. Despite releasing only recently, Apple’s latest flagship has quickly become the most traded-in device across the independent trade-in market.

This report looks at how the iPhone 17 Pro Max climbed the trade-in rankings so quickly, what early depreciation data reveals about resale behaviour, and why some owners may be choosing to sell far sooner than expected. While early trade-ins might suggest dissatisfaction at first glance, the data points to a more nuanced picture shaped by strong value retention, changing upgrade habits and wider economic pressures.

Main Findings

• The iPhone 17 Pro Max now accounts for 11.5% of all Top-20 trade-ins, making it the number-one traded-in device despite launching only recently.
• Mint-condition iPhone 17 Pro Max devices have depreciated by around 25.4% since launch — roughly 7% less than the iPhone 16 Pro Max, which lost about 32.5% of its value over the same 145-day period.
• This slower depreciation means the iPhone 17 Pro Max is holding noticeably stronger resale value than the previous generation at the same stage of its lifecycle, helping explain unusually early trade-in activity.
• Around 76.5% of iPhone 17 Pro Max trade-ins are unlocked, suggesting sellers are actively timing resale decisions rather than relying on carrier upgrade programs.
• Around 86% of iPhone 17 Pro Max trade-ins are in Mint or Good condition, suggesting many owners are selling soon after purchase.

Chart analysis

Chart 1 – Growth in iPhone 17 Pro Max trade-ins

Trade-in share for the iPhone 17 Pro Max rose from around 5.1% in late November to 11.5% by early February, more than doubling in just 12 weeks as the device climbed from eighth position to the number-one spot.

• Share increased steadily week by week rather than spiking suddenly, suggesting sustained resale activity.
• The device moved from outside the top five to number one between late December and mid-January.
• Growth continued into early 2026, indicating ongoing early resale behaviour rather than a short-term promotion or launch spike.

Chart 2 – Top devices for trade-ins

The Top-20 comparison chart highlights how quickly the iPhone 17 Pro Max has moved ahead of competing Pro Max Models.

• The iPhone 15 Pro Max and iPhone 14 Pro Max remain strong but sit several points behind, both at 7.3% respectively.
• Multiple generations appear in the rankings, indicating stable overall resale demand
• A newly released flagship leading the chart is historically unusual. 
• Apple devices typically retain stronger resale value than many Android flagships, which can influence trade-in rankings across independent resale markets. Industry studies suggest iPhones often retain around 60–70% of their value after one year compared with roughly 50–60% for Samsung devices, meaning owners are more likely to resell while prices remain high. This difference in depreciation patterns may help explain why iPhone models dominate the Top-20 trade-in rankings.
• The Top-20 most traded-in devices account for roughly 47% of all trade-in activity, showing how heavily resale volume is concentrated among a small group of high-demand models.

Chart 3 – Unlocked vs carrier-locked (combined data)

Combined data shows a clear majority of unlocked devices entering the resale market for the iPhone 17 Pro Max.

• 76.5% unlocked versus 23.5% carrier-locked
• Higher unlocked ownership increases resale flexibility
• Data may suggest that sellers are making deliberate timing decisions

Chart 4 – Depreciation comparison

The depreciation comparison highlights stronger value retention for the iPhone 17 Pro Max relative to the previous generation over exactly the same period of time 145 days since launch.

• iPhone 17 Pro Max depreciation averages around 25.4% since launch.
• iPhone 16 Pro Max averaged roughly 32.5% over a similar period. 
• This equates to roughly 7% stronger value retention and up to a $95 dollar additional retained value over the same time period for the iPhone 17 Pro Max.
• Stronger pricing performance could help explain early resale behaviour.

Why Owners May Be Selling So Early

Strong resale prices appear to be the biggest driver behind early trade-ins. On average, Mint-condition iPhone 17 Pro Max devices are currently holding significantly more value than the previous generation at the same stage – 7 percent more and up to $95 more per device. With average resale values sitting around $967.50 against original launch prices above $1,200, some owners may see an opportunity to recover a large portion of their spend when they choose to sell iPhone models while prices remain high.

Short ownership cycles can also reduce the overall cost of ownership. Some buyers may simply test the newest flagship before deciding whether to keep it long-term, choosing instead to trade in iPhone 17 Pro Max devices during favourable resale conditions.

However, financial strategy may not be the only explanation. Some users may simply decide that the experience doesn’t justify the price after real-world use. Major software changes, including Apple’s newer design language and evolving iOS features, can influence how a device feels day-to-day, and previous SellCell iOS 26 research has shown that many iPhone owners remain cautious about major software updates.

Economic factors may also play a role. Consumer research from PYMNTS Intelligence suggests that around 71% of Americans report living paycheck to paycheck, while industry studies show that more than half of Americans sold at least one second-hand item last year as resale markets continue to grow. As flagship smartphones now cost well over $1,000, devices like the iPhone 17 Pro Max can act as short-term assets that owners may sell to release cash when needed.

Taken together, early trade-ins may reflect a mix of strong resale value, evolving upgrade habits and broader economic behaviour rather than a single reason.

Depreciation and Resale Performance

One of the most striking findings is how well the iPhone 17 Pro Max is holding its value compared with the previous generation.

• Average depreciation sits around 25.4%
• The iPhone 16 Pro Max saw depreciation closer to 32.5% over a similar period
• Stronger value retention of up to $95 per device vs last year’s iPhone 16 Pro Max, over the same 145 day post launch window, makes early resale financially viable

This performance helps explain why some early adopters may choose to sell sooner rather than later — not because the device has failed, but because resale prices remain unusually strong for a recently launched flagship.

Conclusion

The rapid rise of the iPhone 17 Pro Max as the most traded-in device highlights how smartphone ownership is evolving. Strong value retention and high resale prices appear to be encouraging some owners to sell earlier than usual, treating premium devices more like financial assets than long-term purchases.

At the same time, early trade-ins may also reflect real-world user behaviour — from people testing the latest technology before committing long-term to others choosing to release cash while resale values remain high. Rather than pointing to a single cause, the surge in trade-ins likely reflects a combination of resale strategy, economic timing and changing upgrade habits.

Methodology

This analysis is based on internal SellCell trade-in data and secondary-market pricing trends across 40 independent iPhone buyers. Rankings reflect percentage share of Top-20 devices over time, while depreciation comparisons use average Mint-condition resale values against historical pricing data for previous Pro Max models. Percentages are rounded.

Our content is created in good faith and reviewed regularly - if you spot an error, please contact corrections@sellcell.com. Read our Editorial Policy

The post iPhone 17 Pro Max Is Already the Most Traded-In Phone, Holding 11.5% Share Across the Top-20 Trade-In Rankings appeared first on SellCell.com Blog.

Introduction

Apple’s iOS 26 is one of the most noticeable iPhone updates in recent years, introducing a range of system changes alongside Liquid Glass, a new visual design that changes how iOS looks and feels.

At the same time, recent security-focused coverage has encouraged users to move away from older iOS versions, as protections and legacy pathways are phased out if models can support iOS 26. As a result, many iPhone users are facing increasing pressure to update, even if they remain unsure about the impact on battery life, performance, or usability.

Reporting around iOS 26 upgrade rates has been inconsistent, with some sources suggesting relatively low adoption and others pointing to much higher uptake. This has made it harder to gauge not just how widely the update has been installed, but how confidently users have approached it.

This report examines how iPhone users are actually responding to iOS 26. Using survey data from 2,000 iPhone users, SellCell analyses adoption levels, update behaviour, and the specific concerns creating hesitation around Apple’s latest operating system.

For many users, updating to iOS 26 isn’t an easy yes or no — it’s something they think about, weigh up, and often delay. So, let’s look at what the data shows.

Main Findings

The findings show a clear gap between how many users have installed iOS 26 and how confident they feel about doing so.

• 78% of iPhone users report having updated to iOS 26, while 22% say they have not yet upgraded, despite the update being available for several months.
• Only 28% of respondents say nothing they’ve seen puts them off updating, meaning 72% report at least one concern or hesitation around the update. 
• Most users do not update immediately when prompted, with 61% delaying, dismissing, or passively handling updates.
• Battery life and performance remain the most common hesitation drivers, even among many users who have already updated.
• Reaction to Apple’s Liquid Glass redesign is mixed, with 17.5% of users disliking the design or readability and a further 8.6% frustrated that it can’t be fully turned off.
• 15.0% are concerned about the difficulty of reverting once iOS 26 is installed.
• 11.4% worry about bugs or features breaking.
• Overall, most users install iOS 26 cautiously rather than confidently, with hesitation shaping both timing and experience.

Chart Analysis

Chart 1: iOS 26 Adoption Status

(Question 1 – Pie chart: Updated vs Not Updated)

• 78% of respondents report having updated to iOS 26 and 22% have not yet upgraded
• The 22% figure underpins the “one in five” headline referenced in this report
• While adoption is widespread, a sizeable minority remain on older versions

Chart 2: Why Some iPhone Users Have Not Upgraded to iOS 26

(Question 1 follow-up – Reasons given by non-upgraders only)

Among the 22% of iPhone users who have not yet upgraded to iOS 26 (443 respondents)

• Awareness and inertia account for the largest share of responses, with 28.0% of those who did not upgrade stating they were unaware iOS 26 was available, 23.7% assuming automatic updates, and 23.3% saying they haven’t got round to it
• Battery-related concerns are present but secondary, with 9.9% of the 443 worried updating could worsen battery life
• Design resistance plays a smaller but meaningful role, with 7.7% of the non-upgraders not wanting the Liquid Glass interface
• Performance concerns are cited by 5.2% of non-upgraders 
• Very small proportions cite understanding or confidence barriers
• Percentages shown relate only to non-upgraders and not the full user base

Chart 3: How Users Respond to iOS 26 Update Prompts

(Question 2 – Update behaviour)

Looking across all 2,000 surveyed iPhone users:

• 38.8% update immediately when prompted
• 27.2% wait to see if other users report problems
• 13.4% assume updates happen automatically
• 9.5% dismiss update reminders
• 5.2% only update when an app stops working
• 4.3% wait several months before updating
• Very small proportions seek external reassurance or help
• Overall, users are more likely to delay or defer updates than act immediately

Chart 4: Reasons for Hesitation Around iOS 26

(Question 3 – Multi-select concerns across all users)

Across the full sample of 2,000 iPhone users

• 28.0% say nothing they’ve seen puts them off updating
• This means 72.0% report at least one concern or hesitation about iOS 26
• Battery life and performance dominate hesitation, cited by 24.2% and 23.8% respectively
• Design resistance is significant, with 17.5% disliking Liquid Glass and 8.6% frustrated it can’t be fully turned off
• 15.0% worry it may be hard or impossible to revert once updated
• 11.4% cite reports of bugs or features breaking
• Knowledge gaps and settings concerns also contribute to hesitation

Percentages overlap as respondents could select multiple concerns

Conclusion

Overall, iOS 26 has seen strong uptake, but confidence hasn’t kept pace. One in five iPhone users still haven’t upgraded, and even among those who have, many continue to flag concerns around battery life, performance, design changes, and how easy it would be to roll back if something goes wrong. For many users, it comes down to how the update will affect their phone in day-to-day use.

Methodology

SellCell surveyed 2,000 U.S.-based adult iPhone users in January 2026. Participants answered three closed questions covering update status, update behaviour, and hesitation factors. One question allowed multiple responses.

Results reflect self-reported attitudes and behaviour rather than device-verified adoption. No personally identifiable information was collected as part of the process.

Our content is created in good faith and reviewed regularly - if you spot an error, please contact corrections@sellcell.com. Read our Editorial Policy

The post One in Five iPhone Users Still Haven’t Upgraded to iOS 26, Despite Apple’s Push to Update appeared first on SellCell.com Blog.

Introduction

Recent reports suggest that the core iPhone 17 models have enjoyed strong early demand, with sales momentum outpacing last year’s launch according to sources such as MacRumors.  In contrast, the iPhone Air appears to have struggled from the outset, with coverage from outlets like IBTimes pointing to softer sales and lower production expectations.

This report will investigate whether the resale value of the iPhone 17 and iPhone Air is following the same pattern. Using ten weeks of SellCell data, it examines how the iPhone 17 lineup is performing compared with the iPhone 16, 15, and 14 ranges at the same ten-week point post-launch, and how the Air’s trajectory compares with its predecessors.

Main Findings

• The iPhone 17 range averages 34.6% depreciation after ten weeks, outperforming both the iPhone 16 (39.0%) and iPhone 14 (36.6%) ranges.
• The iPhone Air averages 44.3% depreciation, with losses ranging from 40.3% to 47.7%.
• The main iPhone 17 models retain 9.7% more value than the Air.
• Compared with previous generations, the Air performs 12.4% worse than the iPhone 15, 7.7% worse than the iPhone 14, and 5.3% worse than the iPhone 16.
• The best performing iPhone 17 model is the Pro Max 256GB at 26.1% depreciation.
• The worst performing device overall is the iPhone Air 1TB at 47.7% depreciation.
• The iPhone 15 lineup continues to lead ten-week resale performance at 31.9% average depreciation.
• The widening gap between the iPhone Air and the rest of the lineup suggests market concerns around the Air’s long-term desirability.

Chart Analysis

Full Depreciation Breakdown: iPhone 17 vs 16, 15, and 14 (10 Weeks)

• The iPhone 17 lineup has the widest spread between best and worst models, driven by strong Pro values and weak Air values.
• The iPhone Air 1TB’s 47.7% depreciation is the steepest ten-week drop of any iPhone since 2022.
• All iPhone 17 Pro and Pro Max models stay below 40% depreciation, reinforcing strong resale demand.
• While iPhone 17 depreciation stabilises by week 10, the Air continues to fall, signalling likely long-term issues with resale confidence.

Average Depreciation by Model Range (10 Weeks)

• The iPhone 17 Series averages 34.6% depreciation, beating the iPhone 16 (39.0%) and iPhone 14 (36.6%).
• The iPhone Air averages 44.3% depreciation, making it the weakest performer across all recent generations.
• The iPhone 15 Series remains the best at ten weeks with 31.9% average depreciation, still ahead of the 17 range.
• The iPhone 17 Series holds around 10% more value than the iPhone Air after ten weeks.
• The iPhone Air performs 5–12% worse than previous generations (14, 15, and 16).

Best vs Worst Model Performance

• The iPhone 17 Pro Max 256GB is the best performer at 26.1% depreciation after ten weeks.
• The iPhone 17 Pro Max 512GB follows at 30.3%, keeping Pro Max models at the top.
• Standard iPhone 17 models fall between 32.9% and 40.8%, showing stable mid-range performance.
• All iPhone Air models sit at the bottom, between 40.3% and 47.7% depreciation.
• The iPhone Air 1TB is the worst performer overall at 47.7% depreciation.

Conclusion

Ten weeks of data makes one thing clear: the iPhone 17 range is performing as expected in the resale market, while the iPhone Air is not. The Air remains an unknown quantity to buyers and vendors alike. Slower sales, uncertainty around long‑term durability, and questions within the repair and refurbishment markets about parts, repair costs, and the ultra‑thin design all appear to be weighing on its resale value.

With depreciation already reaching as high as 47.7%, the Air is tracking far below every recent iPhone model. If this trend continues, owners may find themselves holding a very expensive—but undeniably beautiful—paperweight.

Methodology

SellCell analysed ten-week depreciation using real-time trade-in prices from more than 40 US-based buyback companies. All devices were assessed in good condition to ensure consistent comparisons. Depreciation figures were calculated by comparing original MSRPs with average trade-in prices at weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, and 10. Averages include all storage capacities within each model range.

Our content is created in good faith and reviewed regularly - if you spot an error, please contact corrections@sellcell.com. Read our Editorial Policy

The post iPhone Air Suffers Worst Resale Drop of Any iPhone Since 2022 – Losing Up to 47.7% in 10 Weeks appeared first on SellCell.com Blog.