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.

Introduction

Samsung’s new tri-fold phone is expected to make its debut later this year, and reports suggest Apple is also developing its first foldable iPhone. According to Tom’s Guide, Samsung may showcase its tri-fold device at the APEC Summit this fall. Meanwhile, Reuters reports that Apple is exploring test production of its first foldable iPhone in Taiwan, with a possible launch window in 2026.

So, are foldables the next big thing? For some, they offer innovation, flexibility, and feel a little more futuristic but they still don’t retain their value as well as traditional flagship models.

SellCell examined trade-in data from leading foldable and standard flagship phones from brands like Samsung, Google, and OnePlus to compare the two categories and see what the depreciation gap looks like. Let’s see what the data shows in terms of foldable vs non foldable value retention.

Detailed Highlights

• Foldable phones generally depreciate faster than standard flagship models, with a rate that can be as much as 15.4% higher in the first six months after their release.
• On average, foldable devices lose about 62.3% of their value within six months, compared to 49.8% for traditional flagships, highlighting a significant 12.5% difference in short-term value retention.
• After 18 months, foldables have typically lost 71.1% of their value, while non-foldables have seen a depreciation of 60.7%, indicating that foldables tend to lose around 10.4% more in the long run.
• Samsung’s foldable devices experienced the steepest decline, with a value loss of 63.7% in the first six months, compared to 48.3% for the Galaxy S series.
• This 15.4% difference positions Samsung as the brand with the largest gap between foldable and standard models during the initial 18 months.
• In contrast, Google’s Pixel Fold performs better, losing 58.1% after six months, while the Pixel Pro loses 56.1% — a modest 2% difference.
• By the end of the first year, this gap narrows to about 1.7%, indicating that resale stability for Google’s devices improves over time.
• OnePlus shows the smallest difference, with its Open model losing 55.2% in six months, while the OnePlus 11 drops 51.0% — just 4.2% worse.
• After 18 months, the value retention of the OnePlus Open and OnePlus 11 is nearly the same, making the Open the best-performing foldable in this analysis.
• Samsung’s Z Fold and Flip series consistently rank as the weakest in terms of value retention, with depreciation rates surpassing the market average across all timeframes.

Data Overview

Foldables vs Standard Flagships – Overall Comparison

• Across all brands, foldable phones depreciate significantly faster than standard flagships.
• At the six-month mark, foldables had lost an average of 62.3% of their value, compared with 49.8% for non-foldables — a difference of roughly 12.5%. 
• By 18 months, foldables had dropped 71.1% compared with 60.7% for standard models, maintaining a consistent 10.4% gap.

This steady difference shows that foldables continue to underperform across their lifespan, suggesting consumers still view them as riskier long-term purchases.

Samsung – Foldables vs Galaxy S

• Samsung’s Z Fold and Z Flip models show the sharpest early depreciation of any brand analyzed.
•  After six months, Samsung foldables had lost 63.7% of their value, while the Galaxy S series had lost just 48.3% — a 15.4% difference in value retention.
• After a year, foldables were still down 65.8% against 54.4% for the Galaxy S, showing the same pattern and a 11.4% value retention gap.

The data highlights how Samsung’s dominance in the foldable category doesn’t yet translate to stronger resale confidence.

Google – Pixel Fold vs Pixel Pro

• Google’s Pixel Fold loses value more gradually than Samsung’s foldables but still underperforms the Pixel Pro.
•  At six months, depreciation for the Pixel Fold reached 58.1%, compared with 56.1% for the Pixel Pro — a difference of around 2%.
• After 12 months, the gap narrowed slightly to 1.7%, suggesting that Google’s foldables might be closer to bridging the resale gap as the line matures.

OnePlus – Open vs OnePlus 11

• The OnePlus Open starts off slightly behind the OnePlus 11 but closes the gap over time.
• After six months, depreciation was 55.2% for the Open and 51.0% for the OnePlus 11 — a 4.2% difference.
•  By 18 months, both phones had depreciated almost identically, showing that smaller, competitively priced brands may be finding ways to stabilize value faster.

Summary

There are quite a few reasons why foldable phones might depreciate more quickly than standards. The foldable trend is fairly new to the market and as such resellers and buyers still view them as intriguing yet untested, whereas users are more familiar with a standard phone. Repairing or replacing foldable screens is significantly pricier than dealing with standard displays / screens, making second-hand models less attractive for trade-ins or resale.

Currently, traditional smartphones are the more reliable choice for both consumers and resellers. They are simpler to refurbish, have more predictable resale values, and enjoy a well-established demand. While foldables may represent the future of technology, they are still in the early-adopter stage regarding value retention.

It will be interesting to see how the latest foldable models perform, especially with Apple’s entry into the market and Samsung’s innovative tri-fold design  Will these advancements help them compete more closely with conventional flagship devices on the depreciation front?

Methodology

SellCell analyzed trade-in value data for leading foldable and non-foldable flagship smartphones from Samsung, Google, and OnePlus. Depreciation was tracked over 1, 3, 6, 12, and 18-month periods, based on the top resale prices across 40+ verified US buyback companies.

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 Foldables Fall Flat on Value Retention, New SellCell Data Shows appeared first on SellCell.com Blog.

Introduction

Apple’s September keynote, officially branded Apple Event: Awe Dropping, takes place on September 9 and will see the company unveil the iPhone 17 lineup. Ahead of the event, SellCell surveyed more than 2,000 U.S. iPhone owners to measure upgrade intent. The headline figure is clear: 68.3 percent say they plan to upgrade.

That number is up from 61.9 percent for iPhone 16 in 2024 (SellCell iPhone 16 pre-launch survey), showing a meaningful rise in buyer intent year-on-year.

This year’s survey digs into what is driving upgrades, what barriers remain including the propensity to switch to a competitor and how external factors such as tariffs and foldables could shape Apple’s most important launch of the year.

Detailed Highlights

• Nearly seven in ten iPhone owners (68.3 percent) say they will upgrade to iPhone 17, up from 61.9 percent for iPhone 16.
• The Pro/Pro Max remain the most popular choice, accounting for 38.1 percent of intended upgrades, while the new ultra-thin Air appeals to 13.5 percent.
• Satisfaction levels are high: 72.9 percent of users say they are more satisfied with their iPhone than in previous years. BUT at the same time, 27.1 percent feel Apple has “lost its edge” compared to rivals. This is over a quarter of existing iPhone users and remains a big threat to Apple.
• Price remains the biggest barrier on upgrades (68.9 percent), followed closely by users being satisfied with current devices (71.7 percent).
• Foldables are a rising factor: 3.3 percent are holding out for a foldable iPhone, while 20.1 percent say they would consider Samsung and 10.2 percent Google if Apple waits until 2026 to launch a foldable phone..
• Battery life is the top driver for upgrades (53.2 percent), way ahead of AI features at only 7.1 percent as an upgrade reason.
• eSIM adoption is now mainstream, with 72.5 percent saying they like it — though more than a quarter still prefer a physical SIM.
• Tariffs could become a major curve ball: 36.8 percent would hold off on buying if prices rise, and 29.2 percent say it would depend on the increase.

Q1. Upgrade intent

68.3 percent of iPhone owners say they will upgrade to iPhone 17 at launch. Within that, 38.1 percent will choose a Pro or Pro Max, 16.7 percent the standard model, and 13.5 percent the ultra-thin Air. Around 28.5 percent won’t upgrade immediately, and 3.3 percent are waiting for a foldable iPhone.

• Nearly seven in ten plan to upgrade, up on iPhone 16.
• Pro/Pro Max dominate demand, while the new Air accounts for a notable 13.5 percent.
• A small but visible segment is holding out for foldables and remember some of the ones that are currently not upgrading may opt for these too.

Q2. Thinness versus battery

The thinner the better seems to be the route forward here with apple fanboys. If going down the thinner phone route 47.5 percent would accept less battery life for a thinner device, 22.8 percent prefer Samsung’s Galaxy S25 Edge approach, and 29.7 percent aren’t interested in ultra-thin designs.

• If having to choose a thinner phone option, almost half would prefer to have a thinner phone, even at the cost of battery.
• Samsung’s design direction resonates with one in five.
• A third reject thinness as a priority, underlining the importance of battery.

Q3. eSIM versus physical SIM

72.5 percent say they like eSIM, while 27.5 percent still prefer a physical SIM.

• eSIM now has majority support among iPhone users.
• More than a quarter still want a SIM tray, echoing debates since iPhone 14.

Q4. Why do people upgrade?

Improved battery life seems to be the biggest major driver for upgraders, Battery life leads at 53.2 percent, followed by new design/features (36.2 percent), display improvements (34.3 percent), cameras (28.1 percent), and AI/software (7.1 percent).

• Simple improved Battery life is the strongest single driver.
• A third wants new design and display improvements.
• Although it has a huge share of media buzz, AI sits far behind hardware features as a motivator.

Q5. Why don’t people upgrade?

As remains consistent throughout the survey, price could be a big stumbling block for iPhone users if over stretched. Price is the top barrier at 68.9 percent. Satisfaction with current devices is also high at 71.7 percent. Others are waiting for foldables (7.5 percent), worried about eSIM (6.6 percent), or considering Android (5.3 percent).

• High satisfaction stretches upgrade cycles.
• Price is the consistent brake on intent.
• Foldables and eSIM concerns play smaller but persistent roles.
• People do not care that the iPhone Plus model is being dropped is a notable point here too!

Q6. Android appeal

Almost half of iPhone users (49 percent) say nothing about Android appeals to them — yet the majority worryingly admit Android is becoming more attractive, citing AI (13 percent), pricing (11 percent), cameras (11 percent), and foldables (9 percent).

• Apple’s ecosystem keeps nearly half locked in.
• BUT Android’s edge shows up in AI, price, and foldables.
• Cameras remain another comparative strength offered by other brands.

Q7. The role of AI (and who leads)

When asked just about AI, rather than its comparative, relative importance overall. 44 percent say Apple AI is very important, while 33 percent say it doesn’t matter. On leadership: Apple (44 percent), Samsung (6.6 percent), Google (6.6 percent), and 10 percent say no brand leads.

• AI matters to almost half of users but is not universal.
• iPhone owners perceive Apple as the AI leader.
• Rivals’ AI marketing hasn’t yet shifted perceptions.

Q8. Tariffs and pricing pressure

If tariffs push prices up, 34 percent would still buy, 37 percent would hold off, and 29 percent say it depends. Reuters has reported tariffs could add as much as 43 percent to iPhone prices if exemptions change.

• Two in three buyers could hesitate if prices rise.
• A third are price-insensitive, but most will pause if costs jump.
• Financing and trade-ins may be critical in managing upgrade intent.

Q9. Foldables versus Apple loyalty

69.6 percent will stay with Apple, but 20.1 percent would consider Samsung foldables and 10.2 percent Google if Apple delays its own until 2026. Apple propensity to innovate seems like something that could affect loyalty. TechRadar has suggested Apple’s foldable might not arrive until 2026 or 2027.

• Loyalty is strong but not absolute.
• Samsung is best placed to win defectors, with its Foldable range.
• Apple’s timeline gives rivals a window.

Q10. Satisfaction levels

73 percent say they’re more satisfied with iPhones today than in past years; a BIG 27 percent say less satisfied. So in essence over a quarter of existing iPhone owners are not as satisfied with iPhones than they were a few years ago. Reading between the lines this could be innovation sickness.

• High satisfaction underpins loyalty and intent.
• It also explains why cost is the key barrier, not dissatisfaction.

Summary

SellCell’s iPhone 17 pre-launch survey suggests Apple goes into Awe Dropping with momentum. Nearly seven in ten plan to upgrade, Pro and Pro Max lead, and the Air has sparked interest. Battery life is the top driver; price is the main brake.

Tariffs and foldables are the two external factors to watch. With 20 percent of iPhone owners saying they’d consider Samsung if Apple delays foldables until 2026, and with tariffs threatening to push prices higher, Apple faces a tricky balance. Still, strong loyalty and demand for Pro models suggest another headline September launch is likely.

Methodology

SellCell surveyed more than 2,000 U.S. adults who currently own an iPhone using a leading international survey platform in August 2025. There are no identifiable, personal details stored as part of this survey

Time To Trade-In?

With the clock ticking down to the awe-dropping event, there’s never been a better time to get the best value for your old iPhone if you’re thinking about upgrading to the iPhone 17. With only a few days left, now is the time to sell your iPhone and lock in the best price—guaranteed for up to 30 days ahead of the iPhone launch and release.

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 Pre-Launch Survey: Nearly 7 in 10 iPhone Owners Plan to Upgrade appeared first on SellCell.com Blog.

Recent data from SellCell highlights an important shift in smartphone resale dynamics. Although Apple’s iPhone remains the leader, Samsung’s AI-enhanced Galaxy S series is consistently closing the gap year over year. If these trends continue, the resale value gap could narrow significantly by 2026, though upcoming flagship launches may influence the pace of change.

For consumers choosing their next smartphone, these shifting resale values could influence buying decisions in surprising ways. Imagine opting for a Samsung device that not only offers top-tier AI features but might also hold its value nearly as well as an iPhone within a couple of years.

Introduction

SellCell has long reported that the Apple iPhone leads the pack in producing phones that depreciate more slowly than competitors, making it the undisputed champion of resale value retention. But with the introduction and rollout of Apple Intelligence and Samsung’s Galaxy AI, are our data experts still seeing the same story in the independent resale marketplace?

This article dives into whether AI-enabled smartphones are helping brands hold their value or speeding up depreciation. By analysing resale trends across five generations of flagship devices from Apple, Samsung, and Google within the independent buyback market, SellCell reveals which brands are gaining ground, which are losing it, and how artificial intelligence is reshaping the second-hand market.

Building on data from our recent AI smartphone survey, we also explore whether new AI features are challenging the well established fact that Apple has always been the slowest phone depreciator. Interestingly, could Samsung eventually overtake Apple’s long-standing dominance as the King of Smartphone Value Retention? It’s a question worth considering. What does this mean for the broader smartphone market—and for you as a buyer? Let’s dive into the numbers.

Our depreciation data looks into three main questions:

1. How are depreciation trends changing across flagship generations?
2. Is AI having a real impact on resale value?
3. Which brands lead resale value now, and will Apple continue to dominate as King of Value Retention?

Looking at resale data from the iPhone 16, Galaxy S25, Pixel 9 and previous models helps us answer these.

Detailed Highlights

• iPhone depreciation worsened by 10.7 percentage points at 5 months post-launch, rising from 24.7% (iPhone 13) to 35.4% (iPhone 16).
• Samsung’s Galaxy S series improved by 5.3 percentage points in month 5, dropping from 51.9% (S22) to 46.6% (S25), continuing a steady upward trend.
• At 9 months, iPhone depreciation climbed from 25.2% (iPhone 12) to 34.7% (iPhone 16), showing that Apple’s AI hasn’t reversed the trend – yet!
• Galaxy S25’s 5-month depreciation of 46.6% is a slight 0.7-percentage point improvement over the S24 and 3.4 points better than the S23 at the same stage.
• While Apple still leads in resale value, the gap is narrowing, there’s now an 11.2-point difference at 5 months between Galaxy S25 and iPhone 16.
• Pixel 9 showed a 2.6-point year-on-year improvement at 10 months over Pixel 8, suggesting growing trust in Google’s AI-first flagship.
• Samsung’s Foldables surprised by depreciating 2.4 points less than the previous generation at 9 months, beating expectations.
• If depreciation trends continue to track in the same way, there is a strong possibility that Samsung’s Galaxy S series could possibly overtake Apple’s resale value by mid 2026 — a big shift in second-hand market leadership.

Comparing Depreciation Rates of the Latest AI Driven Devices vs. Predecessors – First 12 Months

The table looks at ‘range on range’ depreciation over the past 5 years, highlighting changes year on year between each launch over the months ahead.

Projected Depreciation for Apple & Samsung

Depreciation Data – Month 5 Post Launch

The graph below shows the projected resale depreciation of Apple iPhones and Samsung Galaxy S phones five months after launch, based on data from 2021 to 2025.

While iPhone depreciation has steadily increased between ranges, Samsung’s Galaxy S series has been improving. The two lines cross around mid 2026, which means Samsung is expected to start holding its resale value better than Apple from then on

Note that this is at the 5th month of depreciation and to get a longer term view we will also look at a 9 month forecast.

• iPhone depreciation rose 10.7 percentage points from 24.7% in 2021 to 35.4% in 2024.
• Samsung’s Galaxy S depreciation improved by 5.3 percentage points, falling from 51.9% in 2022 to 46.6% in 2025.
• We averaged the annual change for each brand — Apple’s depreciation increases by about 3.57 percentage points per year, while Samsung’s decreases by about 1.77 points per year
• Extrapolating these trends forward, the crossover for Samsung Phones to meet iPhone’s average retained value is projected for mid 2026.

5-Month Depreciation Analysis:

We used iPhone resale data from 2021 to 2024, showing depreciation rising from 24.7% to 35.4%. For Samsung, we used data from 2022 to 2025, with depreciation improving from 51.9% to 46.6%. The average annual change (run rate) was calculated by subtracting the earliest depreciation from the latest, then dividing by the years between, resulting in +3.57 percentage points per year for iPhone and –1.77 for Samsung. These run rates were used to project future depreciation trends.

• The iPhone resale value is slipping faster, expected to lose 46.1% of its value by 2027 if current trends continue.
• Samsung’s resale value is steadily improving, forecasted to drop to 43.1% depreciation by 2027.
• The mid 2026 crossover marks a major shift in the resale smartphone market, driven by Samsung’s gains.

Depreciation Data – Month 9 Post Launch

To apply a little more longevity to a depreciation projection we have also looked at 9 months worth of data post the launch of a range. Because Samsung’s Galaxy S25 only launched in February 2025, we don’t have actual 9-month depreciation data yet. So, we modeled the S25 based on Samsung’s recent performance and AI upgrades. For context here’s what we based our projection on:

• Galaxy S22 lost 58.2% of its value in 9 months.
• Galaxy S23 improved to 53.4%.
• Galaxy S24 further improved to 50.7%.
• Galaxy S25 predicted to depreciate by 47.7% at 9 months

The 2025 9-month depreciation figure for the Samsung Galaxy S25, estimated at 47.7%, was calculated by analyzing the year-on-year improvement between the 2023 Galaxy S23 (53.4%) and the 2024 Galaxy S24 (50.7%), which showed a decline of 2.7 percentage points. To be conservative and account for potential variability, this decline was rounded to 3 percentage points and subtracted from the 2024 figure to project the S25’s depreciation. This modeled value provides a realistic estimate of continued improvement in Samsung’s resale value retention.

This projection is based on trends, not actual data, but fits the pattern of steady improvement.

9-Month Depreciation Analysis:

We used iPhone data from 2020 to 2024, with depreciation increasing from 25.2% to 34.7%. Samsung data spanned 2021 to 2025 (modeled for 2025), with depreciation improving from 51.0% to 47.7%. Using the same method, run rates were +2.38 percentage points per year for iPhone and –0.83 for Samsung. These informed the linear projections estimating when Samsung’s resale value will match Apple’s in 2028.

Realistic Prediction on Crossover Timing

SellCell’s data reveals a consistent increase in iPhone depreciation over recent years, while Samsung’s Galaxy S series displays steady improvements in resale value retention. Although Apple maintains a lead, the gap is shrinking. Projections indicate that, if these trends hold, Samsung’s Galaxy S series could close the difference substantially by 2026, though the exact crossover point will depend on market fluctuations.

While the 5-month data suggests the crossover could happen as early as mid-2026, the 9-month modeled data indicates it might occur closer to early 2028. Given limitations in the data and potential market changes, the actual crossover is likely to fall somewhere between these dates—assuming current trends continue without disruption. However, if Apple introduces impactful changes with the iPhone 17, it could slow or even reverse the current depreciation trend. All projections depend on steady market conditions; unexpected shifts in technology, consumer preferences, or product strategies could alter these outcomes.

Apple Still Leads, but Android Is Closing Fast

Even though the iPhone 16 has depreciated 35.4% after 5 months, Apple still holds the resale value crown — for now. At the same point in their lifecycle, the Galaxy S25 is down 46.6% after 5 months, showing that while Apple leads in absolute terms, the margin is shrinking. We explored this pattern of change in Is the iPhone Still King of Value Retention and also showed early signs that Samsung then were catching up if we looked at depreciation range by range.

Apple Intelligence, while impressive, hasn’t yet boosted iPhone resale values—likely due to its phased rollout and early consumer caution around the iPhone 16. Meanwhile, Samsung’s Galaxy Intelligence packs real, everyday AI tools like Live Translate and Generative Edit, backed by longer update promises.

This practical approach seems to be winning consumer trust and helping Samsung devices hold value better in the resale market.

Conclusion

Apple’s iPhone continues to dominate resale value retention, but depreciation has increased with recent models. Samsung’s Galaxy S series and Google’s Pixel phones show encouraging improvements, reflecting growing consumer trust in Android’s AI integration. While Samsung is not projected to overtake Apple imminently, the resale value gap is closing, with mid-2026 marking a possible milestone if current trends persist. Future Apple device launches and market developments could influence these patterns.

Let’s hope the iPhone 17’s rumored hardware and storage improvements can help halt the resale gap. After nearly a decade of the SellCell team tracking depreciation and highlighting Apple’s reign as the clear champion of value retention, it would be both surprising and a little bittersweet to see that dominance challenged, but also exhilarating to witness a new contender enter the ring and battle it out. As someone who’s tracked smartphone trends for years, I find it fascinating—and a bit thrilling—to watch this rivalry heat up. The resale battle between Apple and Samsung is shaping up to be one of the most compelling stories in tech today.

Apple’s upcoming iPhone 17 and future AI advancements could yet change the picture. SellCell will keep tracking these developments closely as new data arrives.

Methodology

SellCell aggregates resale pricing data from over 40 major U.S. buyback platforms. Our analysis focuses exclusively on mint-condition devices, tracking their resale values over time compared to original MSRP. All prices reflect independent market offers paid in cash, without involvement in manufacturer or carrier trade-in programs, upgrade requirements, or bundled promotions. Unlike trade-in systems that often require users to remain within a specific brand or carrier ecosystem, SellCell’s data reflects true open-market resale values. This approach provides an unbiased, transparent view of how smartphones hold their value in the independent second-hand market.

All data is current as of July 2025. No personal information is collected during this analysis. SellCell is not affiliated with Apple, Samsung, or Google.

How We Calculated the Projection

We analyzed resale depreciation percentages for iPhones and Samsung Galaxy S phones at 5 and 9 months post-launch over several years. To measure how depreciation is changing, we calculated the average annual change (“run rate”) by comparing depreciation percentages between the earliest and latest available years for each brand. For the 5-month data, Samsung’s range extends through 2025 to include the latest Galaxy S25, providing the freshest insights, while iPhone data covers through 2024. For the 9-month data, Samsung’s 2025 value is modeled due to the recent launch of the Galaxy S25, resulting in a slightly shorter actual data range compared to iPhone’s. These run rates were used to create linear models projecting future depreciation trends. The crossover year is estimated by finding where these projections intersect, indicating when Samsung phones might hold their resale value as well as Apple’s.

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 Samsung’s AI Phones on Track to Close Resale Value Gap with iPhone by 2026 appeared first on SellCell.com Blog.

Report – Key Takeaways

• Galaxy Z Fold and Flip models can lose up to 15% of their value within 8 weeks of a new model launch

• The Flip 5 (256GB) lost 14.4% ($59) after the Flip 6 launched

• SellCell forecasts show the Flip 6 (256GB) could lose $70 after the Fold 7 and Flip 7 are unveiled in just 8 weeks

• Trade-in values remain consistent before launch — but plunge rapidly afterwards in weeks

• Waiting just 2 months after launch could cost you $60–$70 or more

WHAT GALAXY OWNERS NEED TO KNOW
	Galaxy Fold & Flip models have historically dropped up to 15% in value 8 weeks post-launch
	The Flip 5 (256GB) lost $59, and the Fold 4 (1TB) dropped $68
	The closer we get to July 9th the faster you should sell your device to get maximum value
	Trade in now to secure the highest possible payout before the new models arrive

Samsung’s next Galaxy Unpacked event will be held on July 9, 2025, where the tech giant is expected to unveil its latest foldables — the Galaxy Z Fold 7 and Galaxy Z Flip 7.

Whilst this is great news for fans who are looking for new features, owners of older Fold and Flip models could be weeks away from losing out. Phone values are predicted to plummet post launch.

SellCell, a leading phone trade-in company has analysed historical depreciation trends from past Galaxy Fold and Flip launches to understand how much Fold and Flip owners could lose out if they hold onto their devices for too long.

Resale Values for Fold & Flips Send a Clear Message – Sell now or risk losing up to 15% in just 8 weeks

Based on SellCell’s trade-in data, Galaxy Fold and Flip devices lose a significant portion of their value in the weeks following the launch of a new model. Here’s what’s happened in previous years:

• The Fold 4 1TB lost over $68 in 8 weeks of value post the newer Fold 5 launch and depreciated by nearly 11% in 2 months.
• Even the newest Fold 5 256 GB saw a 4.6% dip and $31.95 value drop  within two months of launching the Fold 6 series.
• The Flip 5 256 GB was the biggest loser overall over an 8 week period percentage wise, shedding 14.4% of its value ($59)  in just two months  after the launch of the newer model.
• The Fold 4 256GB lost 11.4% and a huge $68 wiped off the resale price.
• On average at around the-8 week mark post the launch date of a newer Z Flip & Fold model older ranges are losing up to 8-10% in value.
• In just 8 weeks between the launch of a new range, existing owners of Flip & Fold phones experience a drop in value of up to 15% off the resale value of their existing phone.

Depreciation Doesn’t Start Before Launch – It Accelerates After

SellCell’s data shows that Galaxy Z Fold and Flip models tend to hold their value right up until the launch of a new generation, which is unusual in the world of phones. Typically devices tend to see a rapid decline in the weeks before launch as resellers price down old devices  in anticipation of new stock, but foldables seem to hold value and then rapidly drop on announcement day and in the weeks ahead.  In fact the data shows that on average the Galaxy Z Fold 5 and Z Flip 5 slightly gained value (0.5%) in the 2 months before launch of the Galaxy Z Fold 6 and Z Flip 6.  This is largely driven by the figures for the Z Flip 5 256GB and to a lesser extent the Z Flip 5 512GB.  If you discount those two devices, then average depreciation in the 2 months leading up to launch is just 2.3%.

But once the new models are announced in the Galaxy Unpacked Event,  the picture changes dramatically. In the 2 months following launch, depreciation accelerates quickly.  The Flip 5 (256GB), for example, lost 14.4% of its value – around $59 – within just 8 weeks. The Fold 4 (256GB) dropped by $68 in the same timeframe, a loss of 11.4%. On average, devices across the board shed between 8% and 10% of their value post-launch, typically translating to $40-$70 in lost trade-in value.

This pattern clearly demonstrates that delaying a trade-in, in  the days or weeks after launch can lead to steep value losses.

Forecast: What Could Happen to Fold 6 & Flip 6 Values After the July 9 Launch

SellCell’s forecast for the Galaxy Z Fold 6 and Z Flip 6 are based on last year’s launch.  Our projections suggest that owners of the Z Fold 6 and Z Flip 6 could see significant value losses within just 1–2 months of the Z Fold 7 and Z Flip 7 launch:

• Average projected loss in 2 months: $44.03 (7.2%) , but users could face the possibility that the 6’s could lose as much as 15% of the phone’s value in just 8 weeks post launch.
• The Flip 6 256GB is predicted to be the biggest loser, dropping 14.4% ($70.13) by early September
• The Fold 6 1TB could lose nearly $35.78 (4.2%) in just 2 months
• Even the newest Fold and Flip models aren’t immune — value erosion begins almost immediately after new models are announced

What Does This Mean for Fold & Flip Owners on July 9?

When the Galaxy Z Fold 7 and Flip 7 are announced on July 9, older models  including the Fold 6 and Flip 6 are likely to begin losing value immediately. If a Flip or Fold owner is looking to upgrade to a new model they should start the process of trading in a phone as soon as possible to get the maximum value for their old phone to put towards the upgrade. If we map the past launches, owners may lose up to 15% of the value of their device if they wait too long to sell their old device to put towards an upgrade.. That’s the equivalent of losing $60–$70 or more, just by holding onto an existing phone for a few weeks.

Conclusion: Don’t Wait and Watch Your Value Disappear

If you’re holding onto a Galaxy Z Fold or Flip and thinking about upgrading, the time to act is now. Historical trends, real data, and future forecasts all point to one thing — waiting even a few weeks after launch could hit you in the pocket when you come to upgrade.

Don’t get caught out. Lock in your trade-in while prices are high — and make the most of your upgrade.

Methodology

SellCell analysed trade-in prices for Samsung Galaxy Z Fold and Flip models using real-time pricing data from over 40 trusted buyback vendors featured on its platform. Devices assessed were in ‘mint’ condition, and pricing snapshots were taken at intervals of 1 month before launch, launch day, 1 month after, and 2 months after. The study focuses specifically on how resale values decline in the critical 8 week window following a new model launch, highlighting short-term depreciation trends that impact trade-in value.

SellCell Advice: Lock In Top Trade-In Prices Now Before The Price Crash

SellCell compares prices from over 40 trusted buyback vendors, ensuring you get the best value when trading in your device. Trade-in now to secure the highest possible payout before the new models arrive Find your device’s top trade-in offer now at SellCell.com

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 Sell Now or Lose Up to 15%: Galaxy Z Fold & Flip Values Could Plummet After July 9 Launch appeared first on SellCell.com Blog.

• 72.9% of Apple users are unimpressed with the iPhone 16e

• 91.6% say the iPhone 16e is too expensive

• Only 7.3% of iPhone 15 or older users plan to upgrade to the iPhone 16e

In a surprise move late last month, Apple ditched its budget lineup iPhone SE and replaced it with a brand new iPhone 16e model as an affordable entry to the flagship iPhone 16 series. While it sits at the bottom of the lineup, the 16e packs Apple’s first-ever in-house 5G modem C1 and shares many of the same features as the standard iPhone 16 model, including a 6.1-inch OLED display, A18 chipset, 48MP rear camera, and Apple Intelligence. But unlike its pricier counterparts, it lacks several key features, including multiple rear cameras, MagSafe compatibility, a modern design with Dynamic Island display, a dedicated Camera Control button, and a relatively brighter display (1200 nits on 16e vs 2000 nits maximum brightness on iPhone 16).

With the iPhone 16e now released in stores across the US for a starting price of $599, we collected responses from more than 3500 iPhone users on what they think of the new budget iPhone, whether they would consider buying it over a higher-end iPhone 16, reasons why they would or would not buy one, and more. Furthermore, the survey also quizzed existing iPhone 16 users on whether they feel differently about their purchase now that a newer, cheaper iPhone is on the market.

Highlights from the survey

• iPhone users are largely unimpressed with the recently launched iPhone 16e model, with 72.9% indicating ‘slightly’ or ‘not at all’ impressed, 14.7% ‘somewhat’ impressed, and 12.4% ‘extremely’ or ‘very’ impressed.
• Most Apple users (91.6%) are unhappy with the pricing of 16e, with 72.7% suggesting it should be around $500 and 18.9% saying it should stay around $429 like the SE. Meanwhile, 8.4% think the price is fair given the improvements.
• Almost a quarter (23.8%) would like Apple to release a new budget ‘e’ version of every iPhone going forward, as opposed to 76.2% not interested in future iPhone ‘e’ iterations.
• Around two-thirds iPhone users (63.3%) believe the addition of a cheaper model to the flagship lineup will devalue the brand, as opposed to 36.7% who do not.
• Battery life (49.4%), Camera quality (45.2%), Brand loyalty (28.4%), Features (23.3%), and Performance (18.4%) are among the top factors influencing smartphone upgrade decisions for iPhone users.
• Only 7.3% of Apple users with an iPhone 15 or older model plan on switching to iPhone 16e as they upgrade, while the vast majority (92.7%) are opposed to buying the new budget iPhone.
• When those switching to iPhone 16e were asked to select up to 3 reasons for considering iPhone 16e, the top reasons were ‘Fits my budget’ (72.3%), ‘Longer battery life’ (67.4%), ‘Apple’s latest A18 processor’ (36.2%), and ‘Longer software support being a newer model’ (23.2%).
• In contrast, ‘Lack of multiple rear camera sensors such as wide angle or telephoto lens’ (52.6%), ‘I prefer a higher-end model as I want the best of what Apple has to offer regardless of the price’ (34%), ‘Relatively cheaper but not cheap enough to make it worthwhile over higher-end iPhone 16 models’ (25.3%), ‘Missing MagSafe compatibility for faster wireless charging speeds and magnetic accessories’ (16.1%), and ‘No significant upgrades compared to my current phone’ (14.3%) were among the top reasons for NOT considering the iPhone 16e.
• The data reveals most Apple users are unwilling to settle for a bargain and would rather spend more on a premium model with better hardware and features. Besides the 38% of older iPhone users not upgrading this year, ‘iPhone 16 Pro / Pro Max’ is the top choice at 23.7% among those looking to upgrade, followed by ‘iPhone 16 / 16 Plus’ (19.8%), ‘Switching to Android’ (10.4%), and ‘Older / Refurbished iPhone’ (8.1%).
• Most respondents with a premium iPhone 16 model are happy with their purchase despite the launch of a newer, relatively cheaper iPhone. In fact, 85.5% of existing iPhone 16 users consider their purchase ‘definitely worth it’, adding that the extra features (dynamic island, MagSafe charging, multiple rear cameras, brighter screen) justify the additional cost. Additionally, 94.3% are confident they made the right choice with a higher-end iPhone purchase, as opposed to a mere 5.7% who regret it.

iPhone users largely unimpressed with the new iPhone 16e model

We started by asking the iPhone users to rate on a scale of 1 to 5 on how impressed they are with the iPhone 16e model, and the results were:

• A mere 12.4% of iPhone users said they were ‘extremely’ or ‘very’ impressed with the new budget iPhone
• 14.7% of iPhone users consider themselves ‘somewhat’ impressed, while a majority (72.9%) indicated they were ‘slightly’ or ‘not at all’ impressed with the iPhone 16e

Apple’s previous budget iPhone, the 2022 iPhone SE (3rd gen), launched at a starting price of $429, but the new iPhone 16e’s base variant costs $170 more at $599. When asked if they think this price bump is fair, the Apple users responded:

• More than nine in ten iPhone users (91.6%) responded negatively, with 72.7% suggesting the price should be closer to $500 and 18.9% saying it should stay around $429 like the iPhone SE
• The remaining 8.4% answered affirmatively, agreeing the price is fair given the improvements

With rumors swirling around a potential iPhone 17e next year, we asked the survey takers whether they think Apple should release a budget ‘e’ version of every iPhone going forward (e.g., iPhone 17e, 18e), and the responses were:

• An overwhelming majority of users (76.2%) indicated no interest in seeing iterations of the iPhone ‘e’ model in the future
• Meanwhile, less than a quarter (23.8%) would like a new, inexpensive iPhone ‘e’ release every year, along with standard and Pro models

Next, we questioned the respondents if they think Apple adding a cheaper model to its flagship iPhone lineup will devalue the brand in any way, and they responded:

• Almost two-thirds (63.3%) shared this concern and would rather have the cheaper models stay in a separate lineup like the SE
• On the other hand, 36.7% do not believe adding affordable choices to the flagship lineup would negatively impact the brand image

Only 7.3% of older iPhone users would consider switching to iPhone 16e; ‘Lack of multiple rear cameras’ is the top reason for not buying 16e

We further asked the iPhone users participating in the survey to pick the factors that influence their smartphone upgrade decision, and the responses – in order of the votes received – were:

Note: The respondents were allowed to select up to 3 options.

• Battery life – 49.4%
• Camera quality – 45.2%
• Brand Loyalty – 28.4%
• Features (Dynamic Island, Apple Intelligence, etc.) – 23.3%
• Performance / Speed – 18.4%
• Pricing – 15.1%
• Design and size – 11.3%
• Other – 3.2%
• Display / Screen technology – 2.2%

Note: The next set of questions in the survey was asked based on participants’ responses to which iPhone model they were currently using.

Respondents with an iPhone 15 or older models were asked if they would choose the new iPhone 16e as their next phone when considering an upgrade.

• Only a meager 7.3% of iPhone owners with an older model intend to buy a new iPhone 16e
• However, most pre-2024 iPhone users (92.7%) indicated no interest in purchasing the new budget iPhone

Pre-2024 iPhone users who said ‘yes’ to buying an iPhone 16e were further asked to pick the reasons why they would consider it, and the responses – in order of votes received – were:

Note: Respondents were allowed to select up to 3 options.

• Fits my budget (starts from $599) – 72.3%
• Longer battery life (26 hours of video playback) – 67.4%
• Apple’s latest A18 processor – 36.2%
• Longer software support being a newer model – 23.2%
• 48MP, f/1.6 rear camera with sensor cropping for 2x zoom – 14.7%
• Apple Intelligence features (Visual Intelligence, Image Playground, etc.) – 11.6%
• USB-C port for charging and data transfer – 5.4%
• 6.1-inch OLED display with 60Hz refresh rate – 3.6%
• Other – 2.2%
• Apple’s in-house 5G modem C1 – 1.8%

We then asked the respondents with an older iPhone model who said ‘no’ to iPhone 16e to pick the main reasons why they would NOT consider it, and the reasons – in order of votes received – were:

Note: Respondents were allowed to select up to 3 options.

• Lack of multiple rear camera sensors such as wide angle or telephoto lens – 52.6%
• I prefer a higher-end model as I want the best of what Apple has to offer regardless of the price – 34%
• Relatively cheaper but not cheap enough to make it worthwhile over higher-end iPhone 16 models – 25.3%
• Missing MagSafe compatibility – 16.1%
• No significant upgrades compared to my current phone – 14.3%
• No Dynamic Island secondary display for alerts and background activities – 11.3%
• Features an outdated 2022 iPhone 14 design – 9.4%
• My current iPhone is still performing well – 5.1%
• Screen is not as bright as the other models (1200 nits vs 2000 nits max brightness) – 2.8%
• No dedicated Camera Control button for opening the camera app and its settings – 1.5%
• Other – 1.3%

We further asked the same set of respondents who said ‘no’ to buying a 16e what smartphone they would consider instead, and these were the responses:

• Two in ten older iPhone users (19.8%) would rather buy a standard iPhone 16 or a 16 Plus than a 16e
• Close to a quarter (23.7%) said they would get one of the iPhone 16 Pro models – 16 Pro or 16 Pro Max
• 8.1% prefer buying an older or refurbished iPhone over the new iPhone 16e model
• Interestingly, one in ten (10.4%) noted that they are switching to an Android phone
• Four in ten (38%) said they don’t intend to upgrade their smartphone this year

No buyer’s remorse among premium iPhone 16 users despite budget iPhone release

We then checked in with survey takers who own a higher-end iPhone 16 model (iPhone 16, 16 Plus, 16 Pro, or 16 Pro Max) and asked whether they felt their iPhone 16 was worth the higher price they paid, now that a newer, relatively cheaper $599 iPhone 16e is in the market.

• Definitely worth it – the extra features (dynamic island, MagSafe charging, multiple rear cameras, brighter screen) justify the additional cost – 85.5%
• Somewhat worth it — but I might have considered the 16e if it launched earlier – 7%
• Not really — the 16e seems to offer what I need at a lower price – 4.1%
• I’m unsure — I need to see more reviews or comparisons first – 3.4%

The same set of iPhone 16 users was then asked, “Does the existence of a budget-friendly iPhone 16e make you feel differently about your own iPhone 16 purchase?”, and the responses were:

• Almost all iPhone 16 owners (94.3%) are still confident they made the right choice with a higher-end iPhone 16 purchase
• But a tiny 5.7% think the 16e would have been sufficient for them and regret buying an expensive iPhone

Conclusion

The survey reveals that Apple users are largely unimpressed with the new iPhone 16e, with 30.7% saying they are ‘not at all’ impressed, 42.2% ‘slightly’ impressed, 14.7% ‘somewhat’ impressed, 8% ‘very’ impressed, and only 4.4% ‘extremely’ impressed.

While relatively cheaper than its other iPhone 16 counterparts, a whopping 91.6% of existing iPhone users think the 16e is still overpriced at $599, with 72.7% suggesting it should be closer to $500 and 18.9% saying it should cost around $429 like the SE.

Only a mere 7.3% of Apple users with an iPhone 15 or older model intend to buy a 16e as their next smartphone, revealing ‘budget’ (72.3%), ‘longer battery life’ (67.4%), ‘A18 processor’ (36.2%), and ‘longer software support’ (23.2%) as the top reasons for considering it.

Among the top reasons for not buying a 16e included ‘Lack of multiple rear camera sensors such as wide angle or telephoto lens’ (52.6%), ‘I prefer a higher-end model as I want the best of what Apple has to offer regardless of the price’ (34%), ‘Relatively cheaper but not cheap enough to make it worthwhile over higher-end iPhone 16 models’ (25.3%), ‘Missing MagSafe compatibility for faster wireless charging speeds and magnetic accessories’ (16.1%), and ‘No significant upgrades compared to my current phone’ (14.3%).

Overall, the survey further uncovers a surprising trend — iPhone users are unwilling to settle for a bargain and would rather spend more on a higher-end model with better hardware and features. Barring the 38% not upgrading this year, ‘iPhone 16 Pro / Pro Max’ is the top choice at 23.7% among respondents looking to switch, followed by ‘iPhone 16 / 16 Plus’ (19.8%), ‘Switching to Android’ (10.4%), and ‘Older / Refurbished iPhone’ (8.1%).

Finally, the survey also shows that iPhone 16 owners feel little to no regret over splurging more on a higher-end model despite the existence of a newer, relatively cheaper iPhone, with 85.5% indicating the extra features are worth the additional costs. Further, 94.3% of iPhone 16 users reported they are still confident they made the right choice purchasing an expensive iPhone.

Methodology

The report is based on an online survey – conducted between March 1 to March 15, 2025 – involving more than 3500 Apple iPhone users, aged 18 years or older, based in the United States. Of the 3500+ survey-takers, 55% identified as ‘men’, 44% as ‘women’, and 1% as ‘other’.

The survey sample consisted of 442 iPhone 16 users (12.6%), 955 iPhone 15 users (27.2%), 825 iPhone 14 users (23.5%), 105 iPhone SE 3 2022 (3%), and 1181 users with an iPhone 13 or older model (33.7%). Of the 442 iPhone 16 users who participated in the survey, 180 identified as standard iPhone 16 users (40.7%), 34 iPhone 16 Plus users (7.7%), 76 iPhone 16 Pro users (17.2%), and 152 iPhone 16 Pro Max users (34.4%).

The responses to the survey were collected without storing any personally identifiable information of the involved respondents.

The motive of the survey was to study what iPhone users think of the new budget iPhone 16e, whether they would consider buying it over a higher-end iPhone 16, reasons why they would or would not buy one, and more. Furthermore, the survey also quizzed existing iPhone 16 users on whether they feel differently about their purchase now that a newer, cheaper iPhone is on the market.

Just a tip for those of you who are looking to upgrade to an iPhone 16e, don’t forget to sell your iPhone as soon as possible to avoid it dropping in value.

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 16e Fails to Win Over Apple Users, Pricing and Features Fall Short appeared first on SellCell.com Blog.