RapNet's Zero-Commission Trading and What That Means For Diamond Dealers and Buyers and Their Bottom Line

What We Cover

• Maximizing profit with the right diamond and gemstone trading platform.
• The advantage of RapNet and other zero‑commission networks provide serious diamond and gemstone buyers.
• A practical example of a trader’s profits across commissions-based and subscription-based diamond and gemstone trading platforms.

Why Platform Choice Matters For Profit

For serious diamond traders, platform fees directly change the cost of goods and the margin on every stone. A small percentage taken on each transaction compounds across hundreds of trades a year, while a fixed subscription stays the same regardless of volume. As a business scales, zero‑commission networks tend to preserve more profit per deal, whereas commission‑based models take a larger absolute share with every extra stone sold.

RapNet vs Competitors

RapNet is the largest of the zero‑commission trading networks where verified buyers and sellers transact directly with one another, with no charge of commissions or transaction fees on completed trades. Other zero-commission platforms include IDEX and Polygon. These diamond and gemstone trading networks maintain a profit through a paid subscription model, connecting gemstone dealers and buyers with one another without taking a percentage of the deals they close.

By contrast, competitors such as Nivoda and VDB grow revenue with transaction‑linked and tool‑metered fees. Nivoda charges buyers a per‑transaction fee which is a percentage of the cost of the item, bundling logistics, quality control, and consolidated invoicing into that commission. VDB generally charges marketplace technology, apps, and integrations, which makes the cost of using its tools scale with ongoing activity, even if not framed as a simple buyer commission.

Shelly and Viktor: Buyer’s Net Profits After Fees

Consider two professional gemstone buyers, Shelly and Viktor, operating a similarly scaled business. Both buy 400 stones per year at an average cost of 1,000 USD and aim for a 10% gross margin before platform costs.

• Purchase per stone: 1,000 USD
• Target gross margin per stone: 10% → 100 USD
• Yearly gross profit before platform costs:
• USD

Shelly on a Zero‑Commission Network (RapNet)

Shelly builds around a zero‑commission marketplace like RapNet and pays for access via a membership plan. Assume:

• Annual RapNet membership and tools: 750 USD.
• Net profit after platform cost:
• 40,000 – 750 = 39,250 USD

After paying the annual membership, nearly every stone sold goes straight to profit—Shelly can focus on selling, not fees.

Viktor on a Commission‑Based Competitor

Viktor prefers a commission‑based platform that provides sourcing, logistics, and consolidated billing but charges a percentage on every purchase. Using a typical buyer fee range:

• At 1.5% commission:
• Fee per stone: USD
• Annual commission: USD
• Net profit:
• USD
• At 2% commission:
• Fee per stone: USD
• Annual commission: USD
• Net profit:
• USD

Even at a modest 1,000 USD average stone cost, Shelly's zero‑commission structure leaves her with 4,500–6,500 USD more profit per year than Viktor at the same volume and target margin. As they increase the number of stones or the average price, that difference grows proportionally.

Key Takeaways

• Diamond and gemstone trading platform economics are a core part of the cost of each stone: fixed memberships stay constant as volume grows, while per‑trade commissions rise with every additional stone.
• RapNet and other zero‑commission networks allow traders to keep the full spread between buy and sell prices once membership is paid, which materially improves profitability at scale.
• Commission‑oriented competitors such as Nivoda and technology‑metered platforms like VDB tie costs to transaction volume and value, which can erode thousands of dollars in annual profit even at mid‑range price points.
• For diamond buyers focused on maximizing their bottom line, centering activity on a zero‑commission network and layering subscription‑based tools strategically is often the most efficient long‑term structure.