Outlook: positive, structurally strong

Anthony Gormley’s market challenges the assumption that successful contemporary artist markets depend on trophy-level supply or high-volume activity at the lower end, demonstrating instead that liquidity and value can be sustained through a single dominant medium.

This dynamic is underpinned by a deep and well developed middle tier. Between 2018 and 2025, the middle tiers bands, defined as works with hammer prices between $25k and $1m, accounted for 91.7% of total hammer, while the top 5% of works generated 14.1% of total revenue. Works on paper and editions contribute to transaction volume, but do not materially shape the market’s economic centre. 

Gormley’s market is therefore broad and liquid, but uneven across categories, operating as a sculpture-led system in which activity and value are sustained by a highly functional mid-market. 

Data and market scope 

This report analyses publicly available auction data for works by Antony Gormley sold between 2018 and 2025 across major international auction houses. The dataset includes 2,523 global auction results across all mediums, including paintings, works on paper, sculpture, and prints and editions.

→ Explore Market Intelligence

A range of structural indicators were analysed to evaluate the underlying mechanics of Antony Gormley’s market, including sell-through rates, supply volatility, price distribution, estimate performance, repeat-sale outcomes, and geographic concentration. Although private transactions play a role in the broader ecosystem, auction data remains the most transparent and consistent measure of pricing behaviour, liquidity, and segment-level demand.

Market snapshot 

Sculpture defines Gormley's market, accounting for 97% of total hammer value while comprising roughly half of all lots. Between 2018 and 2025, it achieved a median price of $304.3k and sell-through rate of 95.7%, significantly outperforming works on paper and prints and editions, which posted median prices of $11.7k and $1.3k, respectively. 

Sculpture is the defining medium of Gormley’s practice, forming the basis of his institutional presence and market recognition. As such, it attracts the deepest collector base and the most consistent bidding, reinforcing its dominance in both value and liquidity.

At the market level, the market continues to absorb supply efficiently with an average sell-through of 92% across the period. This performance has moderated slightly, declining from near-perfect levels in 2018 to 2019 to 83.9% in 2024, before recovering to 91.4% in 2025. The dip in 2024 reflects a small number of high–profile buy-ins at Christie’s and Sotheby's, including Big Skew, Steep II, Two Seeds, alongside continued softness in works on paper. 

Source: Artscapy | Visualisation: Darden Gildea

Total hammer sales reached $59.3 million across the period, ranking Gormley among the leading contemporary sculptures globally and underscoring the scale of his market. This scale is supported by sustained institutional recognition, which underpins demand and reinforces the market’s credibility,  

However, supply is variable, as indicated by a 0.38 coefficient of variation. Offered volume fluctuated from 22 lots in 2019 to a peak of 72 in 2022, before moderating to 35 in 2025.

These indicators position Gormley’s market as both highly liquid and comparatively large within the contemporary sculpture category, while remaining structurally dependent on the timing and composition of supply. 

How the market works 

Market structure 

This variability in supply reflects the practical structure of Gormley’s market, where activity is centred in the continuous circulation of sculpture.  

This dynamic reflects the structure of demand: sculpture is the most visible and institutionally validated medium within Gormley’s practice, generating the deepest pool of comparables and the most consistent collector engagement.

At a more fundamental level, this reflects the economics of the medium: sculpture combines institutional visibility, recognisability, and repeatable comparability, creating efficient conditions for price formation and liquidity.

Sculptures appear more frequently than other mediums, averaging 20.4 offered lots per year compared to 11.8 for works on paper and 10.1 for prints and editions, and accounting for nearly half of auction lots. They also reappear on a tighter cadence, with a median gap between auction days of 12 days and activity in 58 of 96 months. By contrast, works on paper are thinner and less continuous, with a median gap of 22 days and activity in 49 months, and prints and editions are episodic, appearing in only 36 months and characterised by bursts of supply. 

Source: Artscapy | Visualisation: Darden Gildea

Even as overall volume fluctuates, the regularity of sculpture supply provides a stabilising effect, allowing turnover to be maintained without reliance on lower-value volume. 

This pattern persists in recent activity. Thus far in 2026, 6 sculptures have been offered, compared to one work on paper and two editions, reinforcing sculpture as the primary channel through which the market operates. Gormley’s market, therefore, functions as a continuously circulating sculpture system, generating liquidity through frequency and consistency of a single dominant medium. 

Price segmentation 

While sculpture dominates by medium, value is concentrated in the middle to upper-middle tiers. From 2018 to 2025, 80.5% of total auction revenue was generated within the $25k to $1m range. 

The $250k to $1m tier accounted for 66.3% of total hammer price on 85 sold lots with a 94.4% sell-through rate. Despite the scale, median price sat at $409.9k, below the midpoint of the tier, reflecting the dispersion within the tier. On an annual basis, this segment contributed between 51.4% and 80.2% of total hammer price while representing only a minority of transactions.

This pattern persists across the broader middle tiers. The $25k to $250k segment accounted for 14.2% of total hammer with a 92.6% sell-through rate. Similar to the $250k to $1m tier, median price sits in the lower half of the tier, at $109k. The tier is split with 38 offered lots between $25k and $100k and 43 offered between $100k and $200k, but the latter has a higher sell-through rate of 97.7% compared to 86.8%, indicating thinning liquidity at lower tiers. Recent activity reinforces the importance of this tier: In 2026 year-to-date, all five recorded sales have fallen within the $250k to $1m range. 

Source: Artscapy | Visualisation: Darden Gildea

At the top end, the market remains narrow and episodic. Only 7 works exceeded $1m between 2018 and 2025, but when these outliers appear they materially influence annual results, totalling 17.9% of total hammer prices from 2018 to 2025. 

Below $25k mark, works have an outsized effect on volume, but minimally to value. Works below that $5k accounted for 0.23% of total hammer price, while the $5k to $25k range contributed to 1.36%, for a combined 149 lots, 89% of which are prints and editions or works on paper. 

Gormley’s market is driven by a highly efficient middle and upper-middle tier, where value and volume are consistently generated without reliance on trophy-level sales or high-volume, low-value turnover. 

Distribution: two-speed market

Price operates across multiple tiers, but functionally resolved into a two-speed market, with a clear distinction between lower-value materials and higher-value sculptural works. Results are widely dispersed across the market, with limited clustering around a central price range. Lower-value segments exhibit greater variability, while the core sculpture tiers show tighter price formation. Further, aggregate price indicators mask the underlying market framework, where a relatively small number of higher-value works coexist alongside a larger base of lower-priced transactions. 

This dispersion is particularly evident in 2022. The 10th percentile hammer price was $686, while the median reached $2.6k and the 90th percentile rose to $426.1k, highlighting the breadth of outcomes within a single year. An influx of lower-value material compressed the median, even as the higher-end works continued to transact at substantially elevated price levels. 

Source: Artscapy | Visualisation: Darden Gildea

The delta between mean and median price further highlights this effect. In 2022, the mean reached $139.5k against a median of $2.6k, producing a 49.8x ratio, capturing the influx of lower priced work, primarily in the London auction houses, in response to the aggressive bidding behaviour and post pandemic momentum. By 2024, the gap had narrowed significantly, with a mean-to-median ratio of 1.24x, as sculpture regained its share of the supply composition. 

This dispersion has important implications for pricing. In lower tiers, wider outcomes and fewer comparables reduce pricing confidence, making valuation more interpretive and limiting bidding intensity. Tighter clustering in the core sculptural tiers, however, provides clearer reference points, supporting more confident bidding and more consistent price formation. As a result, segments with tighter dispersion function more efficiently, while those with wider dispersion exhibit greater variability in both pricing and liquidity.

How demand behaves 

Pricing behaviour

Hammer-to-midpoint ratios serve as a proxy for bidding intensity and competitive depth within the market. Between 2018 and 2021, median ratios ranged from 1.13x to 1.54x, indicating sustained competition and broad-based demand across a wide range of works. Since then, bidding intensity has moderated gradually, with ratios declining to 1.03x in 2024 and 0.93 in 2025, suggesting a measured normalisation, with no evidence of an abrupt shift. 

Source: Artscapy | Visualisation: Darden Gildea

This moderation in bidding behaviour is reflected in how results cluster within estimate ranges. Hammer prices are increasingly falling slightly above the low estimate. In 2020, 76.7% of works sold above their high estimates; by 2025, this had fallen to 23.3%, while the share of lots selling below the low estimate rose to 30.0%. Although the proportion of works barely clearing the low estimate has remained relatively stable at approximately 11%, a greater share of total value is now clustered near this lower bound.

Importantly, this shift does not appear to be driven by auction house intervention. Estimates have remained broadly stable, with only marginal tightening at Sotheby’s and slight widening at other houses. Gormley’s works are not frequently guaranteed, indicating that results near the low estimate are not driven by a guarantee-driven price floor. The observed softening therefore reflects increased buyer selectivity, with auction house practices remaining broadly unchanged. This aligns with a broader shift in market dynamics, with pricing increasingly set by buyer discipline within established expectations. This is a normalisation of expectations post-2021. 

Concentration vs. breadth

Concentration in Gormley’s market is episodic. In any given year, the top five lots can account for 40 to 60% of total hammer prices, creating the impression of a trophy-driven market; however, across 2018 to 2025 top five lots account for 14.1% of total value. Activity is ultimately distributed across a broader base of transactions. 

Source: Artscapy | Visualisation: Darden Gildea

High-value works shape annual outcomes, but do not sustain the market. Instead, they function as intermittent accelerants, amplifying total value in specific periods without altering the underlying distribution of activity. Value is therefore primarily established through repeated mid-market transactions, with fewer than 5% of hammer prices exceeding $1m. The market lacks a continuous trophy layer capable of sustaining momentum. When trophy lots do appear, they derive context from the pricing and liquidity established below, and fluctuations in annual total are best understood as compositional, driven by the presence or absence of these high-value works in any given year. 

Market activity takes place within a relatively small set of dominant institutional and geographic hubs, with this structure functioning as enabling infrastructure that supports market depth and consistent turnover. Situating activity within a core group of institutions allowed for sustained depth without requiring broad dispersion. Breadth in Gormley’s market is therefore expressed through transactional density, reinforced by a continuous mid-market and intermittently amplified by the top end.

Liquidity vs. performance

Repeat-sale data indicates that the market trades efficiently, but does not create compounded value at public auction over short periods of time, meaning speculation is relatively low. 17 repeat sales across 38 lots between 2018 and 2026 produced a median gross return of negative 15.9%, and a median CAGR of 1.4% for holdings of at least one year. The win rate was 41.2% meaning fewer than half of repeat transactions generate positive returns. While outliers skew the mean return upwards, the typical outcomes for repeat buyers is flat to negative and outsized positive returns are not typical. Therefore, the market supports liquidity, but not consistent short-term appreciation, indicating stable growth without speculative bidding. 

This pattern extends across price tiers, where repeat-sale outcomes remain uneven and lack a consistent trajectory. Lower-value works tend to generate negative returns alongside low win rates, reflecting weaker pricing power and more limited buyer competition at the entry level. Mid-market segments show stronger outcomes, though these results vary and are based on a relatively small number of observations, suggesting that performance at this level is not yet reliably repeatable. At the upper end, returns weaken again, with negative outcomes and low success rates, indicating that higher-value works do not deliver dependable resale performance over short holding periods. Across tiers, outcomes vary meaningfully, and no segment exhibits sustained, repeatable appreciation. The market therefore facilitates liquidity across multiple entry points, while short-term performance remains inconsistent and does not exhibit clear compounding behaviour.

Divergence 

Market weakness

Since 2023, signs of softness have been more visible in prints and editions and works on paper, particularly below $50k, where sell-through rates have dropped to 86.3%. Sculpture, by comparison, has been more resilient with sell-through rates clearing 98% for $50k to $250k works and 93.5% for the $250k to $1m band. Even so, a small number of higher-profile sculptures, including Big Skew, Steep II, Sidle, and Small Splice IV, failed to sell. These cases are notable and have an outsized impact on mean, median and total hammer prices; however, they remain the exception, as unsuccessful lots occur more frequently in works on paper and prints and editions than sculpture. Abstract steel works, specifically, carry the lowest risk, with a sell-through rate above 95%. 

In practical terms, the softness is uneven. Demand remains firm for core sculptural works, and softening for medium less core to Gormley’s identity. 

Series-level signals

Not all of Gormley’s series perform equally, and understanding series-level patterns is critical for interpreting market behaviour.

The MEME series is one of the most consistent performers. Of 32 lots offered, 31 sold, with hammer prices ranging from $89.2k to $346.8k. The median price was $140.8k, while the mean reached $160.0k, indicating the presence of positive outliers. Bidding is consistently robust, with hammer prices averaging 1.8x midpoint estimates and 83.9% of works selling above the high estimate.

By contrast, the Body series is more variable. While sell-through remains high, with 26 of 27 lots sold, prices range from under $1k to over $70k, with a median of $1.18k. This dispersion is driven by medium mix. Prints and editions average a 1.16x hammer-to-mid estimate ratio, while works on paper average 0.91x, with corresponding price ranges of $748 to $1.6k and $5.5k to $46.9k. At the upper end of the series, larger sculptural works—such as those often grouped under Stand—achieve significantly higher price levels, with results reaching $792k and $1.41m, though these occur infrequently.

Source: Artscapy | Visualisation: Darden Gildea

Larger recurring series, including MEME, Insider, Domain, and Peckham, exhibit near-zero buy-in rates, underscoring consistent demand within core sculptural lines.

As shown in the chart, MEME pairs relatively high pricing with consistently strong sell-through across a larger number of transactions, reinforcing its position as one of the most reliable series. The Body series spans a wide pricing spectrum, combining frequent lower-value transactions with occasional high-value sculptural results, resulting in greater dispersion. Other core series sustain high sell-through at lower price points, indicating steady demand without the same degree of value concentration. Taken together, series-level performance highlights where outcomes are more predictable and where results remain sensitive to factors such as medium, scale, and rarity.

Size and scale

Gormley’s market is not purely monumental; the majority of sales occur in the mid-size range. Across 163 offered sculpture lots, 156 sold, reflecting an overall sell-through rate of 95.5%.

The $250k–$1m size band is the engine of his market. Within this range, 69 works were offered and 67 sold, generating $35.65m in hammer and accounting for 65.5% of total sculpture revenue. Median hammer prices reached $441k, with solid bidding at an average of 1.64x the midpoint estimate.

Source: Artscapy | Visualisation: Darden Gildea

Performance improves with size, up to a point. Smaller works, <5k cm³ achieve a median of $138.9k and an average hammer-to-mid estimate of 1.81x, while mid-sized works, 5k to 259k cm³, have a higher median price of $363.6k. The 250k to 1m cm³ range strikes the balance of scale and liquidity, commanding higher prices and consistent demand, boasting a median hammer price of $441k and an average hammer to mid-estimate of 1.65x. 

Beyond this threshold, performance becomes less reliable. Works larger than 1m cm³ sell less consistently, demonstrated by their 77.8% sell-through and lower average hammer-to-mid estimate of 0.98x. The demand pool for works of that size is more limited, translating to lower bidding activity and competition to drive up hammer prices. 

 Across years, the $250k–1m band consistently dominates revenue, illustrating that the market rewards size, but not the largest works exclusively. Price correlates positively with volume (log-log 0.541), but exceptions exist.

Geographic structure

Gormley’s market is global in reach but concentrated in a small number of major auction hubs. London accounts for nearly half of total value (49.9%), followed by New York (19.8%), Hong Kong (14.4%), and Paris (10.7%). Sell-through rates remain consistently high across all regions, ranging from 91.6% in London to 93.9% in Hong Kong, indicating broadly stable demand regardless of location.

Differences emerge, however, in how value and bidding intensity are distributed. Hong Kong consistently achieves the highest median prices, with sculpture-only median hammers reaching $357.3k, compared to $278.4k in London and $269.9k in New York. Despite this, bidding intensity is lower, with average hammer-to-midpoint ratios of 1.41x in Hong Kong versus 1.63x in London and 1.73x in New York.

This divergence suggests a separation between where high-value works transact and where prices are most actively contested. Hong Kong functions as a venue for high-value turnover, while London and New York play a more central role in price discovery, where competitive bidding more consistently pushes results above expectations.

This geographic concentration is mirrored in the institutional infrastructure underpinning Gormley’s market. Sotheby’s, Christie’s, and Phillips account for 94.5% of total revenue, with their primary sales rooms in London, New York, Paris, and Hong Kong, cities that together represent 95.1% of Gormley's total value. Together, this enables consistent turnover across a wide range of works, supporting market depth without requiring geographic dispersion.

Source: Artscapy | Visualisation: Darden Gildea

Nevertheless, market concentration has declined over time. The Herfindahl-Hirschman Index, a measure of market concentration, fell from 0.74 in 2018 to 0.27 in 2024, on a scale of 0 to 1, indicating a gradual shift toward a more distributed footprint, even as activity remains anchored in a small number of dominant hubs. Within this structure, breadth is expressed less through expansion into new venues than through transactional density, reinforced by a continuous mid-market and intermittently amplified by the top end.

Peer Context

Relative to peers including Anish Kapoor, Tony Cragg, Jaume Plensa, and Marc Quinn, Gormley’s market stands out for both scale and liquidity. Across 2018–2025, it leads the group in total hammer ($59.3m) and sell-through (90.8%), indicating a consistently active and well-supported market.

Repeat-sale performance is more mixed. Median gross returns of –9.9%, a median CAGR of +2.1%, and a win rate of 43.8% suggest limited short-term appreciation. This places Gormley behind Cragg, but ahead of Kapoor, Plensa, and Quinn, positioning the market as relatively more reliable on resale than most peers, though not leading the peer group.

Source: Artscapy | Visualisation: Darden Gildea

Structurally, Gormley’s market occupies a middle position: a market defined by consistent liquidity and scale, with moderate concentration and steady, if unspectacular, repeat performance. It is broader and more evenly distributed than Plensa’s, yet more top-weighted than Cragg’s in its value profile. It sits between the more uneven value distributions observed in Kapoor and Quinn, where pricing is more heavily skewed toward the top end.

Market synthesis: strength and fragility

Gormley’s market is defined by structural strength, underpinned by a deep mid-market, the dominance of sculpture, and consistently high levels of liquidity. These elements provide a stable foundation, allowing the market to sustain activity and absorb supply across cycles.

At the same time, performance has become more differentiated. Estimate outperformance has moderated, buy-ins have risen in lower-value segments, and repeat-sale results point to limited short-term appreciation. Demand remains present, but is increasingly expressed with greater price discipline and selectivity.

Headline results continue to be shaped by occasional high-value works, but the market’s underlying stability comes from the continuous activity of the middle tier. The market combines structural resilience with increasing differentiation in outcomes, where liquidity remains intact but pricing varies more meaningfully across segments.

Case study: MEME series

The MEME series offers one of the clearest lenses through which to understand how Gormley’s market functions in practice. Across auction cycles, it has consistently demonstrated high liquidity, stable pricing, and strong estimate performance, positioning it as a core segment within the mid-to-upper sculptural tiers. Of 32 lots offered, 31 sold, yielding a buy-in rate of just 3.13%. Prices ranged from $89.2k to $346.8k, with a median hammer of $140.8k and an average of $160.0k. Estimate performance is equally robust, with hammer-to-midpoint ratios averaging 1.79x and 83.9% of works selling above their high estimates.

What distinguishes MEME is its recognisability and the pricing confidence it enables. The series is conceptually consistent and visually legible, allowing collectors to quickly situate works within both the artist’s practice and the broader market. This familiarity lowers the barrier to participation and supports more decisive bidding behaviour.

This translates directly into auction outcomes. Prices cluster within a relatively well-defined range, enabled by frequent comparable sales and consistent estimate positioning. Together, these factors create a clear pricing framework, allowing collectors to assess value with greater precision and transact with conviction.

The series also offers clear exit visibility. High sell-through rates, repeated market appearances, and sustained bidding depth mean that works can be reintroduced to auction with a credible expectation of absorption. Liquidity in this segment is consistently evidenced, reducing perceived downside risk for collectors.

More broadly, MEME illustrates how demand operates within Gormley’s market. Liquidity is robust in areas where recognition and comparability are highest, and where pricing draws on a continuous body of reference points. In this way, the series provides a practical indication of where the market is most stable and where participation is most consistent.

→ Explore Market Intelligence

→ Sell with Artscapy

→ Speak with an Advisor

Strategic pathways 

When selling may be advantageous

For sellers, outcomes are increasingly determined by where a work sits within the market’s pricing and demand structure. High-quality sculptures in the mid-to-upper tiers remain the most effective candidates for sale, benefiting from established comparables, consistent transaction frequency, and strong absorption rates. These conditions create pricing clarity and support competitive bidding, with auction results formed through active contests.

Lower-tier material, particularly prints and works on paper, operates under different conditions. Wider price dispersion, fewer consistent comparables, and a thinner buyer base reduce pricing confidence and increase execution risk. In these segments, outcomes are more sensitive to timing and estimate positioning, with buy-ins more likely when supply clusters or pricing expectations exceed the depth of demand. As a result, private transactions or tightly managed auction placements often provide a more controlled route to liquidity.