Following last week’s sales in London, every specialist I spoke with was in a buoyant mood. Assembling the works they offered couldn’t have been easy. Where the New York sales are now focused on large art collections that have come to term—my friend George O’Dell’s neat euphemism for everything from death to estate planning—collectors in Europe and the United Kingdom have generally not been pressed to sell their works all at once. (One Belgian couple did, however, choose the right moment to sell.) That said, securing property for the sales is only half of the art market equation; it only works, of course, if buyers also show up. And they certainly showed up in London. The result was the best sales cycle we’ve seen in five years.

The premium total for last week’s sales in London was a robust $551 million—a return to health for a market that has not seen that level of sales since the last peak in 2022, a year of extraordinary global liquidity and market demand. That year, the premium total from London sales at Phillips, Christie’s, and Sotheby’s reached $718 million. Over the following years, sales declined by an astounding 66 percent, hitting $318 million in 2025—a painful slide for a city that remains a central pillar of the art trade. Last week’s sales were a strong rebound, representing a 76 percent bounce back from last year’s depressed returns.

Looking at the average lot price in these London sales over the last five years, we see that this season’s $670,000 still lags behind the recent peak of $1.1 million, in 2022, when roughly 11 percent fewer lots were sold, including three that sold above $50 million. By 2025, the average price had fallen to $514,000, with no lot selling for more than $15 million. And while this year’s comeback is good, it doesn’t get London back above the $706,000 average from 2023.

The combined sell-through rate was within industry standards—83 percent, with 823 lots offered and 684 sold. Among the lots sold, 235 (34 percent) were bid above the estimate range; 264 (39 percent) sold within the estimates; and 185 (27 percent) sold below the estimates.

The overall hammer ratio was good but not great, at 1.11. That number, along with the proportion of sold lots that achieved prices above, within, and below estimates, suggests a steadily advancing market with more buyers competing for works—but not an aggressive one, and that’s good news. For London to reclaim its role in the global market, its sales need to show steady, sustained growth rather than a volatile snapback.

The top two lots in the London sales exceeded their estimates by strong margins, and were the only ones in the top 10 that saw dynamic bidding. Since both consignors were sophisticated art market players, I’ll assume they took advice from the auction houses and allowed the works to be offered with estimates below their own expectations. Notably, neither had the price protection of a third-party guarantor, but six of the top 10 lots did, which makes sense given the perceived risk of participating in these sales.

For instance, the third-highest-value lot, Kandinsky’s abstract painting Le Rond Rouge, was also offered at a price significantly below what it had achieved in its most recent auction sale. That work had a third-party backer—presumably the buyer—who wound up paying around 17 percent less for it than the seller had paid. The fourth-most-valuable lot was a Fontana that sold for slightly below the estimate, again presumably to the third-party guarantor. The remaining six lots all sold within the estimate range. Taken together, these numbers suggest a market in balance between supply and demand, with price expectations also at an equilibrium.

The lots that saw the most aggressive bidding were all historical works, the most recent being Leon Kossoff’s work from a seminal series of paintings that Sotheby’s was able to market well. Several works in the top 10 come from former ambassador John Loeb Jr.’s sale at Phillips, which featured his collection of Danish painters, including Jens Juel, Joel Ballin, Johan Laurentz Jensen, and Bertha Wegmann.

Notably, six of the top 10 works sold for five-figure prices, indicating that bidders remain focused on lower-value lots. For example, the Toulouse-Lautrec drawing sold for a remarkable multiple of its very low $2,000 estimate, but it was not a major purchase, with a premium price of just under $27,000. Swiss dadaist Alice Bailly’s woolen work sold for nearly seven times the estimate, but only achieved a price of just under $60,000. Man Ray’s Purple Mask, meanwhile, had the kind of sale the market would like to see more of: Estimated at £40,000, it sold for almost £343,000. In fact, the week in London was very strong for Man Ray. Five works were offered and sold, three of them for multiples of the estimates—including one that made more than six times the asking price.

For the past few seasons, third-party guarantees have been considered a sign of market confidence. Bidders, especially on high-value lots, have taken the guarantee to mean the estimate was reasonable, or perhaps even underestimated the value of the work. (In other market climates, bidders have viewed third-party guarantees as a sign that the best price had already been achieved.) Looking through ARTDAI’s data for the London sales, it turns out only 22 of the 86 guaranteed lots saw bidding above the estimates. Of those 22 lots, 16 were David Hockney iPad drawings. That leaves just six guaranteed lots subjected to aggressive bidding. The sample is too small to extrapolate from, but it may be another signal that the market is gathering momentum.

The market share numbers confirm what we’ve discussed several times in recent months: The historical turn in the art market is now fully complete. Gerhard Richter is the only living artist on the top 10 market share list, and he has stopped making art. All of these artists are pillars of the market, and the fact that no single artist commands more than 10 percent of market share suggests the rebound is broad-based, and therefore healthy.

Looking at this list, which includes no women or people of non-European descent, it would be tempting to conclude that the market has reversed its drive toward diversity. But 388 artists were represented in this year’s sales, up from 309 last year and 348 in 2022. That year, the top 10 artists accounted for 56 percent of the sale total. This year, the figure is 36 percent.

I won’t claim this is evidence that the art market is diverse, equitable, and inclusive. We’re a long way from that. But I would caution everyone to remember that the very nature of these markets is to reflect the patterns and preferences of the individuals who participate in them. The slow progress we’re seeing is still progress. The art market remains dominated by dead European men—but a little less so, and it’s moving in the right direction, even in the midst of a revanchist backlash.

That does it for today. Clare McAndrew’s art market report comes out early tomorrow morning. I’ll take a closer look at it on Friday.

Let’s gather together then,
M