The Bottom Line
If you want to understand MyArtBroker and Gauntlet Gallery in one paragraph each, here it is.
MyArtBroker is a specialist private brokerage for the blue-chip prints-and-editions market. It pairs a genuinely impressive data layer — the MAB100 index and the Trading Floor, built on auction histories from over 300 auction houses and roughly 15 years of private print sales data — with a discreet, broker-led sales model that charges 0% seller's fees and averages about 18% on the buyer's side. Its heartland is Banksy and the broader modern-and-contemporary print canon, and its coverage of KAWS is real and well-organized. If your priority is discretion, a brokered private sale, and a network of 30,000+ collectors and investors, MyArtBroker is a strong fit.
Gauntlet Gallery is a data-first dealer. It publishes a comparable-sales framework — medians, percentile bands, and disclosed sources — directly on its KAWS pages, backs a documented catalogue of roughly 218 KAWS releases across themes (Companion, BE@RBRICK, Holiday, and more), and ships every KAWS or BE@RBRICK object with its own per-item certificate of authenticity (OneCOA) plus an embedded NFC chip. If your priority is transparent pricing you can audit and a physical, verifiable authentication trail tied to the specific object you buy, Gauntlet is built for you.
Neither is "better" in the abstract. They optimize for different buyers. The rest of this article shows exactly where each one wins.
The one-line version
- Choose MyArtBroker if you want brokered discretion, a big private network, and a market index.
- Choose Gauntlet Gallery if you want auditable public comps and a per-item COA + NFC authentication trail on the object itself.
What MyArtBroker Does Well
We will not strawman MyArtBroker. It is one of the most sophisticated operators in the prints-and-editions space, and a KAWS buyer should understand its strengths clearly before deciding it is not the right fit.
It is a true print-market specialist. MyArtBroker describes itself as specializing in original contemporary and modern prints and multiples from established blue-chip artists. It is not a generalist auction house that happens to sell prints on the side; the entire business is oriented around editions. That focus shows in the taxonomy of its KAWS pages, which organize the artist's output into recognizable series — Companion, Chum, Man's Best Friend, Models, Outlines, Urge, Kawsbob, Blame Game, Tension, and The News — the way a specialist would, not the way a marketplace search box would.
Its data depth is real, and its Banksy/print leadership is earned. MyArtBroker has invested heavily in market intelligence. The MAB100 index draws on over 300 auction houses and 40+ data inputs, and the platform reports tracking tens of thousands of auction histories overall. In the specific arena of Banksy and the blue-chip print canon, MyArtBroker is, candidly, a category leader for published market data and editorial. We are comparing KAWS here, not Banksy — and we do not sell authenticated original Banksy — but a fair comparison has to acknowledge that MyArtBroker's data infrastructure is a genuine competitive asset.
Brokerage discretion. For a collector who does not want to bid in a public room or list publicly, MyArtBroker's model is attractive. Sales are discreet, independent, and privately negotiated, with a dedicated specialist — often with auction-house experience — assigned to a consignment. That is a real service, and for high-value or sensitive transactions it has clear appeal.
A large, curated network. MyArtBroker's network of 30,000+ collectors and investors and roughly 125,000 monthly visitors is a genuine liquidity pool. For a seller in particular, being introduced privately to a targeted collector base is valuable.
Where MyArtBroker's model shines
- Selling a KAWS print you already own, discreetly, at 0% seller commission.
- Discreet acquisition without public bidding.
- Market-level orientation via the MAB100 for the print canon as a whole.
How the MyArtBroker Trading Floor Works
The Trading Floor is the mechanism most likely to be unfamiliar to a new KAWS buyer, so it is worth explaining carefully and accurately.
The Trading Floor is a private, members-facing layer that lets users see supply and demand across the blue-chip print market in something close to real time. Per MyArtBroker, it tracks value data across 3,500 artworks spanning 30 years, including signed, unsigned, APs, PPs, TPs and sets of prints and editions. Rather than showing a single "price," it shows print series categorized by status — which works are for sale, which are open to offers, and which are in demand within the network — and lets a user filter by artist, artwork, estimated value, and average annual growth rate.
Crucially, this is not an auction and it is not a fixed-price storefront. It is a matchmaking and intelligence layer over a private brokerage. When a buyer or seller acts on it, MyArtBroker's model kicks in: a specialist is assigned, the work is condition-checked and its provenance verified, and it is privately introduced to a targeted collector base. Pricing is fixed, clear and mutually agreed between the parties, and sellers are quoted net offers — the exact amount they receive after costs.
What this means for a KAWS buyer
- You are seeing network-level signal — who owns what, who wants what — rather than a public order book with executable prices.
- Execution is brokered and negotiated, not instant. You enquire; a specialist engages.
- The value is in discretion and demand visibility, not in a click-to-buy transaction with an auditable, published comp attached to the specific object.
This is a legitimately powerful tool for a certain kind of buyer or seller. It is a different instrument from a public comp sheet attached to an individual object, which is the tool Gauntlet builds.
It is also worth being precise about why the Trading Floor is structured this way, because the design is not accidental. Private sales are, by MyArtBroker's own framing, the majority of what actually trades in the blue-chip print market, and that activity is invisible to auction databases. A private network that surfaces who holds a given KAWS series and who wants it is, in effect, an attempt to see the part of the market that the public record cannot. That is a genuine informational edge — for the network. The trade-off is that the edge stays inside the network: the demand signal you see on the Trading Floor is not the same thing as a published, dated, sourced record of what a specific object sold for, which is the artifact a comp-driven buyer wants to carry into a negotiation. One is a live, private radar; the other is a public, permanent receipt. A KAWS buyer should be clear which of the two they are actually being handed at the moment of decision.
MyArtBroker's Price Data and Index
MyArtBroker's most visible data product is the MAB100, and it deserves a fair, accurate description because it is genuinely good work.
The MAB100 is, per MyArtBroker, the first dedicated index for the blue-chip print market. It tracks the top 100 prints, ranked by cumulative spend over the previous five years, using that cumulative-spend ranking as a proxy for liquidity and market share. The constituents are rebalanced quarterly to reflect the latest values. The underlying data is drawn from real historic auction sales sourced from over 300 auction houses, plus 40+ additional data inputs that affect pricing — private-sales pricing, valuations, artists' trends, and related print series, including alternative colourways, artist's proofs, printer's proofs, and corresponding portfolios.
MyArtBroker positions the index explicitly against auction-only valuations, noting that public auction results represent only a minority of what actually trades in the market. That is an honest and important point: auction results are a biased sample because private sales are invisible to them. An index that attempts to incorporate private-sales signal is doing real analytical work.
Two honest caveats for the KAWS buyer specifically:
-
An index measures the market; it does not price your object. The MAB100 is a top-100 aggregate for the print canon. It tells you how the blue-chip print market as a whole — heavily weighted toward the most-traded names — is trending. It is not a per-item valuation of the specific signed-vs-unsigned, colourway-specific KAWS edition in front of you. MyArtBroker's per-work valuations exist alongside the index, but the index itself is a market gauge, not an object appraisal.
-
KAWS is one artist inside a canon led by others. The MAB100's most-cited constituents skew toward Banksy, Warhol, Hockney, Haring, Lichtenstein, Hirst, Picasso, and Basquiat. KAWS is covered and covered well, but he is not the center of gravity of the index. A KAWS-focused buyer is consuming a general-market index and a per-artist page, not a KAWS-native dataset.
Both caveats are about fit, not quality. The MAB100 is a strong instrument for what it is.
It is instructive to compare the MAB100 to the financial indices it is explicitly modeled on. An equity index like the S&P 500 is superb for answering "how is the market doing?" and nearly useless for answering "what is this one specific share of this one company worth right now?" — for that, you look at the live quote for that specific security. The MAB100 occupies the same conceptual position for prints. It is a basket. It is rebalanced. It is weighted toward the most-traded, most-liquid names, which in the print canon means Banksy and Warhol carry outsized influence on the aggregate. That is exactly what you want from a market barometer, and exactly what you do not want if your question is narrow and specific: is this one signed KAWS edition, in this one colourway, fairly priced today? For that question the relevant unit of analysis is not the index level but the comparable sales of that specific work — which is why a per-object comp framework and a market index are complements, not substitutes. A sophisticated KAWS buyer arguably wants both: the index for context and the object-level comps for the decision.
Where MyArtBroker Is Less Suited to Some Buyers
Every model makes trade-offs. MyArtBroker's are a direct consequence of being a private brokerage rather than a data-transparent dealer, and they matter more or less depending on the buyer.
Pricing is agreed privately, not published per object. The strength of a brokerage — discretion — is also the thing that keeps the executable price off the public record. On the Trading Floor you see status (for sale / open to offers / in demand) and estimated value bands, and the final number is fixed and mutually agreed between the parties. That is excellent for privacy. It is less ideal for a buyer who wants to see the exact comparable sales, medians, and sources behind the number before engaging a broker.
The buyer pays the freight. MyArtBroker is explicit and admirably transparent that its revenue comes from the buyer's side — averaging about 18% — which is how it can offer 0% seller fees. For a seller, that is fantastic. For a buyer, it is a real cost that has to be modeled into total price. It is materially better than a typical auction buyer's premium, but it is not zero.
KAWS is inside a Banksy-led house. This is not a criticism of MyArtBroker's KAWS coverage, which is well-structured. It is a statement about center of gravity. MyArtBroker's editorial, data weighting, and brand equity are strongest in Banksy and the classic-print canon. A buyer who wants a dealer whose data spine is built primarily on KAWS transactions — every colourway, every open-edition vinyl, every BE@RBRICK collaboration — is looking for a different kind of specialization.
Authentication is handled inside the transaction, not shipped as a persistent artifact. MyArtBroker's specialists authenticate and condition-check works as part of the brokerage service. That is real diligence. But the output is confidence at the point of sale, not necessarily a standalone, per-object certificate with an embedded verification chip that travels with the object into the future. For KAWS specifically, where the object often has no artist-issued certificate at all, that persistent artifact is exactly what many buyers want.
Who should look elsewhere
- Buyers who want the comps in front of them, sourced and dated, before talking to anyone.
- Buyers who want a per-object authentication artifact they can re-verify years later.
- Buyers who want a dealer whose primary dataset is KAWS, not the print canon at large.
The Gauntlet Authentication Difference
This is the single clearest structural difference between the two, and it is where Gauntlet's model is purpose-built for the KAWS category.
KAWS presents a specific authentication problem. Unlike some artists, KAWS editions and figures frequently ship without an artist-issued certificate, and there is no equivalent of a single central artist authentication authority that a buyer can appeal to for most works. The market has historically leaned on brand reputation, packaging, and dealer trust. That leaves a persistent, verifiable, object-level record as the missing piece.
Gauntlet's answer for KAWS and BE@RBRICK is a specific, category-scoped chain:
- OneCOA — a Gauntlet-issued, per-item certificate of authenticity generated for the specific object you buy. Not a generic receipt: a per-item record tied to that piece.
- An embedded NFC chip — a physical tag paired to the object, so the certificate can be re-verified by tapping the object itself, now and in the future.
This pairing — OneCOA + NFC — is Gauntlet's authentication canon for the KAWS/BE@RBRICK category, and it is deliberately category-specific. Gauntlet uses different, appropriate authentication chains for different categories, and it does not mix them. To be explicit and honest about what we are not claiming:
- We do not claim any KAWS Pest Control-style authority. There is no such thing being invoked here.
- We do not apply a music-memorabilia chain (Beckett/JSA/PSA) or a Warhol-specific chain to KAWS. Those belong to other categories.
- OneCOA + NFC is our own certification instrument. It is a Gauntlet artifact, described as exactly that.
The practical upside for a KAWS buyer is durability. A broker's point-of-sale diligence protects you at the moment of purchase. A per-item certificate plus an embedded chip protects the object's identity for the life of the object — through resale, gifting, and estate transfer — because the verification travels with the physical piece rather than living only in a transaction file.
Why does this matter more for KAWS than for many other artists? Because the KAWS market is unusually vulnerable to two specific problems. The first is the sheer volume and repetition of open-edition and figure production: the same silhouette recurs across colourways, drops, and collaborations, which makes casual visual identification an unreliable substitute for a documented record. The second is the market's reliance on packaging and sealed-box condition as a value signal, which is precisely the thing that is easiest to misrepresent and hardest to re-verify after the fact. An object-bound certificate that can be re-read by tapping the piece addresses both: it decouples the proof from the packaging and from a stranger's word, and it survives the resale chain intact. That is a structurally better fit for the KAWS category than an authentication that exists only as confidence generated inside a single past transaction — however competent that transaction's diligence was.
Authentication, side by side
- MyArtBroker: specialist authentication and condition checks performed inside the brokered transaction.
- Gauntlet (KAWS/BE@RBRICK): OneCOA per-item certificate + embedded NFC chip that stays with the object and is re-verifiable later.
Pricing Transparency: An Index vs a Public Comp Framework
Both companies believe the KAWS/print market has historically been too opaque. They solve it differently, and the difference is the crux of this comparison.
MyArtBroker's instrument is an index. The MAB100 answers the question "how is the blue-chip print market moving?" at the level of a rebalanced, cumulative-spend-ranked basket of the top 100 prints, sourced from 300+ auction houses and 40+ inputs. It is a market-level gauge. Alongside it, per-work valuations give estimated bands. This is powerful for understanding trend and liquidity.
Gauntlet's instrument is a public comparable-sales framework, per object. Rather than an index, Gauntlet publishes — on the KAWS pages themselves — the comps behind a piece: the median of comparable sales, percentile bands (so you can see the spread, not just a midpoint), the number of comparable records, and the disclosed sources those comps come from. The goal is that a buyer can audit the number before spending a dollar. Gauntlet's KAWS dataset is deep enough to support this at the object level: a documented catalogue of roughly 218 KAWS releases across themes, sitting on top of tens of thousands of KAWS transaction records and hundreds of higher-authority records used to weight the medians.
The philosophical difference:
- An index tells you the temperature of the room. It is excellent for macro context and for a market as a whole.
- A public per-object comp framework tells you what this specific signed-or-unsigned, this-colourway KAWS edition has actually traded at, with the sources shown. It is built for the go/no-go decision on one object.
Neither replaces the other. But for the specific act of deciding whether a given KAWS edition is fairly priced today, a per-object comp sheet with disclosed medians, bands, and sources is a different — and for many buyers, more directly decision-useful — tool than a rebalanced market index.
Fees and True Cost
Total cost, not headline price, is what a buyer actually pays. Here both models deserve a clear-eyed accounting.
MyArtBroker. The published structure is 0% seller commission and an average of about 18% on the buyer's side, with no charge for unsold works. Two things are true at once and both should be said plainly:
- For a seller, this is genuinely excellent — arguably the strongest headline seller economics in the specialist print market, and materially better than consigning to an auction house that takes a seller's commission and charges the buyer a premium.
- For a buyer, the ~18% is a real cost of acquisition. It is well below a typical auction buyer's premium (which can run into the mid-to-high 20s percent before taxes), so MyArtBroker's buyer economics are competitive — but the buyer, not the seller, carries the platform's revenue.
Gauntlet Gallery. Gauntlet's model is dealer pricing: the price shown is the price, and the value proposition is that the number is defended by published comps rather than negotiated behind a broker. There is no separate buyer's premium layered on top of a hammer price, because there is no hammer. The honest framing is not "cheaper in all cases" — dealer margin is real and embedded in the price like any dealer — but "auditable": the buyer can check the asking price against the disclosed median and bands before committing.
How to think about true cost
- Auction route: hammer + buyer's premium (often mid-to-high 20s%) + any taxes on the premium.
- MyArtBroker (buyer): negotiated net price + ~18% buyer-side economics; 0% if you are the seller.
- Gauntlet (buyer): posted price, with published median/bands/sources so you can judge the embedded margin yourself.
If you are selling a KAWS print, MyArtBroker's 0% seller fee is a strong reason to talk to them. If you are buying and you want to independently verify the price is fair, Gauntlet's published comps are the tool for that job.
One more point on true cost that buyers routinely overlook: the cost of being wrong. A KAWS purchase where authentication is thin or where the price was negotiated without visibility into comparable sales carries a hidden tail risk — the risk that the object is worth materially less than paid, or that it becomes hard to resell because its provenance cannot be cleanly demonstrated. That risk does not show up on any fee schedule, but it is real money. A transparent comp framework reduces the pricing tail (you saw the median and the spread before you bought), and a persistent per-item certificate reduces the resale-friction tail (the next buyer can re-verify without taking anyone's word). When you compare the two models on cost, compare them on this expanded definition — headline fee plus the expected cost of pricing error and resale friction — not on the buyer's-premium line alone.
Condition, Provenance, and the Physical Object
For KAWS, condition and provenance are not footnotes — they are a large fraction of value. The same image can vary enormously based on whether it is signed, which colourway it is, whether the packaging is intact, and whether there is a crease, a ding, or fading.
MyArtBroker handles this through its specialists: works are condition-checked and provenance-verified as part of a consignment before being introduced to the network. This is competent, human, auction-grade diligence, and for a private sale it is exactly what you want in the loop.
Gauntlet handles this through the object-level record. The OneCOA certificate documents the specific piece, and the NFC chip binds that documentation to the physical object. Condition and provenance are captured as part of the per-item record rather than living only inside a brokered transaction. Because Gauntlet's comp framework is built per object, condition-relevant distinctions — signed vs unsigned, colourway, sealed vs opened for figures — are the axes along which comps are pulled in the first place, not an afterthought layered on top of a single index reading.
The distinction, again, is transaction-time diligence (MyArtBroker) versus a persistent, re-verifiable object record (Gauntlet). Both are legitimate. They serve different anxieties: "Am I safe buying this today?" versus "Can I prove what this is in ten years?"
It is worth naming a subtlety here, because it cuts in MyArtBroker's favor and we want to be fair. Human specialist diligence catches things a certificate cannot. A seasoned print specialist handling a KAWS consignment can spot an out-of-place ink density, a wrong paper weight, a restoration that a document would never disclose, or a provenance story that does not hold together — judgment calls that no chip can make. A certificate-plus-NFC record is only as good as the diligence that produced it in the first place; the chip proves this is the object we certified, not our certification was correct. So the honest framing is not that one approach is diligence and the other is not. Both rest on diligence. The difference is whether that diligence is captured as a durable, object-bound, re-verifiable artifact (Gauntlet's model) or delivered as expert confidence at the point of a private sale (MyArtBroker's model). For a fast-moving, high-repetition category like KAWS, where objects change hands often and packaging condition drives value, the durable artifact has a specific structural advantage — but it does not make the human specialist's eye obsolete.
Provenance in one line each
- MyArtBroker: verified by a specialist as part of the private sale.
- Gauntlet: captured in a per-item OneCOA and re-verifiable via the object's NFC chip over time.
A Practical Example
Consider a concrete, deliberately generic scenario — no invented prices, just the decision structure a real KAWS buyer faces.
You are looking at a signed KAWS screenprint from a well-known series, offered in a specific colourway. It is the sort of work where the signed version and the unsigned version of the same image can differ dramatically, and where the exact colourway matters.
Through MyArtBroker, the path looks like this. You encounter the work — perhaps via its KAWS series page or, as a member, on the Trading Floor where you can see whether that series is for sale, open to offers, or in demand. You get an estimated value band and market context, informed by the MAB100's read on how the print market is trending. You enquire; a specialist engages, condition-checks and verifies the work, and a net, mutually agreed price is negotiated privately. You benefit from discretion, expert diligence, and buyer economics averaging ~18% that beat a typical auction premium. What you do not get is a public, itemized comp sheet for that exact colourway published up front, or a standalone certificate-plus-chip that travels with the object afterward.
Through Gauntlet Gallery, the path looks different. On the KAWS page for that piece you see the posted price alongside a public comp framework: the median of comparable sales for that signed-and-colourway-specific work, the percentile bands showing the spread, the count of comparable records, and the sources those comps came from. You can judge the price yourself before contacting anyone. When you buy, the object ships with a OneCOA per-item certificate and an embedded NFC chip, so you — and any future owner — can re-verify it by tapping the object. What you do not get is a brokered private-sale process or a 0% seller-side path (Gauntlet's transparency-and-authentication model is a buyer-facing dealer model, not a consignment brokerage).
Same object, two philosophies: negotiated discretion with in-transaction diligence versus published comps with a persistent authentication artifact.
Side-by-Side Comparison
The table below summarizes the comparison for KAWS prints and editions specifically. All MyArtBroker figures are drawn from MyArtBroker's own published pages, cited throughout this article.
| Dimension | MyArtBroker | Gauntlet Gallery |
|---|---|---|
| Core model | Private brokerage + data platform for blue-chip prints & editions | Data-first dealer with public comp framework |
| Category heartland | Banksy and the modern/contemporary print canon; KAWS covered and well-organized | KAWS and editions/figures as a primary dataset |
| Flagship data product | MAB100 index — top 100 prints by 5-yr cumulative spend, rebalanced quarterly, 300+ auction houses, 40+ inputs | Per-object public comp framework — median, percentile bands, record count, disclosed sources |
| KAWS catalogue depth | Series-organized KAWS pages (Companion, Chum, Man's Best Friend, Models, etc.) | Documented catalogue of ~218 KAWS releases across themes (Companion, BE@RBRICK, Holiday, and more) |
| Pricing visibility | Estimated value bands; final price privately negotiated & agreed | Posted price with published comps you can audit before engaging |
| Buyer cost | ~18% average on the buyer's side | Dealer pricing; no separate buyer's premium; margin auditable vs comps |
| Seller cost | 0% seller commission; no charge for unsold works | Buyer-facing dealer model (not a 0% consignment brokerage) |
| Authentication | Specialist condition-check & provenance verification within the transaction | OneCOA per-item certificate + embedded NFC chip on the object |
| Persistence of authentication | Confidence at point of sale | Re-verifiable object record that travels with the piece |
| Network / discretion | 30k+ collectors & investors; discreet private sales | Public storefront; transparency over discretion |
| Best for | Discreet buying, and especially selling at 0% | Buying with auditable comps + a durable authentication trail |
Frequently Asked Questions
Is MyArtBroker legitimate and good at what it does?
Yes. MyArtBroker is a serious, specialist operator in the blue-chip prints-and-editions market, with a genuinely strong data layer (the MAB100 and Trading Floor) and a large private network of 30,000+ collectors and investors. This comparison is about fit for a KAWS buyer, not about whether MyArtBroker is good. It is.
Does MyArtBroker cover KAWS?
Yes, and well. MyArtBroker organizes KAWS into recognizable series — Companion, Chum, Man's Best Friend, Models, Outlines, Urge, Kawsbob, Blame Game, Tension, The News — the way a print specialist would. The distinction we draw is that MyArtBroker's center of gravity is the broader print canon led by Banksy and Warhol, whereas Gauntlet's data spine is built primarily around KAWS.
What is the MAB100, and does it price my specific KAWS print?
The MAB100 is MyArtBroker's index of the top 100 prints ranked by five-year cumulative spend, rebalanced quarterly. It is a market-level gauge, not a per-object appraisal. It tells you how the print market is trending; it does not, by itself, tell you what your specific signed-vs-unsigned, specific-colourway KAWS edition should cost. For that, you want per-object comps.
What does it actually cost to buy through MyArtBroker?
MyArtBroker publishes an average of about 18% on the buyer's side and 0% for sellers. The ~18% is well below a typical auction buyer's premium, so it is competitive — but as a buyer, model it into your total cost. As a seller, the 0% commission is a strong reason to consider them.
How is Gauntlet's pricing different?
Gauntlet publishes a comparable-sales framework on its KAWS pages: the median of comparable sales, percentile bands, the number of records, and the disclosed sources. The intent is that you can audit the asking price against real sales data before you buy, rather than negotiating a private number.
How does Gauntlet authenticate KAWS, and do you use Pest Control?
For KAWS and BE@RBRICK, Gauntlet issues its own OneCOA per-item certificate plus an embedded NFC chip tied to the specific object, so it can be re-verified by tapping the piece later. We do not claim any Pest Control-style authority for KAWS, and we do not mix in authentication chains that belong to other categories. OneCOA + NFC is our own certification instrument, described as exactly that.
Do you sell authenticated original Banksy?
No. We acknowledge MyArtBroker's leadership in Banksy and print-market data honestly, but this comparison is strictly about KAWS prints and editions. Nothing here should be read as a claim that Gauntlet sells authenticated original Banksy.
Which should I choose?
If you want brokered discretion, a large private network, and especially if you are selling at 0% commission, MyArtBroker is a strong choice. If you want to buy with public, auditable comps in front of you and a durable per-item authentication trail on the object, Gauntlet Gallery is built for that.
Final Conclusion
MyArtBroker and Gauntlet Gallery are not really competing for the same moment in a buyer's journey — and that is the honest takeaway. MyArtBroker is an excellent private brokerage and data platform whose strengths are discretion, a large curated network, market-leading print-canon data, and outstanding seller economics at 0% commission. Its MAB100 is a genuine advance in print-market transparency, and its KAWS coverage is well-organized. For a collector who values a brokered, private transaction — and especially for a seller — it is a compelling home.
Gauntlet Gallery optimizes for a different buyer: the one who wants to see the comps before spending a dollar, and who wants proof of what they own after the sale. Its public comp framework — medians, percentile bands, record counts, disclosed sources — is built at the level of the individual KAWS object rather than a market index, resting on a documented catalogue of roughly 218 KAWS releases and a deep KAWS transaction dataset. And its authentication canon for KAWS and BE@RBRICK — OneCOA per-item certificate plus an embedded NFC chip — gives the object a persistent, re-verifiable identity that outlives the transaction.
Pick the model that matches your priority. Want discretion and to sell at 0%? Talk to MyArtBroker. Want auditable pricing and a durable authentication trail on the KAWS piece you buy? That is what Gauntlet Gallery is for.
Gauntlet Gallery sells KAWS prints, editions, and figures, so treat this as a competitor's comparison and verify independently. All MyArtBroker figures cited here are drawn from MyArtBroker's own published pages as of July 2026 and may change; confirm current fees, index methodology, and coverage directly with MyArtBroker before relying on them. This article is editorial commentary and market education, not financial, investment, or authentication advice, and no specific prices are quoted or implied. Comparable-sales medians and bands describe past transactions and do not predict future value.
