| 1. | EXECUTIVE SUMMARY |
| 1.1. | VR, AR, MR and XR as experiences |
| 1.2. | Segmenting devices: VR vs AR |
| 1.3. | AR: Field of view categorization |
| 1.4. | Is XR approaching the slope of enlightenment? |
| 1.5. | XR market development |
| 1.6. | Will AI give smart glasses a killer application? |
| 1.7. | Requirements differ across consumer and professional markets |
| 1.8. | Overall AR headset forecasts |
| 1.9. | Overall VR headset forecasts |
| 1.10. | Reflective waveguides for AR: Summary |
| 1.11. | SRG waveguides for AR: Summary |
| 1.12. | Holographic waveguides for AR: Summary |
| 1.13. | Non-waveguide combiners for AR: Summary |
| 1.14. | AR adoption forecast by FOV |
| 1.15. | Status and market potential of selected optical combiners for AR |
| 1.16. | AR combiner technology player landscape |
| 1.17. | AR combiner player landscape segmented by material and FOV |
| 1.18. | Pancake lenses for VR: Summary |
| 1.19. | Dioptric lenses for VR: Summary |
| 1.20. | Focus-tunable lenses for VR: Summary |
| 1.21. | "Generations" of VR lens |
| 1.22. | VR optics technology forecast: Adoption proportions |
| 1.23. | Company profiles |
| 1.24. | Access More With an IDTechEx Subscription |
| 2. | INTRODUCTION |
| 2.1. | Introduction to XR and terminology |
| 2.1.1. | VR, AR, MR and XR as experiences |
| 2.1.2. | Segmenting devices: VR vs AR |
| 2.1.3. | Classifying headsets by field of view |
| 2.1.4. | Passthrough MR in VR devices |
| 2.1.5. | Terminology: Standalone vs tethered |
| 2.1.6. | AR: Field of view categorization |
| 2.1.7. | AR overview |
| 2.2. | Introduction to the XR market |
| 2.2.1. | AR, MR, VR and XR: A brief history |
| 2.2.2. | AR, MR, VR, and XR: 2010 onwards |
| 2.2.3. | 2025: An exciting time for smart glasses? |
| 2.2.4. | XR market development |
| 2.2.5. | The VR market is consolidating |
| 2.2.6. | The commercial status of XR in 2025 |
| 2.2.7. | Requirements differ across consumer and professional markets |
| 2.2.8. | Is XR approaching the slope of enlightenment? |
| 2.2.9. | What went wrong with the metaverse? |
| 2.2.10. | Applications in VR, AR & MR |
| 2.2.11. | Industry 4.0 and XR |
| 2.2.12. | A rocky history for consumer AR headsets |
| 2.2.13. | Consumer AR devices face tough competition |
| 2.2.14. | AR headsets as a replacement for other smart devices |
| 2.2.15. | AR as the end goal, smartphone replacement |
| 2.2.16. | Will AI give smart glasses a killer application? |
| 2.2.17. | VR headsets: Selected players |
| 2.2.18. | AR headsets: Selected players |
| 2.2.19. | Meta as an XR ecosystem player |
| 2.2.20. | Meta to cut 30% of metaverse budget |
| 2.2.21. | Google and Samsung as XR ecosystem players |
| 2.2.22. | Other big tech entries to the AR market |
| 2.2.23. | The Biggest XR News in 2024: Signs of Meta's Long-Term Plays Working |
| 2.2.24. | Smart glass market shifts up a gear in 2025 |
| 2.2.25. | Other key XR industry news (I) |
| 2.2.26. | Other key XR industry news (II) |
| 2.2.27. | Chinese XR players should not be overlooked |
| 2.2.28. | Chinese XR players (I) |
| 2.2.29. | Chinese XR players (II) |
| 2.2.30. | Smart contact lenses |
| 2.2.31. | The outlook for XR: Comparing the VR and AR markets |
| 2.2.32. | Introduction to the XR market: Key takeaways |
| 2.3. | Introduction to XR optics |
| 2.3.1. | Optical requirements for XR |
| 2.3.2. | Pairing optics with displays |
| 2.3.3. | AR vs VR optics: Development status and design considerations |
| 2.3.4. | Optical engines: Combining displays and optics in XR |
| 2.3.5. | Field of view defines XR experiences |
| 2.3.6. | Is an immersive wide FOV always necessary? |
| 2.3.7. | Eyebox and eye relief: Keys to XR usability |
| 2.3.8. | Measuring brightness and efficiency |
| 2.3.9. | Etendue: Optical entropy |
| 2.3.10. | Resolution, FoV, and pixel density |
| 2.3.11. | Foveated rendering and displays: Higher display quality at reduced resolution |
| 2.3.12. | The vergence-accommodation conflict |
| 2.3.13. | Contrast and dynamic range |
| 2.3.14. | Display requirements for XR |
| 2.3.15. | Optical aberrations present design challenges |
| 2.3.16. | Optic coatings in VR and AR |
| 2.3.17. | Optical combiners for AR |
| 2.3.18. | Choices of AR optic |
| 2.3.19. | Choices of VR optic |
| 2.3.20. | Introduction to the XR market: Key takeaways |
| 3. | AR AND VR MARKET FORECASTS |
| 3.1. | Forecasting methodology |
| 3.1.1. | AR headset forecasting: Important data sources |
| 3.1.2. | VR headset forecasting: Important data sources |
| 3.1.3. | Methodology: Optics volume forecasts |
| 3.1.4. | IDTechEx's view of the AR market |
| 3.1.5. | IDTechEx's view of the VR market |
| 3.2. | Headset forecasts |
| 3.2.1. | AR: FOV categorization |
| 3.2.2. | What is not considered in forecasting |
| 3.2.3. | AR headsets: Volume forecast |
| 3.2.4. | AR headsets: Pricing forecast methodology |
| 3.2.5. | AR headsets: Revenue forecast |
| 3.2.6. | Cyclic nature of VR hardware sales |
| 3.2.7. | VR headsets: Volume forecast |
| 3.2.8. | VR headsets: Pricing data |
| 3.2.9. | VR headsets: Revenue forecast |
| 3.3. | Optical combiners for AR market forecasts |
| 3.3.1. | The future of combiner technology |
| 3.3.2. | Non-waveguide combiners expected to be replaced by waveguides |
| 3.3.3. | Waveguides may be beginning to compete with birdbath combiners on price |
| 3.3.4. | Forecasting adoption proportion for AR combiner technologies |
| 3.3.5. | Historic assessment of AR combiner adoption: Wide FOV |
| 3.3.6. | Wide FOV AR combiner technology forecast: Adoption proportions |
| 3.3.7. | Wide FOV AR combiner technology forecast: Adoption data table |
| 3.3.8. | Wide FOV AR combiner technology forecast: Headset volume |
| 3.3.9. | Wide FOV AR combiner technology forecast: Volume data table |
| 3.3.10. | SRG and reflective waveguides: Wide FOV volume forecast |
| 3.3.11. | Polymer and glass waveguides: Wide FOV volume forecast |
| 3.3.12. | Historic assessment of AR combiner adoption: Narrow FOV |
| 3.3.13. | Narrow FOV AR combiner technology forecast: Adoption proportions |
| 3.3.14. | Narrow FOV AR combiner technology forecast: Adoption data table |
| 3.3.15. | Narrow FOV AR combiner technology forecast: Headset volume |
| 3.3.16. | Narrow FOV AR combiner technology forecast: Volume data table |
| 3.3.17. | SRG and reflective waveguides: Narrow FOV volume forecast |
| 3.3.18. | Polymer and glass waveguides: Narrow FOV volume forecast |
| 3.4. | Lenses for VR market forecasts |
| 3.4.1. | Historic assessment of VR optics adoption |
| 3.4.2. | VR optics technology forecast: Adoption proportions |
| 3.4.3. | Narrow FOV AR combiner technology forecast: Adoption data table |
| 3.4.4. | VR optics technology forecast: Headset volume |
| 3.4.5. | Narrow FOV AR combiner technology forecast: Adoption data table |
| 3.5. | Summary of market forecasts |
| 3.5.1. | Status and market potential of selected optical combiners |
| 3.5.2. | AR combiner forecasts: Summary |
| 3.5.3. | "Generations" of VR lens |
| 3.5.4. | VR optics forecasts: Summary |
| 4. | AR OPTICS TECHNOLOGIES |
| 4.1. | Optical combiners/waveguides in AR |
| 4.1.1. | Optical combiners: Definition and classification |
| 4.1.2. | Optical combiners for AR |
| 4.1.3. | Waveguides vs other combiner types |
| 4.1.4. | Status and market potential of selected optical combiners |
| 4.1.5. | AR combiner technology player landscape |
| 4.1.6. | AR combiner player landscape segmented by material and FOV |
| 4.2. | Waveguide combiners |
| 4.2.1. | Common waveguide architectures |
| 4.2.2. | Classes of Waveguide |
| 4.2.3. | Projector entry to waveguides |
| 4.2.4. | Exit pupil expansion in waveguides |
| 4.2.5. | Eye glow is a barrier to social acceptability and efficiency |
| 4.2.6. | Waveguide substrate materials: Refractive index |
| 4.2.7. | Comparing glass suppliers for waveguide substrates |
| 4.2.8. | Waveguide substrate materials: Glass vs polymers |
| 4.2.9. | Weight minimization in waveguides |
| 4.2.10. | Comparison between waveguide methodologies |
| 4.2.11. | It is still unclear which waveguide technology is 'best' |
| 4.2.12. | Strategies in waveguide combiner supply |
| 4.2.13. | Big Tech and AR: Waveguide technologies |
| 4.2.14. | Big Tech and AR: Meta's waveguide technologies |
| 4.2.15. | Reflective waveguides |
| 4.2.16. | Introduction: Reflective waveguides |
| 4.2.17. | Reflective waveguide players assessment (I) |
| 4.2.18. | Reflective waveguide players assessment (II) |
| 4.2.19. | Lumus still leading the way for reflective waveguides |
| 4.2.20. | Plastic vs glass reflective waveguides |
| 4.2.21. | Reflective waveguides: SWOT analysis |
| 4.2.22. | Reflective waveguides: Key takeaways |
| 4.2.23. | Diffractive waveguides |
| 4.2.24. | Introduction: Diffractive waveguides |
| 4.2.25. | Diffractive waveguides: Method of operation |
| 4.2.26. | Challenges for color accuracy in diffractive waveguides |
| 4.2.27. | Solutions to color accuracy in diffractive waveguides |
| 4.2.28. | Development direction to single plate for diffractive waveguides |
| 4.2.29. | Technology variation within diffractive waveguide architectures |
| 4.2.30. | Diffractive surface relief grating (SRG) waveguides |
| 4.2.31. | Introduction: Surface relief grating waveguides |
| 4.2.32. | SRG waveguide players assessment (I) |
| 4.2.33. | SRG waveguide players assessment (II) |
| 4.2.34. | SRG waveguide players assessment (III) |
| 4.2.35. | Grating structures in SRG waveguides |
| 4.2.36. | SRG waveguide materials |
| 4.2.37. | SiC waveguides: Worth the extra cost? |
| 4.2.38. | SRG waveguides: SWOT analysis |
| 4.2.39. | SRG waveguides: Key takeaways |
| 4.2.40. | Holographic waveguides |
| 4.2.41. | Introduction: Holographic grating waveguides |
| 4.2.42. | Holographic waveguide players assessment (I) |
| 4.2.43. | Commercial status of holographic waveguides |
| 4.2.44. | DigiLens' SRG+ technology |
| 4.2.45. | Holographic waveguides: SWOT analysis |
| 4.2.46. | Holographic waveguides: Key takeaways |
| 4.3. | Non-waveguide combiners |
| 4.3.1. | Simple reflective combiners |
| 4.3.2. | Introduction: Simple reflective combiners |
| 4.3.3. | Simple reflective combiners players assessment (I) |
| 4.3.4. | Birdbath optics: Introduction |
| 4.3.5. | Birdbath optics have significant commercial adoption |
| 4.3.6. | Freeform mirrors: Introduction |
| 4.3.7. | Bugeye combiners: Large-scale freeform mirrors |
| 4.3.8. | Birdbath combiners: SWOT analysis |
| 4.3.9. | Freeform mirror combiners: SWOT analysis |
| 4.3.10. | Bugeye combiners: SWOT analysis |
| 4.3.11. | Simple reflective combiners: Key takeaways |
| 4.3.12. | Freespace holographic optical element (HOE) combiners |
| 4.3.13. | Introduction: Free-space holographic optical element (HOE) combiners |
| 4.3.14. | Free-space holographic combiner players assessment (I) |
| 4.3.15. | HOE free-space combiners: Trouble taking off? |
| 4.3.16. | Free-space HOE: SWOT analysis |
| 4.3.17. | Free-space HOE: Key takeaways |
| 4.3.18. | Non-transparent displays: No optical combiner required |
| 4.3.19. | Introduction: Non-transparent displays |
| 4.3.20. | Non-transparent displays: SWOT analysis |
| 4.3.21. | Non-transparent displays: key takeaways |
| 4.4. | AR technology benchmarking and analysis |
| 4.4.1. | Introduction to AR optical combiner benchmarking |
| 4.4.2. | AR optical combiners: Benchmarking categories |
| 4.4.3. | Optical combiners in AR: Technology benchmarking |
| 4.4.4. | Optical combiners in AR: Radar charts |
| 4.4.5. | Comparison of SRG and reflective waveguides |
| 4.4.6. | Comparison of glass and polymer substrates: Reflective waveguides |
| 4.4.7. | Comparison of glass and polymer substrates: SRG waveguides |
| 4.4.8. | Ranking performance of factors: Wide and narrow FOV devices |
| 4.4.9. | Narrow FOV optics technology ranking |
| 4.4.10. | Wide FOV optics technology ranking |
| 4.4.11. | Reduction in optical efficiency at higher FOV by waveguide technology |
| 4.4.12. | Technology benchmarking: Key takeaways |
| 4.5. | Encapsulation and prescription correction in AR |
| 4.5.1. | Approaches to prescription correction in today's AR devices |
| 4.5.2. | Future approaches to prescription correction: User-customization |
| 4.5.3. | Why encapsulate waveguides with lenses? |
| 4.5.4. | Ancillary lenses fill gaps in waveguide capabilities |
| 4.5.5. | Static accommodation adjustment |
| 4.5.6. | Prescription correction: 3D printing offers an elegant solution |
| 4.5.7. | Meta, Luxexcel and AddOptics |
| 4.5.8. | AddOptics |
| 4.5.9. | Correcting the vergence-accommodation conflict |
| 4.5.10. | Deep Optics and liquid crystal lenses |
| 4.5.11. | Future AR eyepieces development |
| 4.5.12. | Encapsulation and prescription correction players |
| 4.5.13. | Encapsulation and prescription correction: Key takeaways |
| 4.6. | Optical simulation software providers |
| 4.6.1. | Optical software providers |
| 4.6.2. | Optical simulation software: Custom or off the shelf? |
| 4.6.3. | Optical simulation software: Key takeaways |
| 5. | VR OPTICS TECHNOLOGIES |
| 5.1. | VR optics introduction |
| 5.1.1. | The VR optics technology landscape |
| 5.1.2. | Lenses in VR |
| 5.1.3. | Pancake lenses now the dominating for current and near future VR |
| 5.1.4. | "Generations" of VR lens |
| 5.1.5. | Technological status of VR lens technologies |
| 5.1.6. | Big Tech and VR: Optics technologies |
| 5.2. | Pancake lenses |
| 5.2.1. | Pancake lenses: Introduction |
| 5.2.2. | Pancake lenses: From niche to standard |
| 5.2.3. | Pancake devices: Dominating in 2025 |
| 5.2.4. | Comparing pancake and Fresnel lens headsets |
| 5.2.5. | Artefacts in pancake vs Fresnel lenses |
| 5.2.6. | Pancake lenses and new design possibilities |
| 5.2.7. | Holographic pancake lenses |
| 5.2.8. | Other catadioptric lens designs |
| 5.2.9. | Polarization-based pancake lenses: SWOT analysis |
| 5.3. | Dioptric lenses |
| 5.3.1. | Fresnel lenses: The previous standard in VR lenses |
| 5.3.2. | Meta's patented hybrid Fresnel lens |
| 5.3.3. | Other approaches to god ray mitigation in Fresnel lenses |
| 5.3.4. | Fresnel doublets |
| 5.3.5. | Users modifying headsets |
| 5.3.6. | Aspherical lenses at the high end in VR |
| 5.3.7. | Comparing aspheric and pancake lenses |
| 5.3.8. | Fresnel lenses: SWOT analysis |
| 5.3.9. | Aspherical lenses: SWOT analysis |
| 5.4. | Focus-tuneable lenses |
| 5.4.1. | Why is dynamically variable focus important for XR? |
| 5.4.2. | Emerging lens technologies by technology readiness |
| 5.4.3. | Solutions to the vergence-accommodation conflict for XR |
| 5.4.4. | VAC workarounds and focus-free systems: SWOT analysis |
| 5.4.5. | Dynamic optics (focus tunable lenses): SWOT analysis |
| 5.4.6. | SWOT: "True 3D" displays |
| 5.4.7. | "True 3D" displays |
| 5.4.8. | "True 3D" displays overview |
| 5.4.9. | Light field displays: Reconstructing scenes from multiple viewpoints |
| 5.4.10. | Avoiding the resolution limit: Sequential light field displays |
| 5.4.11. | Case study: CREAL's light field near-eye displays |
| 5.4.12. | Holography: Reconstructing wavefronts |
| 5.4.13. | Computer-generated holography: Digital hologram generation |
| 5.4.14. | VividQ: Holographic displays for AR |
| 5.4.15. | Summary: "True 3D" displays as competitors to focus-tunable lenses |
| 5.4.16. | Geometric phase lenses |
| 5.4.17. | Introduction to geometric phase lenses |
| 5.4.18. | Flat lenses: Diffractive optics, metasurfaces, liquid crystals and more |
| 5.4.19. | Why geometric phase lenses matter |
| 5.4.20. | What is geometric (Pancharatnam-Berry) phase? |
| 5.4.21. | Optically anisotropic materials and GPLs |
| 5.4.22. | Liquid crystals and switchable waveplates |
| 5.4.23. | Liquid crystals in GPLs |
| 5.4.24. | Metasurfaces: Another method to apply geometric phase |
| 5.4.25. | Introduction to optical meta-surfaces |
| 5.4.26. | Manufacturing optical metamaterials: Havard research |
| 5.4.27. | Applications for metasurfaces: Harvard research |
| 5.4.28. | Metasurfaces for distributing light and imaging |
| 5.4.29. | Manufacturing metasurfaces via semiconductor fabrication |
| 5.4.30. | Rolling mask lithography |
| 5.4.31. | Meta's GPL prototypes |
| 5.4.32. | The vision for GPL use in headsets |
| 5.4.33. | Geometric phase lenses for XR: Outlook |
| 5.4.34. | Other focus tunable lenses |
| 5.4.35. | Tunable liquid crystal lenses |
| 5.4.36. | Meta: Various approaches to solving the VAC |
| 5.4.37. | Alvarez lenses |
| 5.4.38. | Focus-tunable lenses: Key takeaways |
| 5.5. | VR technology benchmarking and analysis |
| 5.5.1. | Introduction to VR lens benchmarking |
| 5.5.2. | Benchmarking criteria (I): Commercial factors |
| 5.5.3. | Benchmarking criteria (II): Technological factors |
| 5.5.4. | Benchmark scores: VR lenses |
| 5.5.5. | Comparing overall lens performance |
| 5.5.6. | Ranking the performance of optical lenses |
| 5.5.7. | Attribute importance in VR devices |
| 5.5.8. | VR lens benchmark performance |
| 5.5.9. | VR lens benchmarking: Conclusions to inform forecasting |
| 6. | COMPANY PROFILES |
| 6.1. | AddOptics (2022) |
| 6.2. | AddOptics (2025) |
| 6.3. | AddOptics: 2023 Update |
| 6.4. | Cambridge Mechatronics (2022) |
| 6.5. | Deep Optics (2022) |
| 6.6. | DigiLens (2022) |
| 6.7. | DigiLens (2025) |
| 6.8. | Dispelix (2022) |
| 6.9. | EverySight (2025) |
| 6.10. | HTC Vive (2022) |
| 6.11. | Inkron (2022) |
| 6.12. | Kubos Semiconductors (2025) |
| 6.13. | Kura Technologies (2022) |
| 6.14. | Lenovo: The ThinkReality A3 (2022) |
| 6.15. | LetinAR (2022) |
| 6.16. | LetinAR (2024) |
| 6.17. | LetinAR: Optics in a High-Volume Headset (2024) |
| 6.18. | LightTrans (2025) |
| 6.19. | Limbak (2022) |
| 6.20. | Limbak: Acquired by Apple? (2023) |
| 6.21. | Lumus (2022) |
| 6.22. | Lumus (2023) |
| 6.23. | Lumus (2025) |
| 6.24. | Luxexcel (2022) |
| 6.25. | Luxexcel Acquired by Meta (2023) |
| 6.26. | Lynx (2022) |
| 6.27. | Lynx — Q2 2022 Update |
| 6.28. | Meta (VR Optics) (2022) |
| 6.29. | Meta: Professional Use of VR and Quest for Business (2023) |
| 6.30. | Meta: Smart Glasses Update (2025) |
| 6.31. | MICROOLED (2023) |
| 6.32. | Mira Reality (2022) |
| 6.33. | Mira Reality: Acquired by Apple (2023) |
| 6.34. | Mojo Vision (2022) |
| 6.35. | Morphotonics (2022) |
| 6.36. | Morphotonics (2025) |
| 6.37. | Oorym (2023) |
| 6.38. | Optiark 2025 Update |
| 6.39. | Optinvent (2022) |
| 6.40. | Optinvent (2025) |
| 6.41. | Optix (2025) |
| 6.42. | Samsung: Galaxy Event (2025) |
| 6.43. | Schott AG (2025) |
| 6.44. | Schott AG: Augmented/Mixed Reality Operations (2022) |
| 6.45. | SCIL Nanoimprint (2025) |
| 6.46. | Snap: AWE 2025 (2025) |
| 6.47. | Sony (CES 2023) |
| 6.48. | TruLife Optics (2022) |
| 6.49. | Varjo (2023) |
| 6.50. | VividQ (2022) |
| 6.51. | VividQ and Dispelix: Pairing Holographic Displays with Waveguides (2023) |
| 6.52. | VividQ: Visit and Tech Demo (2022) |