I am very excited for our very first comparison review! The straps will be compared against each other under the same categories of a regular strap review. For each category, a winner will be selected (or it could be a tie) and an overall winner will be chosen at the end of the review. Since both of these straps were previously reviewed in detail (Rubber B Rubber Strap with Tang Buckle for Rolex GMT-Master II and Everest Rubber Strap with Tang Buckle for Rolex GMT-Master II), this comparison review will only focus on the differences between the two straps and not on the details of each individual strap. Note that for this battle, the straps are the tang buckle versions and sold as fitting the Rolex GMT-Master II.

Overall Design | Winner: Rubber B
This category is of course very subjective, beauty is truly in the eye of the beholder. Both straps are beautiful in my opinion and either will provide that unique look for your Rolex. Both straps feature a raised middle section on both sides. However, on the Rubber B, this raised middle section gradually disappears before reaching the end of the strap. In addition, the Rubber B strap has a perpendicular line that runs near the edge of the lugs, which the Everest does not have. I would described the Rubber B as more "sleek". The Rubber B is slightly thinner and the keepers and tang buckle are also smaller when compared to the Everest counterparts. However, it seems like the Everest strap curves more than the Rubber B once on the wrist. My biggest issue with the Everest strap is that it is a bit too long for my wrist size (6.5") and my personal taste. The length of the Everest strap is 85/125 mm and the length of the Rubber B strap is 75/115 mm. For my smaller wrist, my preference is obviously the shorter length strap since that typically results in less excess strap on the tongue side. Personally, I do not like it when too much excess strap can be seen when I am looking at my watch. This can be remedied by opting for the deployant version of the Everest strap (which comes in various sizes for the perfect fit). In contrast, the Rubber B deployant version only allows adjustment in size on one side of the strap (at least for the version they sell for the Rolex GMT-Master II), which can result in the Rolex buckle being off-centered if your wrist is too thin. Slight advantage goes to Rubber B in the Overall Design category.

The raised middle section on the straps is where the design differs between the two brands. Rubber B on the left, Everest on the right.

Quality and Durability | Winner: Tie
The quality on these two straps is undeniable. Both are made from vulcanized Swiss rubber and they are simply fantastic in terms of fit and finish. My only observation here would be that the Everest strap comes with a screw-in tang buckle while the Rubber B strap comes with a spring bar tang buckle. Obviously the former is preferred as it is more secure, but it is also the more expensive option in terms of manufacturing. It is worth mentioning again that the tang buckle on the Rubber B is more compact. In terms of durability, I can say that both straps have aged really well... barely any visible wear and tear if any. However, I have noticed that wear marks around the holes (from the buckle pressing against the rubber, which is expected from normal use) are more noticeable on black straps. All-in-all, both straps will provide you with many years of joy. A tie in the Quality and Durability category.

Sleeker Rubber B tang buckle on the left. The more secure Everest screw-in tang buckle on the right.

Both straps will give your Rolex a new and refreshing look.

Operation and Fitment | Winner: Everest
Both straps are easy to operate, no issues with either when it comes to putting on the watch or removing it from the wrist. However, the free keeper on the Everest is slightly loose for my liking, which can be an annoyance at times. In terms of fitment, the Everest strap is a breeze to install compared to the Rubber B. As mentioned in my review on the Rubber B, even the company has acknowledged that this particular strap (meant for the Rolex GMT-Master II) is challenging to install (not sure if they have updated the strap to fix this issue). Advantage goes to Everest in the Operation and Fitment category.

The Everest strap is a lot easier to install than the Rubber B.

Comfort | Winner: Everest
Luckily for my 6.5" wrist, both straps were able to fit my wrist comfortably. However, note that the Rubber B strap only has 7 holes and the Everest strap has 9 holes. That means that you have a better chance of obtaining the ideal fit with the Everest strap since there are more holes available and they are also a lot closer to each other (with the Rubber B one hole could be slightly too tight and the next available hole could be too loose). Slight advantage goes to Everest in the Comfort category.

7 holes (Rubber B) vs. 9 holes (Everest Bands).

Both straps are extremely comfortable on the wrist, but with more adjustable positions on the Everest, you are more likely to find the perfect fit with the Everest.

Value | Winner: Everest
The Everest strap is $225 and the Rubber B strap is $240. In other words, the Rubber B is over 6% more expensive than the Everest strap. Granted that the price difference is small and almost negligible, I have to give this one to Everest since the straps are so similar in many ways that I do not feel that the Rubber B is worth that extra 6%. Slight advantage goes to Everest in the Value category.