There are many factors that play into SMV, wealth being one of them. That said, wealth can only increase SMV to the extent that it is observable to the opposite sex. For women, a certain "put togetherness" is the core characteristic of wealthier women, which is exemplified through a strong ensemble of fashion and cosmetic products. For men, a similar factor holds, though it is more dependent on factors other than fashion and cosmetics.

Shoes, watches, ties and belts are items that have two characteristics: (i) high variance in price / quality and (ii) a variance in price / quality that is readily discernible to others. For this reason, they are often serve as markers, symbols or signals of status. These are not the only factors (I recognize that so please do not criticize me for that), but they are the factors I would like to consider with this thread.

Often a status symbol, like a nice watch or belt, can exhibit high wealth but poor taste, which presents a unique tradeoff in optimizing SMV display through material possessions:

1) With watches, the classic tradeoff for a wealthy young person would be between a classic "bling" watch brand like Rolex versus a classic "connoisseur" brand like Jaeger or Patek. A Rolex is recognized by the public as the expensive, so has a clearer signal of status. The last two convey "I am wealthy but I am more keen to demonstrate by good taste in craftsmanship and less keen to try to impress the common folk that know little about watches." That said, for the Jaeger / Patek, the wealth signal is weaker for the average woman you'll likely meet because most people simply don't know what they are. A watch connoisseur would likely look down on the Rolex as merely being the sort of watch that someone would purchase for the purpose of impressing others. In some more general sense, a Rolex may be sense by a general audience as "beta" or "lame" because it conveys a certain level of status anxiety (vs. an "alpha" composure / calm about one's social position in society).

2) With belts, almost all of them look exactly the same, but a few of them have a classic appearance that conveys a certain level of wealth. The classic "douche" belts of New York City are the ones made by Hermes and Ferragamo (because they look extremely distinctive from a far distance on a city block). These convey a high degree of wealth, but they also convey "I am a huge douche" because they are loud and showy in ways that most other fashion pieces are not. With an expensive watch, the wealth display is subtle and less "loud," so the "I am trying to impress and am lame" signal is much louder in the case of these belts.

There are many circles it is clear which watch or belt you should buy, but these are outside the intended scope of this question. For example, I work in NYC high finance and, as a young person, I cannot wear a Rolex watch or Hermes belt because it is simply not in any way, shape or form appropriate to try to brag about status (e.g., it generally conveys poor judgment and a desire to be too showy in relation to one's superiors).

That said, here we care about optimizing for one goal: SMV. To be clear, we specifically care about how much you get laid. How should you resolve this classic status symbol dillema in theory? Moreover, how would you resolve it in the specific case of "classic" or "bling" status symbols in the context of watches and belts?