ATEX vs IECEx: the short answer
ATEX is a mandatory legal requirement for selling electrical equipment in the European Economic Area. IECEx is a voluntary international certification scheme that covers roughly 50 countries and is legally required in Australia, New Zealand, Singapore and Israel.
The underlying technical standards - IEC 60079 for IECEx and EN 60079 for ATEX - have been technically harmonised since 2005. The engineering requirements are the same. What differs is the regulatory framework, the certification bodies, and the markets each scheme opens.
UK manufacturers now also need to consider UKEX: the GB-specific scheme introduced after Brexit, administered under DSEAR and using the same BS EN 60079 series standards.
Quick Decision Guide
- Selling in the UK only: UKEX
- Selling in EU/EEA: ATEX
- Selling in Australia, New Zealand, Singapore or Israel: IECEx (legally required)
- Selling globally or responding to international tenders: dual ATEX + IECEx, obtained via IECEx first
- Lower-risk equipment in Zone 2 or Zone 22: ATEX Category 3 self-certification may be sufficient
Certification - Which Path Unlocks Your Global Markets?
You’ve engineered equipment for chemical processing plants or oil and gas facilities. Your hardware performs flawlessly.
But when sales propose expansion into European refineries, Middle Eastern petrochemical facilities, or Australian mining operations, one question stops the conversation:
“Which hazardous area certification do we pursue – ATEX or IECEx?”
Make the wrong choice, and you’ll face costly recertification or geographic restrictions that limit your addressable market.
In reality, The underlying technical standard is identical. It’s just the paperwork, regulatory bodies, and geographic acceptance that differ.
Table of Contents
Core Differences: Mandatory vs Voluntary
ATEX (European)
- Nature: Mandatory legal requirement for EEA market access
- Governed by: EU Directives 2014/34/EU (Equipment) and 1999/92/EC (Workplace)
- Technical Standard: EN 60079 series
- Certification Bodies: Notified Bodies (ExNBs) appointed by EEA governments
- Geographic Scope: Mandatory across all EEA member states plus Switzerland and Turkey
- Post-Brexit UK: UKEX now required for UK (though ATEX still widely accepted)
IECEx (International)
- Nature: Voluntary international certification scheme to facilitate global
- Governed by: International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC)
- Technical Standard: IEC 60079 series (identical, in technical content, to EN 60079 since 2005)
- Certification Bodies: IECEx Certification Bodies (ExCBs) with global peer assessment
- Geographic Scope: Mandatory in Australia, New Zealand, Singapore and Widely recognised globally, in some cases as a basis for national certification.
- Key Advantage: Test reports (ExTRs) can support subsequent ATEX certification
| Attribute | ATEX | IECEx | UKEX |
|---|---|---|---|
| Regulatory nature | Mandatory legal requirement (EU Directives 2014/34/EU and 1999/92/EC) | Voluntary international certification scheme (IEC-administered) | Mandatory for Great Britain market (DSEAR 2002, as amended) |
| Technical standard | EN 60079 series | IEC 60079 series Technically identical to EN 60079 since 2005 | BS EN 60079 series Technically identical to ATEX and IECEx |
| Certification bodies | EEA Notified Bodies (ExNBs) appointed by national governments | IECEx Certification Bodies (ExCBs) with international peer assessment | UKAS-accredited UK Approved Bodies (e.g. BASEEFA) |
| Self-certification | Permitted for Category 3 (Zones 2/22). Manufacturer holds full legal liability. | Not permitted for any category. Full third-party certification required. | Permitted for Category 3 (Zones 2/22). Manufacturer holds full legal liability. |
| Quality system audits | Annual, or 18-monthly for ISO 9001:2015 accredited manufacturers | Annual. Mandatory regardless of ISO 9001:2015 status. | Annual, or 18-monthly for ISO 9001:2015 accredited manufacturers |
| Certificate portability | Can use IECEx ExTRs and QARs to support the application | ExTRs and QARs support a subsequent ATEX application. ATEX cannot support IECEx. | Can use ATEX and IECEx test reports to support application |
| Typical timeline | 6–12 months (Cat 1/2) 2–4 months (Cat 3 self-cert) | 8–14 months | 6–12 months (Cat 1/2) 2–4 months (Cat 3 self-cert) |
| Primary markets | All EEA member states, Norway, Switzerland, Turkey. Essential for UK manufacturers exporting to EEA. | Mandatory: Australia, New Zealand, Singapore, Israel. Widely accepted: Middle East, Asia-Pacific, Africa. | Great Britain only. Northern Ireland requires CE/ATEX marking. |
| Optimal use case | EEA-focused products, or second step in a dual programme (IECEx first). | Global or Asia-Pacific products. Commission first when dual certification is the goal. | GB domestic market. Typically obtained alongside ATEX for EEA export. |
Where Is Each Certification Accepted?
ATEX Mandatory/Widely Accepted:
- All EEA countries (Germany, France, Netherlands, Italy, Spain, Poland, Belgium, Sweden, etc.)
- EEA-associated: Norway, Switzerland, Turkey
- United Kingdom: UKEX now primary, but ATEX still accepted
- Middle East: Often accepted alongside IECEx
- Africa: Generally accepted
IECEx Mandatory:
- Australia (in national law)
- New Zealand (in national law)
- Singapore (in national law)
- Israel (in national law)
IECEx Widely Accepted:
- Middle East: UAE, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Kuwait, Oman (often specified in tenders)
- Asia-Pacific: Malaysia, Indonesia, India, China, Japan, South Korea
- Africa: South Africa, Nigeria, Egypt
- Americas: INMETRO certification is mandatory for hazardous-area IECEx test reports, certificates and quality assessments are often accepted as supporting evidence as part of the INMETRO approvals process.
| ATEX Mandatory / Primary | IECEx Mandatory | IECEx Widely Accepted | Neither Sufficient |
|---|---|---|---|
European Economic Area Germany, France, Netherlands, Italy, Spain, Poland, Belgium, Sweden, Denmark and all EEA member states EEA-Associated Norway, Switzerland, Turkey Post-Brexit UK UKEX is primary for the GB market. ATEX is still widely accepted and required for EEA export. Also accepted Middle East (alongside IECEx) Africa (generally accepted) | Australia Required by national law New Zealand Required by national law Singapore Required by national law Israel Required by national law One-way rule IECEx ExTRs can support an ATEX application. ATEX certificates cannot support IECEx. Always obtain IECEx first. | Middle East UAE, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Kuwait, Oman Often specified in tenders even where not legally required Asia-Pacific Malaysia, Indonesia, India, China, Japan, South Korea Africa South Africa, Nigeria, Egypt Americas Brazil (INMETRO): IECEx ExTRs accepted as supporting evidence within the INMETRO approvals process | USA Requires UL or FM (NEC-based certification) Canada Requires CSA (NEC-based certification) Mexico Requires NOM certification Note IECEx test reports may support North American applications and reduce duplicate testing. A separate national certification is still required. |
Sources
IECEx System — iecex.com: scheme rules and mandatory country list
European Commission ATEX Guidelines — ec.europa.eu: Directive 2014/34/EU scope and EEA applicability
HSE DSEAR Guidance — hse.gov.uk: UKEX post-Brexit requirements for Great Britain
Which Certification Should You Choose?
Choose ATEX Alone When:
- Your sales are exclusively UK and European markets
- You have no plans for Asia-Pacific, Middle East expansion
- You're producing Category 3 equipment (Zones 2/22) where self-certification reduces costs
- You have established relationships with EEA Notified Bodies
Limitation: Closes doors in Asia-Pacific markets and limits Middle Eastern opportunities.
Choose IECEx When:
- Mandatory for Australian, New Zealand, Singaporean, or Israeli markets
- Targeting Asia-Pacific region (increasingly favours IECEx)
- Middle Eastern projects led by international operators
- You want test reports that can support subsequent ATEX certification
Strategic Advantage: IECEx Test Reports (ExTRs) can be used to support ATEX certification applications, but not vice versa.
Choose Dual Certification (ATEX + IECEx) When:
- You need maximum global market access
- Your customers operate across multiple regions
- You want flexibility to respond to tenders globally
- The incremental cost (versus single certification) is justified by market opportunity
Optimal Pathway: Commission IECEx testing first, obtain Certificates of Conformity, then use those test reports when engaging EEA Notified Bodies for ATEX—avoiding duplicate testing costs.
What will certification actually cost you?
No certification body publishes a fixed price list for ATEX or IECEx work, and any precise ‘typical investment’ figures you see online should be read with caution.
Costs vary considerably depending on protection concept, product complexity, gas group, number of enclosures and variants, documentation status, and which test house you approach.
An intrinsically safe single-board sensor and a flameproof multi-enclosure control system are both ‘ATEX Category 2 products’ on paper.
In practice, the certification programmes look nothing alike.
What we can give you is a realistic sense of the main cost components, the factors that push a programme in either direction, and the mistakes that most commonly blow budgets.
Where the money goes
Every ATEX or IECEx programme has three cost buckets:
- Certification body fees: testing, assessment, reports, certificates, and the initial QA notification or audit.
- Ongoing surveillance: annual quality audits from your notified body (ATEX) or IECEx certification body. For ATEX, manufacturers with ISO 9001:2015 accreditation can extend to 18-monthly cycles; IECEx mandates annual regardless.
- Internal and external engineering effort: the technical file, calculations, intrinsic safety assessments, test samples, and the design iterations that almost always happen before a product is ready to submit.
The third bucket is where projects most often go wrong.
Certification body invoices are visible and anticipated. The engineering effort required to prepare a compliant, submittable design is frequently underestimated, particularly on a first hazardous-area product.
ATEX Category 1/2 equipment
For higher-risk equipment (Categories 1 and 2, covering Zone 0, 1, 20 and 21 applications), total programme cost includes notified body fees, a quality system audit, and the engineering work to build a defensible technical file.
Simple products – a straightforward intrinsically safe sensor with a single protection concept – sit at the lower end of a wide range.
Complex multi-board systems with several protection concepts, or products designed for Zone 0 (continuous explosive atmosphere), require significantly more testing and documentation effort.
Budgeting
Based on the hazardous area projects we have supported over the years, full ATEX programmes for complex industrial equipment can typically run to mid-five-figure totals when you include engineering effort alongside notified body fees. Simpler products can come in well below that.
Treat any number you see before getting a quote as a rough planning assumption, not a budget.
ATEX Category 3 self-certification
Category 3 equipment for Zone 2 or Zone 22 applications can be self-certified under ATEX without engaging a notified body for testing.
There is no third-party certification invoice in the classic sense, but you do need a technically defensible file – and you carry full legal liability if anything goes wrong.
The cost is, therefore, engineering and documentation effort rather than certification fees. It is lower than a full third-party programme, but it is not free. Manufacturers who treat self-certification as an opportunity to cut corners tend to discover the cost later, when an incident forces a forensic review of a file that was never properly built.
The numbers...?
In our experience, manufacturers who take Category 3 self-certification seriously generally spend in the low-to-mid five-figure range on engineering and documentation. This is an internal rule of thumb based on the projects we have reviewed, not an industry-wide benchmark.
- Type examination testing
- Assessment reports (ExTRs)
- Certificate of conformity
- Initial QA notification or audit
- Intrinsic safety calculations
- Technical file preparation
- Test sample builds and iterations
- Protection concept redesigns
- Pre-submission design reviews
Sources
IECEx System — iecex.com: scheme rules confirming mandatory annual QAR surveillance regardless of ISO 9001 status
ExVeritas — exveritas.com: industry guidance that certification bills can be four to five times the quoted cost if design is non-compliant at submission
Intertek — intertek.com: ATEX quality audit requirements under ISO/IEC/EN 80079-34
ATEX Category 3 self-certification
IECEx is similar to, or slightly higher than, ATEX in direct fees for equivalent equipment.
The documentation requirements are stricter; IECEx demands explicit conformity with each listed standard, with less of the ‘deemed to comply’ flexibility that ATEX permits. That translates into more engineering effort at the documentation stage.
The strategic advantage of IECEx is that its test reports (ExTRs) and quality assessment reports (QARs) can support subsequent ATEX certification. The reverse is not true: ATEX certificates cannot be used to support IECEx.
If there is any prospect of needing both, obtaining IECEx first is almost always the more cost-effective route.
Dual certification (ATEX + IECEx)
When you plan dual certification from the outset and use IECEx test reports and quality assessments to support the ATEX application, the incremental cost over a single-scheme programme is real but manageable. In our experience, a well-planned dual programme typically costs somewhere in the range of 20–50% more than a single-scheme project of equivalent complexity, not double.
The key is planning. Sequential, uncoordinated programmes – IECEx one year, ATEX separately two years later – are significantly more expensive and time-consuming than a coordinated approach from day one.
The engineering cost that catches people out
Certification body fees are only part of your true cost. Redesigns for intrinsic safety or temperature classification, technical file preparation, and building and iterating test samples can easily match or exceed what you pay to test houses and auditors — particularly on your first hazardous area product.
The most reliable cost-reduction strategy is early engagement. Certification decisions made during the concept and architecture phase – before PCB layouts are fixed and enclosures are ordered – are materially cheaper than retrofit approaches. If the protection concept is wrong or the component energy budget is blown, discovering that at the testing stage means redesigning hardware that has already been built.
Cost guidance notes
All cost guidance in this section is based on ByteSnap’s experience with UK hazardous area projects and is provided as indicative planning information only. Certification costs depend heavily on product complexity, protection concept, gas group, and certification body pricing. For an accurate quote, approach your chosen notified body or IECEx certification body directly. BASEEFA, Eurofins CML, and ExVeritas are among the UK-based bodies offering ATEX and IECEx services.
How the Certification Process Works - ATEX Certification
Flexibility: ATEX permits “deemed to comply” approach; alternative compliance demonstrations possible when standards don’t fit innovative designs.
IECEx Certification
Rigour: IECEx demands strict conformity with listed IEC standards—less flexibility but more consistent global interpretation.
Getting your certification strategy right from the start
Choosing between ATEX, IECEx, and dual certification is a market-access decision as much as a compliance one.
The right answer depends on where your product needs to sell, who is specifying it, and what your realistic timeline and budget look like.
Getting this wrong does not necessarily mean a redesign – the engineering requirements under EN 60079 and IEC 60079 are technically the same.
But it can mean costly recertification, missed tender windows, and a product that cannot enter the markets you need.
At ByteSnap Design, we have supported manufacturers through ATEX and IECEx programmes since 2008, including the InductoSense ATEX Zone 0 sensor – one of the most demanding certification categories, where equipment operates in a continuously explosive atmosphere. Zone 0 is where certification-aware design really earns its value.
Every component choice, every power budget decision, and every protection concept needs to be considered from the first schematic.
Not sure which way to go? Let's work it out.
FAQs
What is the difference between ATEX and IECEx?
ATEX is a mandatory EU legal framework for equipment used in potentially explosive atmospheres, governed by Directives 2014/34/EU (equipment) and 1999/92/EC (workplace). It is compulsory for placing equipment on the EEA market. IECEx is a voluntary international certification scheme administered by the International Electrotechnical Commission. It is recognised across approximately 50 countries and is legally required in Australia, New Zealand, Singapore, and Israel. The underlying technical standards, EN 60079 for ATEX and IEC 60079 for IECEx, have been technically identical since 2005. The differences are regulatory and geographic, not engineering.
Is ATEX accepted in the UK after Brexit?
Yes. ATEX certification is still widely accepted by UK end users and remains essential for UK manufacturers exporting to the EEA. The primary certification for equipment placed on the Great Britain market is now UKEX, introduced under DSEAR 2002 (as amended) and using the same BS EN 60079 technical standards as ATEX. Differences between UKEX and ATEX are administrative: which certification bodies can issue certificates, and which mark appears on the product. UK manufacturers targeting both GB and EEA markets will need both. Northern Ireland continues to require CE/ATEX marking. UK approved bodies including BASEEFA issue both UKEX and ATEX certificates.
Is IECEx accepted in Europe?
IECEx is widely recognised by European end users, engineering contractors and operators, particularly on internationally tendered projects. It does not replace ATEX’s legal requirement for equipment placed on the EEA market. In practice, many European buyers accept IECEx-certified equipment, but a manufacturer selling into the EEA must still comply with the ATEX Directive. This is why manufacturers targeting both European and international markets frequently pursue dual certification.
Do I need both ATEX and IECEx?
That really depends on your target markets. ATEX alone (with UKEX for GB) is sufficient if you are selling exclusively within the UK and EEA with no plans for Asia-Pacific or Middle Eastern expansion. IECEx is required if you are entering markets where it is legally required: Australia, New Zealand, Singapore, and Israel. Major engineering contractors in the Middle East and Asia-Pacific increasingly specify it, even in the absence of legal mandates. For maximum global market access, dual certification is sensible. Commission IECEx first and use the IECEx test reports (ExTRs) to support the ATEX application. The reverse is not possible.
How much does ATEX or IECEx certification cost?
No certification body publishes a standard tariff. Costs are quoted per project because the variables – protection concept, product complexity, gas group, number of variants, documentation status – make any generic figure unreliable. What you can plan around is the cost structure: certification body fees, ongoing quality audits (annual for IECEx; annual or 18-monthly for ATEX with ISO 9001:2015 accreditation), and the engineering and documentation effort to prepare a submittable design.
For a reliable estimate, approach your chosen certification body directly.
What is the difference between ATEX and Ex?
‘Ex’ is the universal symbol for explosion protection, used across ATEX, IECEx, UKEX and North American schemes. ATEX is one specific certification route that requires the Ex marking. All ATEX-certified equipment carries the Ex symbol, but not all Ex-marked equipment is ATEX-certified; it may be IECEx, UKEX, UL, CSA, or another national scheme.
What is the UK equivalent of ATEX?
UKEX is the GB-market equivalent of ATEX, introduced after Brexit. It is governed under DSEAR 2002 (as amended), issued by UKAS-accredited UK Approved Bodies, and uses BS EN 60079 series standards. The technical safety requirements are essentially identical to ATEX. The differences are administrative: which bodies issue certificates, and which conformity mark appears on the product (the UKEX mark rather than CE). Manufacturers selling in Great Britain and the EEA will need both UKEX and ATEX. Northern Ireland requires CE/ATEX.
Dunstan is a chartered electronics engineer who has been providing embedded systems design, production and consultancy to businesses around the world for over 30 years.
Dunstan graduated from Cambridge University with a degree in electronics engineering in 1992. After working in the industry for several years, he co-founded multi-award-winning electronics engineering consultancy ByteSnap Design in 2008. He then went on to launch international EV charging design consultancy Versinetic during the 2020 global lockdown.
An experienced conference speaker domestically and internationally, Dunstan covers several areas of electronics product development, including IoT, integrated software design and complex project management.
In his spare time, Dunstan enjoys hiking and astronomy.
Further Reading
ATEX and Intrinsic Safety: Designing for Hazardous Environments: https://www.bytesnap.com/news-blog/atex-and-intrinsic-safety-design-for-hazardous-environments/
What is ATEX Design? Tips for Successful ATEX Product Development: https://www.bytesnap.com/news-blog/what-atex-design-tips-successful-atex-product-development/
WirelessHART and ATEX Device Certification: https://www.bytesnap.com/markets/industrial/wirelesshart-design-certification/
ATEX Intrinsically Safe Product Design: https://www.bytesnap.com/electronic-design/atex-intrinsically-safe-product-design/
Component Obsolescence Management (OMaaS) for certified products requiring long-lifecycle design updates: https://www.bytesnap.com/services/obsolescence-management/
Official certification bodies and regulatory guidance
IECEx System — scheme rules, certified equipment database and certification body directory: https://www.iecex.com
European Commission ATEX Directives and Guidelines: https://single-market-economy.ec.europa.eu/sectors/mechanical-and-electrical-engineering/atex-directive_en
HSE DSEAR Guidance (UKEX): https://www.hse.gov.uk/fireandexplosion/dsear.htm
ATEX Directive 2014/34/EU — full text (EUR-Lex): https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32014L0034
BASEEFA — UK certification body for ATEX, IECEx and UKEX: https://www.baseefa.com
Technical standards
IEC 60079 Series — IEC standards for equipment in explosive atmospheres: https://www.iec.ch/dyn/www/f?p=103:23:0::::FSP_ORG_ID:1310
BSI Standards — BS EN 60079 series and UKEX standards: https://www.bsigroup.com
COMPEX Competent Persons Scheme — training and certification for Ex equipment work: https://www.compex.org.uk
