ATEX vs IECEx
What’s the difference and why it matters?
ATEX and IECEx share the same basic goal—stop equipment from igniting flammable atmospheres—yet they grew up in different regulatory families and serve slightly different audiences.
Origins and legal force
Technical content—virtually identical
Both systems are built on the very same IEC 60079 series of standards for design, testing and repair. An explosion-proof motor certified to IECEx can usually gain ATEX certification with minimal extra work, and vice-versa. The paperwork, not the test method, is what differs.
Market acceptance
Inside the EU/EEA you must have ATEX marking; IECEx alone is not valid.
Outside the EU regulators often reference IECEx, but some (e.g., Brazil, China, USA/NEC) still require their own national certificates. A common strategy is IECEx first, then add any country-specific paperwork.
End users in multinational groups increasingly specify “ATEX + IECEx” on purchase orders to keep sites compliant everywhere.
Documentation and language
ATEX files (the Technical Documentation) must be retained for 10 years and an EU Declaration of Conformity must be supplied in the language of each destination country.
IECEx uses a public online certificate database—no language translation, but anybody can verify a certificate’s authenticity instantly.
Repairs and overhauls
Both schemes recognise IEC 60079-19 for service workshops, but IECEx has a dedicated “Service Facility” certificate. Many EU repair shops hold the IECEx service ticket to reassure global clients, even though it is not legally required by ATEX.
Bottom line: ATEX is the legal passport for the EU and EEA; IECEx is the global business card that opens doors almost everywhere else. Treat them as complementary rather than competing—and you’ll minimise retesting, simplify logistics and keep every regulator, insurer and safety manager happy.