E-Invoicing Formats
XRechnung vs. ZUGFeRD
XRechnung and ZUGFeRD are Germany's two dominant e-invoicing standards. This comparison shows which format suits which use case.
| Criterion | XRechnung | ZUGFeRD |
|---|---|---|
| Data format | Pure XML (UBL 2.1 or UN/CEFACT CII) | Hybrid: PDF/A-3 with embedded XML (CII) |
| Human readability | Machine-readable only, no visual layout | PDF view for humans + machine-readable XML |
| Mandatory for public procurement | Yes, since 2020 (federal authorities) | No, but accepted when EXTENDED profile is used |
| Leitweg-ID required | Yes, mandatory field BR-DE-15 | Not mandatory; depends on profile and recipient |
| Supported profiles / conformance levels | One specification (EN 16931-compliant core invoice) | MINIMUM, BASIC WL, BASIC, EN 16931, EXTENDED |
| EU standard EN 16931 | Fully compliant | Compliant from EN 16931 profile; MINIMUM/BASIC WL are not EN 16931-compliant |
| B2B use | Widespread, especially in e-procurement systems | Very widespread thanks to PDF compatibility |
| Processing effort | Low overhead, purely structured data | Higher overhead due to PDF wrapper; easier for manual review |
| Valid formats from 2025 (§ 14 UStG) | Yes, qualifies as structured e-invoice | Yes, from BASIC profile (EN 16931-compliant profiles) |
| Tooling & validators | KoSIT Validator (official), docutools.pro | Mustang Project, VeraPDF, docutools.pro |
Verdict
For invoices to federal authorities, XRechnung is mandatory. In B2B, ZUGFeRD EXTENDED or EN 16931 is recommended because the attached PDF simplifies manual review while still enabling full automation. Small businesses invoicing public clients regularly should use XRechnung; for everyone else, ZUGFeRD is often the more convenient starting point.
Related comparisons
ZUGFeRD vs. Factur-XZUGFeRD and Factur-X are technically almost identical — but differ in origin, versioning and geographic adoption. Here is what really lies behind both names.XRechnung vs. PDF InvoiceMany businesses still send PDF invoices. From 2025, that will no longer suffice for B2B invoices in Germany. This comparison shows the key differences.UBL vs. UN/CEFACT CIIXRechnung supports two XML syntaxes: OASIS UBL 2.1 and UN/CEFACT CII D16B. Both comply with EN 16931 — but they differ significantly in structure, adoption and tooling.