Both formats are legal e-invoices in Germany, so the choice is practical, not legal. Choose XRechnung when you invoice public authorities or exchange invoices purely machine-to-machine, and ZUGFeRD (EN 16931 profile) when your customers still want to open and read the invoice — which is most small and mid-sized businesses. If you need one file for both worlds, the ZUGFeRD profile XRECHNUNG embeds an XRechnung-conformant XML in a readable PDF.
What is the same about XRechnung and ZUGFeRD?
Both implement the European norm EN 16931, both are accepted by the German tax administration as e-invoices under § 14 UStG (UStAE 14.1 Abs. 13 and 14), and both carry the same semantic content: seller, buyer, lines, tax breakdown, totals, payment terms, references. A ZUGFeRD file in the EN 16931 profile and an XRechnung in CII syntax differ mainly in the wrapper (PDF or none) and in the additional German rules that XRechnung imposes. Neither format requires a network: e-mail is a permitted channel for both. The legal framework is on the Germany hub.
Comparison table
| Criterion | XRechnung | ZUGFeRD |
|---|---|---|
| Maintained by | KoSIT for the IT-Planungsrat (public sector) | FeRD, jointly with FNFE-MPE (Factur-X) |
| File | One XML file (UBL 2.1 or UN/CEFACT CII) | One PDF/A-3 with embedded CII XML |
| Human readability | None without a viewer or XSLT rendering | Full: the PDF is the invoice a person reads |
| Legal part | The XML | The XML; the PDF is a copy and must not deviate (UStAE 14c.1 Abs. 4a) |
| Meets § 14 UStG | Yes | Yes from 2.0.1, except MINIMUM and BASIC WL |
| Profiles | One core, plus the Extension XRechnung | MINIMUM, BASIC WL, BASIC, EN 16931, EXTENDED, XRECHNUNG |
| German rules (BR-DE) | Mandatory: buyer reference, seller contact, payment details, and more | Only in the XRECHNUNG profile |
| B2G acceptance | Required or preferred by federal and most state receivers; Leitweg-ID in BT-10 | Federal platform lists EN 16931 formats such as ZUGFeRD 2.2.0 as accepted; many receivers still expect the XRechnung CIUS — use the XRECHNUNG profile |
| Peppol | UBL syntax maps directly to Peppol BIS Billing 3.0 practice; XRechnung UBL is transported over Peppol in Germany | PDF containers are not the Peppol default; the embedded CII can be sent as CII, but most Peppol receivers expect UBL |
| Cross-border | German CIUS; foreign receivers may not know the BR-DE rules | Identical to Factur-X, so directly usable with French counterparts |
| Current version | 3.0.2 (bundle of 31 January 2026); 4.0 in preparation | 2.5.2 (4 August 2026); next release announced for autumn 2026 |
| Validation tooling | KoSIT validator with official configuration; XSD + Schematron | FeRD XSD + Schematron per profile, plus a PDF/A-3 check (e.g. veraPDF) |
| File size and handling | Small; needs software to display | Larger; opens in any PDF reader |
| Archiving | Keep the XML unchanged | Keep the XML; the PDF part only if it carries extra tax-relevant data (GoBD, 14 July 2025) |
| Risk of inconsistency | None: one representation | PDF and XML can diverge if produced separately; generate both from the same data |
Readability: who will open the invoice?
This is the deciding question for most businesses. A ZUGFeRD PDF works for every recipient: a bookkeeper opens it, a system extracts the XML, and nobody needs to know it is an e-invoice. An XRechnung is an XML file; a recipient without accounting software that understands it sees a wall of tags. Since 1 January 2025 every German business must be able to receive e-invoices, so in principle every recipient can handle either — in practice, many small recipients still process what they can see. If your customers are small businesses, tradespeople, associations or landlords, ZUGFeRD lowers the number of support calls. If your customers are corporates or public bodies with automated intake, XRechnung is the cleaner exchange.
Readability is not free. The BMF makes the XML the legal invoice and treats a deviating PDF as a potential second invoice. If your invoice designer and your XML generator are different tools, they can disagree on a rounding, a description or a tax amount. Use a generator that derives both from one data set and validates the pair.
B2G: does the authority accept ZUGFeRD?
The federal receipt platform states that it accepts XRechnung and other EN 16931-conformant formats, naming ZUGFeRD 2.2.0 as an example, and requires the Leitweg-ID in the buyer reference regardless of format. Many public receivers nevertheless specify the XRechnung CIUS — its mandatory fields, its specification identifier, its German business rules — and a ZUGFeRD file in the EN 16931 profile does not carry those. A ZUGFeRD file in the XRECHNUNG profile does, because its XML is an XRechnung. So for public buyers the practical choice is between bare XRechnung XML and ZUGFeRD in the XRECHNUNG profile, and the receiving portal's instructions decide; state portals differ. Details on portals and the Leitweg-ID are on the XRechnung page; the general distinction on B2B vs B2G.
Profiles: how much data, how strict?
XRechnung has one level and it is strict: everything EN 16931 requires plus the German additions, applied to every invoice. ZUGFeRD lets you pick a level. For B2B the sensible default is the EN 16931 profile, which is the norm's core model without national extras. EXTENDED exists for industries that need more than the norm — several deliveries per invoice, sub-lines, additional references — and has been expanded in 2.4 and 2.5. BASIC is enough for very simple invoices. Avoid MINIMUM and BASIC WL: they are not e-invoices under § 14 UStG. The profile catalogue is explained on the ZUGFeRD page.
Tooling and archiving
XRechnung has the simpler validation story: one official validator, one official configuration, a verdict of acceptable or rejected, and a test suite from the standards body. ZUGFeRD needs two checks — the PDF/A-3 container and the XML — with FeRD's XSD and Schematron since 2.4 covering the XML for every profile. Both formats are supported by the same open-source libraries and by most German accounting software; the formats overview lists what exists across Europe.
Archiving is the same for both once you accept that the XML is the invoice. The GoBD amendment of 14 July 2025 says that for e-invoices it is sufficient to keep the structured part, and that the human-readable part of a hybrid invoice must be kept in addition only if it contains extra or deviating tax-relevant information. Converting a ZUGFeRD PDF to TIFF or printing it destroys the XML and is not permitted. Retention is eight years under § 14b UStG.
When to choose which
- Choose XRechnung when …
- you invoice federal or state bodies; you exchange invoices with partners whose systems consume XML directly; you send over Peppol in UBL; you want one strict rule set and one validator.
- Choose ZUGFeRD (EN 16931 profile) when …
- your customers are businesses that open invoices in a PDF reader; you want the invoice to look like your invoice; you also invoice French customers (Factur-X); you want the lowest friction during the 2025–2028 transition.
- Choose ZUGFeRD (XRECHNUNG profile) when …
- you serve public and private customers from one process and want one readable file that also passes the XRechnung validator — provided the specific authority accepts hybrid files.
- Choose neither when …
- the invoice is at most €250 gross, a passenger ticket, from a Kleinunternehmer, or for a supply exempt under § 4 Nr. 8–29 UStG. Those may stay paper or PDF. Whether an individual invoice falls in an exception requires professional confirmation.
How KRONENWERK handles this
SUPPORTED KRONENWERK produces both formats for German companies from the same invoice data: XRechnung XML and ZUGFeRD as PDF/A-3 with embedded CII, so the PDF and the XML never diverge. Every file is validated at issuance against the EN 16931 rules and, for XRechnung, the KoSIT Schematron, cross-checked with the Mustang library; a file that fails a rule is not issued. Incoming files in either format are read into bills and the XML original is retained unchanged. Peppol delivery goes through an accredited access point provider (Storecove) once the company is connected in Settings → Delivery. See the e-invoicing product page and, for a quick test of any file, the free e-invoice checker.
Frequently asked questions
Is ZUGFeRD or XRechnung "more legal" in Germany?
Neither. Both are EN 16931 formats accepted under § 14 UStG. Only the MINIMUM and BASIC WL profiles of ZUGFeRD fall short.
Can I send ZUGFeRD to a public authority?
Sometimes. The federal platform names EN 16931 formats such as ZUGFeRD as accepted, but many receivers specify the XRechnung CIUS, so use the XRECHNUNG profile or plain XRechnung and follow the portal's instructions.
Can my customer refuse an XRechnung and demand a PDF?
No. Since 1 January 2025 domestic businesses must accept e-invoices; consent is only required for non-structured electronic formats such as plain PDF.
Do I need both formats?
Often not. ZUGFeRD in the EN 16931 profile covers most B2B cases; add XRechnung (or the XRECHNUNG profile) only if you invoice public bodies or partners that require it.
What should I archive for a ZUGFeRD invoice?
The complete file with its XML unchanged. Keeping the XML alone is sufficient under the GoBD; keeping the PDF part is required only if it carries extra tax-relevant data.
Sources
- BMF letter of 15 October 2025 on the mandatory e-invoice (UStAE 14.1 Abs. 13–14, 14c.1 Abs. 4a) — read on
- BMF, GoBD second amendment of 14 July 2025 — read on
- KoSIT, XRechnung versions and bundles — read on
- FeRD, ZUGFeRD FAQ (profiles) — read on
- FeRD, news: ZUGFeRD 2.5.2 published — read on
- E-Rechnung Bund (federal invoice receipt, accepted formats and channels) — read on