EDI X12 vs UN/EDIFACT

The table below highlights the difference between the EDI X12 standard and EDIFACT standard.

Topic		ANSI X12	UN/EDIFACT
Application		- Mostly  used in U.S and North America	- Mostly used in Europe and Asia
Terminologies Equivalence		- Transaction Sets	- Messages
		- Loops	- Groups
		- Terminators	- Separators
Interchange Header/Trailer Segments		- ISA/IEA	- UNB/UNZ
Group Header/Trailer Segments		- GS/GE	- UNG/UNE (optional)
Transaction Set, (Message)  Header/Trailer Segments		- ST/SE	- UNH/UNT
Separators Specification Segment		- None	-  UNA (optional)
Commonly used Terminators, (Separators)	Segment	~	'
	Element	*	+
	Composite	>	:
Release Indicator		- Not supported	- Supported
Composite Elements		- Rarely used	- Commonly Used
Acknowledgment		- TA1 and 997	- CONTRL
Binary support		- BIN, BDS segments	-  ISO 9735-8 - Associated data in EDI
? Security		- ASC X12.58 - Security Structures	-  ISO 9735-5 - Security rules for batch EDI (authenticity, integrity and non-repudiation of origin) -  ISO 9735-6 - Secure authentication and acknowledgement message (message type - AUTACK) -  ISO 9735-7 - Security rules for batch EDI (confidentiality) -  ISO 9735-9 - Security key and certificate management message (message type - KEYMAN)

The main difference between EDIFACT and X12 are

1.EDIFACT uses composite data elements
2.Looping and nesting procedures are different
3.There are 6 data elements types are defined in ANSI X12 while only three are
defined in EDIFACT
4.There is no provision in EDIFACT for optional fields
5.EDIFACT allows for two levels of syntax
6.And ofcourse the message structure in both
standards is different for different messages.