Comparison Overview

Berkshire Hathaway

VS

AXA

Berkshire Hathaway

US
Last Update: 2025-12-12

None

NAICS: 524
NAICS Definition: Insurance Carriers and Related Activities
Employees: 6,832
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

AXA

25, avenue Matignon, Paris, FR, FR, 75008
Last Update: 2025-12-11
Between 800 and 849

As one of the largest global insurers, our purpose is to act for human progress by protecting what matters. Protection has always been at the core of our business, helping individuals, businesses and societies to thrive. And AXA has always been a leader, an innovator, an entrepreneurial company, fostering progress in all its dimensions. Our purpose also links back to the Group's roots. From the outset, AXA has been committed to acting as a force for collective good. From solidarity-based actions with AXA Hearts In Action to work on prevention issues with the AXA Research Fund and the fight against climate change, AXA has always been attentive to its social environment and embraced its responsibility as an insurer: responsibility for taking action upstream in order to better understand risks, with one goal in mind: to ensure better protection. Discover more: https://www.axa.com/en/about-us/our-purpose To know more about AXA's Privacy Policy - https://www-axa-com.cdn.axa-contento-118412.eu/www-axa-com/1cd44dfb-3b7a-4cf7-933b-06024cf7f25b_axa_privacypolicy_internetusers_va.pdf

NAICS: 524
NAICS Definition: Insurance Carriers and Related Activities
Employees: 139,913
Subsidiaries: 41
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/defaultcompany.jpeg
Berkshire Hathaway
ISO 27001
ISO 27001 certification not verified
Not verified
SOC2 Type 1
SOC2 Type 1 certification not verified
Not verified
SOC2 Type 2
SOC2 Type 2 certification not verified
Not verified
GDPR
GDPR certification not verified
Not verified
PCI DSS
PCI DSS certification not verified
Not verified
HIPAA
HIPAA certification not verified
Not verified
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/axa.jpeg
AXA
ISO 27001
ISO 27001 certification not verified
Not verified
SOC2 Type 1
SOC2 Type 1 certification not verified
Not verified
SOC2 Type 2
SOC2 Type 2 certification not verified
Not verified
GDPR
GDPR certification not verified
Not verified
PCI DSS
PCI DSS certification not verified
Not verified
HIPAA
HIPAA certification not verified
Not verified
Compliance Summary
Berkshire Hathaway
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
AXA
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Insurance Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Berkshire Hathaway in 2025.

Incidents vs Insurance Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for AXA in 2025.

Incident History — Berkshire Hathaway (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Berkshire Hathaway cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — AXA (X = Date, Y = Severity)

AXA cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/defaultcompany.jpeg
Berkshire Hathaway
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/axa.jpeg
AXA
Incidents

Date Detected: 5/2021
Type:Ransomware
Motivation: Data Theft, Financial Gain
Blog: Blog

FAQ

Berkshire Hathaway company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to AXA company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

AXA company has historically faced a number of disclosed cyber incidents, whereas Berkshire Hathaway company has not reported any.

In the current year, AXA company and Berkshire Hathaway company have not reported any cyber incidents.

AXA company has confirmed experiencing a ransomware attack, while Berkshire Hathaway company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither AXA company nor Berkshire Hathaway company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither AXA company nor Berkshire Hathaway company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Berkshire Hathaway company nor AXA company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Berkshire Hathaway nor AXA holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

AXA company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Berkshire Hathaway company.

AXA company employs more people globally than Berkshire Hathaway company, reflecting its scale as a Insurance.

Neither Berkshire Hathaway nor AXA holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Berkshire Hathaway nor AXA holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Berkshire Hathaway nor AXA holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Berkshire Hathaway nor AXA holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Berkshire Hathaway nor AXA holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Berkshire Hathaway nor AXA holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

NXLog Agent before 6.11 can load a file specified by the OPENSSL_CONF environment variable.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 8.1
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
Description

uriparser through 0.9.9 allows unbounded recursion and stack consumption, as demonstrated by ParseMustBeSegmentNzNc with large input containing many commas.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 2.9
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L
Description

A vulnerability was detected in Mayan EDMS up to 4.10.1. The affected element is an unknown function of the file /authentication/. The manipulation results in cross site scripting. The attack may be performed from remote. The exploit is now public and may be used. Upgrading to version 4.10.2 is sufficient to fix this issue. You should upgrade the affected component. The vendor confirms that this is "[f]ixed in version 4.10.2". Furthermore, that "[b]ackports for older versions in process and will be out as soon as their respective CI pipelines complete."

Risk Information
cvss2
Base: 5.0
Severity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:N/I:P/A:N
cvss3
Base: 4.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N
cvss4
Base: 5.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/VC:N/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X
Description

MJML through 4.18.0 allows mj-include directory traversal to test file existence and (in the type="css" case) read files. NOTE: this issue exists because of an incomplete fix for CVE-2020-12827.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 4.5
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:L/I:N/A:L
Description

A half-blind Server Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability exists in kube-controller-manager when using the in-tree Portworx StorageClass. This vulnerability allows authorized users to leak arbitrary information from unprotected endpoints in the control plane’s host network (including link-local or loopback services).

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 5.8
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:H/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:N