Comparison Overview

Marsh

VS

AXA XL

Marsh

1166 Avenue of the Americas, New York, New York, 10036, US
Last Update: 2025-11-20
Between 750 and 799

We help our clients and colleagues grow — and our communities thrive — by protecting and promoting Possibility. We seek better ways to manage risk and define more effective paths to the right outcome. We go beyond risk to rewards for our clients, our company, our colleagues, and the communities in which we serve. Marsh, a business of Marsh McLennan (NYSE: MMC), is the world’s top insurance broker and risk advisor. Marsh McLennan is a global leader in risk, strategy and people, advising clients in 130 countries across four businesses: Marsh, Guy Carpenter, Mercer and Oliver Wyman. With annual revenue of $23 billion and more than 85,000 colleagues, Marsh McLennan helps build the confidence to thrive through the power of perspective.

NAICS: 524
NAICS Definition: Insurance Carriers and Related Activities
Employees: 27,488
Subsidiaries: 29
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
2
Attack type number
2

AXA XL

One Bermudiana Road, Hamilton, HM08, BM
Last Update: 2025-11-21
Between 750 and 799

We are a leading provider of insurance and reinsurance offering innovative risk management solutions for businesses worldwide. We partner with those who move the world forward, navigating complex risks and working across diverse industries to support and empower our clients. Note: We are currently experiencing some technical issues with our recruitment platform which we hope to resolve shortly, please be patient with us, thank you for your interest in jobs at AXA XL.

NAICS: 524
NAICS Definition: Insurance Carriers and Related Activities
Employees: 10,464
Subsidiaries: 1
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/marsh.jpeg
Marsh
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/axaxl.jpeg
AXA XL
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
Marsh
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
AXA XL
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Insurance Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Marsh in 2025.

Incidents vs Insurance Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for AXA XL in 2025.

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

Marsh cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

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

AXA XL cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/marsh.jpeg
Marsh
Incidents

Date Detected: 4/2021
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Unauthorized Access
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 04/2021
Type:Data Leak
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 6/2013
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Unauthorized Access
Blog: Blog
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/axaxl.jpeg
AXA XL
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

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

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

In the current year, AXA XL company and Marsh company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither AXA XL company nor Marsh company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Marsh company has disclosed at least one data breach, while the other AXA XL company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither AXA XL company nor Marsh company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Marsh company nor AXA XL company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Marsh nor AXA XL holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Marsh company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to AXA XL company.

Marsh company employs more people globally than AXA XL company, reflecting its scale as a Insurance.

Neither Marsh nor AXA XL holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Marsh nor AXA XL holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Marsh nor AXA XL holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Marsh nor AXA XL holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Marsh nor AXA XL holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Marsh nor AXA XL holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

Angular is a development platform for building mobile and desktop web applications using TypeScript/JavaScript and other languages. Prior to versions 19.2.16, 20.3.14, and 21.0.1, there is a XSRF token leakage via protocol-relative URLs in angular HTTP clients. The vulnerability is a Credential Leak by App Logic that leads to the unauthorized disclosure of the Cross-Site Request Forgery (XSRF) token to an attacker-controlled domain. Angular's HttpClient has a built-in XSRF protection mechanism that works by checking if a request URL starts with a protocol (http:// or https://) to determine if it is cross-origin. If the URL starts with protocol-relative URL (//), it is incorrectly treated as a same-origin request, and the XSRF token is automatically added to the X-XSRF-TOKEN header. This issue has been patched in versions 19.2.16, 20.3.14, and 21.0.1. A workaround for this issue involves avoiding using protocol-relative URLs (URLs starting with //) in HttpClient requests. All backend communication URLs should be hardcoded as relative paths (starting with a single /) or fully qualified, trusted absolute URLs.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 7.7
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:N/SC:H/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/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

Forge (also called `node-forge`) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript. An Uncontrolled Recursion vulnerability in node-forge versions 1.3.1 and below enables remote, unauthenticated attackers to craft deep ASN.1 structures that trigger unbounded recursive parsing. This leads to a Denial-of-Service (DoS) via stack exhaustion when parsing untrusted DER inputs. This issue has been patched in version 1.3.2.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 8.7
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/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

Forge (also called `node-forge`) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript. An Integer Overflow vulnerability in node-forge versions 1.3.1 and below enables remote, unauthenticated attackers to craft ASN.1 structures containing OIDs with oversized arcs. These arcs may be decoded as smaller, trusted OIDs due to 32-bit bitwise truncation, enabling the bypass of downstream OID-based security decisions. This issue has been patched in version 1.3.2.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 6.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/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

Suricata is a network IDS, IPS and NSM engine developed by the OISF (Open Information Security Foundation) and the Suricata community. Prior to versions 7.0.13 and 8.0.2, working with large buffers in Lua scripts can lead to a stack overflow. Users of Lua rules and output scripts may be affected when working with large buffers. This includes a rule passing a large buffer to a Lua script. This issue has been patched in versions 7.0.13 and 8.0.2. A workaround for this issue involves disabling Lua rules and output scripts, or making sure limits, such as stream.depth.reassembly and HTTP response body limits (response-body-limit), are set to less than half the stack size.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
Description

Suricata is a network IDS, IPS and NSM engine developed by the OISF (Open Information Security Foundation) and the Suricata community. In versions from 8.0.0 to before 8.0.2, a NULL dereference can occur when the entropy keyword is used in conjunction with base64_data. This issue has been patched in version 8.0.2. A workaround involves disabling rules that use entropy in conjunction with base64_data.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H