Home / Guides / AXA vs EKTA

AXA vs EKTA: which Schengen visa insurance should you buy?

Last updated: September 13, 2026 · By the SchengenCompare editorial team

Both certificates clear the same €30,000 Article 15 bar. The real difference is what you're paying for beyond that: AXA sells certainty and a refund if your visa is refused; EKTA sells the lowest sticker price with a deductible attached. Here's how to pick.

At a glance

Source: provider pricing pages, Trustpilot & EU Regulation 810/2009, Article 15 · Verified September 2026

Where AXA wins

AXA's real advantage isn't the coverage number, it's what happens around the certificate. Several consulates can verify AXA's certificates electronically, which removes an entire category of doubt from your file — worth something if you're applying through a stricter consulate or you're a first-time applicant with zero appetite for risk. The refusal refund matters too: if the visa doesn't come through, you get the premium back against the official letter, which EKTA doesn't commit to in writing the same way. AXA is also underwritten within the EU regulatory framework; EKTA's underwriter, Auras Insurance LLC, is Comoros-based and explicitly does not submit to EU regulatory oversight, with disputes handled through binding arbitration abroad rather than an EU consumer-protection or ombudsman route.

Where EKTA wins

Price, plainly. EKTA's Start plan sits well below AXA's per-day rate even before its current discount, and still clears the €30,000 legal floor by a wide margin ($50,000 cover). The catch is a 25% deductible on that entry tier — read as: EKTA pays 75% of a claim above the deductible threshold, not the full amount, on the cheapest plan. Stepping up to EKTA's Gold tier removes the deductible for a higher per-day price, at which point the price gap to AXA narrows considerably.

The deductible is the actual decision point

A visa officer only checks that the €30,000 minimum, Schengen-wide validity, exact dates and repatriation are on the certificate — the deductible doesn't affect approval. It matters if you ever actually need to claim: AXA's Basic plan has no deductible on a straightforward claim within its terms, while EKTA's cheapest tier means you cover the first 25% of any claim yourself. If you're buying purely for the paperwork and traveling with a low health risk, that's a reasonable trade for the lower price. If you want the cover to behave like real insurance and not just a document, weigh the deductible against the price difference before defaulting to the cheapest row.

If you're over 60, read this before picking EKTA on price

EKTA's advertised plan limits don't apply the same way past age 60 — an age-based table overrides the selected program regardless of which tier you bought. A 65-year-old on EKTA Gold ($150,000, no deductible advertised) is actually capped at $9,000 with a 20% deductible; the caps drop further with age, down to $2,000 with an 80% deductible over 100. AXA doesn't carry this kind of age-based override — its advertised limits hold regardless of age. For travelers over 60, this narrows the price advantage considerably once real coverage is the comparison, not just the sticker price.

Bottom line

Pick AXA if you want the least friction at the consulate and a documented refund path on refusal. Pick EKTA if the price is the deciding factor and you're comfortable with a deductible on the entry tier — or step up to EKTA's Gold plan if you want EKTA's price positioning without the deductible.

Frequently asked questions