Best ISO 42001 auditors and certification bodies in the UK
We compare certification bodies that can issue ISO/IEC 42001 certificates to UK buyers. Each is scored against 7 published criteria: accreditations, reviews, pricing, responsiveness, tooling, reputation, and integration.
Our assessment criteria
Accreditations
Which accreditations the body holds, and from whom. ISO 42001 under UKAS or another IAF signatory counts most; related standards count for less. Checked against the accreditation body's register, not the certification body's claims.
Reviews
What clients say about their experience working with the accreditation bodies through the audit process. Review score is weighted by star rating, relevance, quantity and recency.
Pricing
How clearly the body explains its prices, what those prices include, and the value compared to the rest of the market.
Responsiveness
How quickly and practically a body responds and conducts the audit process, including availability and end-to-end project timings.
Leverage of software/tooling
Whether the body works with the software, platform and tools you already run. We look for auditors who take evidence from your existing systems instead of asking you to reproduce it in spreadsheets or other formats.
Auditor reputation
The standing of the audit team that a buyer can check. We look for named and dated ISO/IEC 42001 certificates, relevant management-systems experience, published AI clients or case studies, and information about who may conduct the audit.
Integrated audits
Whether the body can fold ISO 42001 into a management system you already run. Most buyers hold one standard and can skip this column. For anyone already certified to ISO 27001 or 9001 it is often the criterion that decides, because the alternative is a second system to maintain alongside the first.
ISO 42001 auditors compared
Every body marked against the 7 scoring criteria. For full evidence behind the scoring, visit the methodology page.
| # | Total/10 | Certification body | Accreditations22% | Reviews14% | Pricing15% | Responsiveness17% | Leverage of software/tooling16% | Auditor reputation10% | Integrated audits6% |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 7.7 |  |
4 | 10 | 9 | 10 | 9 | 6 | 6 |
| 2 | 7.6 |  |
6 | 8 | 6 | 8 | 9 | 9 | 10 |
| 3 | 6.9 |  |
10 | 4 | 4 | 5 | 7 | 10 | 9 |
| 4 | 6.7 |  |
9 | 7 | 5 | 6 | 5 | 7 | 8 |
| 5 | 6.4 |  |
8 | 8 | 4 | 5 | 5 | 7 | 9 |
| 6 | 5.8 |  |
9 | 0 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 5 | 8 |
| 7 | 5.4 |  |
9 | 0 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 5 | 8 |
| 8 | 5.1 |  |
6 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 5 | 8 |
Detailed analysis of top ISO 42001 auditors
One entry per body: the verdict, followed by the score and evidence for each criterion. Every scored claim carries a numbered source reference, listed at the foot of the entry.
1
Tempo Audits
Visit website
7.7/10
Tempo Audits
Visit website7.7 overall, first place. Tempo leads on pricing, responsiveness and reviews. It also shares the top score for software and tooling.
Read more
Schellman is only a rounding point behind, at 7.69 against Tempo's 7.64 before rounding. Read both entries together and choose according to the criteria that matter most to you.
Accreditation is Tempo's limiting factor, and it carries the heaviest weight. It scores 4 on accreditation. UKAS currently accredits it for ISO 27001 and SOC 2, not ISO 42001. Tempo is progressing through the second UKAS tranche and expects accreditation in late 2026, based on its public confirmations. That would materially change this entry.
What they certify: ISO 27001 certification, UKAS accredited · AICPA SOC 2 assurance · ISO 42001 certification · All three audited together.
What to watch for: If your customer requires a UKAS-accredited ISO 42001 certificate, a certificate issued outside that scope will not satisfy the requirement. Ask for the accreditation schedule in writing, check the standards it covers, and ask what would happen to your certificate if Tempo receives ISO 42001 accreditation after your audit.
UKAS accredits Tempo for ISO/IEC 27001 [1]. Tempo is in the second UKAS tranche for ISO/IEC 42001 and, based on its public confirmations, expects accreditation in late 2026 [3].
Read more
The score reflects the standard named on the accreditation schedule. Tempo scores 4 rather than 0 because its UKAS relationship, impartiality assessment and audited certification processes already exist. Those foundations cover part of the distance to ISO 42001 accreditation.
(9.5 under the review method). We read all 74 reviews. 67 concern audits, all received five stars. One concerns an ISO 42001 audit, 34 mention ISO 27001, and every audit review dates from the last twelve months [4].
Read more
Reviewers repeatedly mention speed and clarity. Tempo has not replied to any review. With no low ratings, it has not faced a public complaint requiring a response.
Tempo is the only body in this study that publishes certification prices. Initial certification costs £3,500 to £20,000, surveillance costs £1,600 to £9,000 a year, and recertification costs £3,500 to £14,000 [2].
Read more
It also identifies the main cost drivers, explains what the prices include, and says that roughly 70 to 75 per cent of quoted audit days involve time with an auditor.
The other seven bodies quote on enquiry. That makes Tempo's published pricing the clearest point of comparison in this market.
Its pricing material identifies headcount, the AI roles in scope, site numbers, sector risk and the AI systems covered. Putting those AI-specific factors alongside headcount gives a buyer more information about how the audit will be sized.
The score stops at 9 because the final audit-day count still requires an enquiry. It is not a 10 for that reason.
Value is easier to assess because Tempo publishes rates. Its UKAS-accredited work in ISO 27001 and its SOC 2 assurance offer are aimed at cloud and SaaS companies, with a remote-first delivery model and lower overhead than many traditional providers.
Tempo presents speed as a core reason for its existence, and client statements support that position. Reviews describe an audit that "moved really fast" to meet a deadline, another that "dovetailed so smoothly the impact was barely noticeable", and a direct comparison that rated Tempo faster than every other firm approached.
Read more
Tempo publishes no booking lead time, so the score relies on client evidence rather than a formal commitment. Every account we found described it as the fastest body in this study, and no other body came close on this criterion.
Tempo works exclusively with software, SaaS and AI companies. Its published material discusses ISO/IEC 42006 audit methodology rather than repeating the standard's contents.
Read more
It works within the tools its clients already use, including Vanta, Drata and Secureframe. Native integrations allow it to ingest continuous evidence through APIs, reducing the manual document review that many audits require.
No other certification body in this study focuses solely on software and AI companies. That makes this criterion especially relevant to a business whose AI is part of its product.
Tempo has the shortest record in the study. Founded in 2022, it has not yet issued an accredited ISO 42001 certificate and has not published a named AI case study.
Read more
Those limitations reduce its score on the checks that reward a longer, publicly documented record.
It has built a growing public profile through its founder, LinkedIn activity and its own website. Tempo also publishes who will conduct an audit, which is unusual in this field, and clients name the same auditor across an engagement.
Review evidence is scored separately under Reviews. We have not counted it again here.
Tempo focuses on ISO 27001, SOC 2 and ISO 42001. That combination covers the standards many software companies are likely to consider together.
Read more
Its range is narrower than the larger certification bodies in this study. Buyers with a wider management-system portfolio may need another provider.
Reporting, not scored
Tempo's stated position is "Less jargon, more clarity". Client statements support that description. One reviewer, who had "worked with many auditors over the years", described a clear difference. Another said the process was explained without confusion.
The company aims to communicate plainly, and its reviews support that impression.
2
Schellman
Visit website
7.6/10
Schellman
Visit website7.6 overall, second place. Schellman has the strongest ISO 42001 experience in this study. It is more established in the US market than the UK market, which matters on a UK-focused ranking.
Read more
ANAB accredited Schellman to certify ISO 42001 in September 2024, around eighteen months before UKAS granted its first accreditation. It therefore has about two years of ISO 42001 audit experience behind it, alongside the broadest set of standards and assurance services audited together.
It scores 6 on accreditation because ANAB is IAF-recognised and it is not UKAS. Tempo and Schellman are effectively level before rounding, at 7.64 and 7.69. Schellman's strengths are international accreditation, established ISO 42001 audit experience and integrated work alongside SOC 2.
What they certify: ISO/IEC 42001 and ISO/IEC 27001 · SOC 1, SOC 2 and SOC 3 · PCI DSS, FedRAMP, HITRUST · AI red teaming.
What to watch for: UK or EU customers whose procurement requirements name UKAS may ask you to explain Schellman's ANAB accreditation. Check whether a UKAS grant has landed rather than assuming it has. If you already use Schellman for SOC 2, confirm that ISO 42001 will be handled by AI specialists rather than assigned automatically to the existing SOC 2 team.
ANAB accredited Schellman for ISO/IEC 42001 in September 2024, making it the first certification body in the world to receive accreditation for the standard [1].
Read more
Schellman was also named in the UKAS first tranche, although the grant remains unconfirmed [3].
ANAB is an IAF multilateral agreement signatory, so Schellman's certificate is internationally recognised. The score reflects this UK-focused ranking. UK procurement teams that specify UKAS may still ask questions, so the score is 6 rather than 9.
Intertek receives the same score for its JAS-ANZ accreditation.
(7.8 under the review method). Schellman has 33 reviews on Gartner Peer Insights, with a 5.0 rating in the compliance and attestation category.
Read more
The newest review dates from August 2025 [5].
Gartner blocks automated access, so we read the profile by hand. We could not read each review closely enough to assess its relevance line by line. Recency is the main factor keeping Schellman below Tempo.
Schellman publishes no price list. Its own material describes a fixed-fee model, which gives buyers some certainty about the structure of the cost without providing a figure.
Read more
The firm operates at the higher end of this study. Its work combines specialist technical expertise with complex scopes that often include SOC 2 or other frameworks. That level of service carries higher pricing than the more focused offers in the market.
Schellman has a strong record of reporting on time, particularly through SOC 2 work where deadlines form part of the engagement.
Read more
Its 90 per cent client retention rate across five years is consistent with a firm that delivers reliably.
It publishes no booking lead time, which keeps the score below 9.
Schellman works with cloud, data-centre, fintech and SaaS businesses. It also runs AI red-teaming engagements, giving its teams experience testing AI systems under attack.
Read more
Its published material on lessons from real ISO 42001 audits is the only material of its kind from a body with two years of experience delivering those audits. Only Tempo scores higher on this criterion.
Schellman matches BSI's score through a different record. Founded in 2002, it gained ISO 42001 accreditation eighteen months before the first UK accreditation.
Read more
It has more publicly documented ISO 42001 experience than any other body in this study.
Schellman identifies three of the 17 publicly named certificates as its own, including Amazon Web Services. It also publishes named practitioners writing about real ISO 42001 engagements, rather than only explaining the standard.
Schellman offers the broadest integrated proposition in this study. ANAB accredits it for ISO/IEC 42001, ISO/IEC 27001, ISO/IEC 27701, ISO/IEC 20000-1, ISO 9001 and ISO 22301.
Read more
UKAS also accredits it for ISO/IEC 27001.
Alongside those standards, Schellman provides SOC 1, SOC 2, SOC 3, PCI DSS, FedRAMP and HITRUST. A business already using Schellman for SOC 2 can add AI certification within an established relationship and audit cycle.
Reporting, not scored
Schellman's published writing is clear and focused on practitioners working in compliance and audit.
3
BSI Assurance UK
Visit website
6.9/10
BSI Assurance UK
Visit website6.9 overall, third place. BSI offers the strongest accreditation position in the study, with a score of 10, and the strongest auditor-reputation score.
Read more
Its overall result falls because the public record contains no pricing and little evidence about speed. It scores 4 on pricing and 5 on responsiveness, which is what pulls a first-class credential down to third.
If your certificate must pass an enterprise procurement review with minimal explanation, BSI is the clearest starting point. If you need a price before opening discussions or have a tight deadline, the other entries deserve close attention.
What they certify: ISO/IEC 42001 certification · Pre-certification assessment, sold separately · ISO/IEC 27001 and ISO 9001 alongside it · ISO 42001 training, and the standard itself.
What to watch for: BSI publishes no price information, and its pre-certification assessment is separate from the certification audit. Ask who will conduct your audit and what relevant work they have completed. BSI helped shape the standard, but that does not tell you who will be assigned to your engagement.
BSI is the only body in this study accredited by all three of UKAS, RvA in the Netherlands and ANAB in the United States for the relevant certification work [2].
Read more
UKAS accredited it as the first certification body in the world for ISO/IEC 42001 [1].
The combination gives BSI a strong position for buyers serving the UK, EU and US markets. It is the only body here with that accreditation coverage, which is why the criterion carries 20 per cent.
(4.4 under the review method). BSI has 29 Trustpilot reviews. 26 received one or two stars, and BSI replied to none [5].
Read more
Eleven reviews concern certification audits, with an average rating of 1.45. Complaints include an audit report that was never sent and extra audit days announced nine days before a certificate expired. The remaining reviews concern BSI's shop, invoices, standards documents and training. Trustpilot categorises BSI under Money & Insurance.
BSI publishes no prices, ranges or audit-day guidance on its ISO 42001 pages. Buyers must obtain every figure through an enquiry [3].
Read more
BSI does publish substantial free guidance about the standard, which gives buyers useful context before they make contact. That is why the score is above zero.
Its strong global brand and public-sector recognition place it among the higher-priced traditional UKAS-accredited bodies. The research found no published figures to support a more precise comparison.
BSI publishes no booking lead time or turnaround commitment. We found no evidence that establishes how quickly it delivers a specific ISO 42001 audit.
Read more
The score therefore stays at the midpoint. It reflects missing public evidence, rather than a finding that BSI is slow.
BSI has substantial resources and proprietary portals, including BSI Connect. Its audit model remains highly standardised and formal, with less public evidence of close integration with continuous-compliance tools.
Read more
That approach may suit a regulated product with formal evidence requirements. A software company releasing changes every week should ask how BSI will use its existing systems and evidence during the audit.
BSI has the longest management-system certification record in the study and the strongest publicly documented ISO 42001 record.
Read more
Its named and dated certificates include KPMG Australia, the first organisation certified globally through BSI, NUWAVE, certified in May 2026, Darktrace and Miro.
No other body in this study can point to a comparable set of publicly identified ISO 42001 certificates.
BSI holds a broad range of UKAS-accredited management-system scopes, extending well beyond ISO 9001, ISO 27001 and ISO 42001.
Read more
That gives buyers with several existing standards a strong basis for a combined programme, supported by its UKAS, RvA and ANAB accreditations.
It scores below Schellman because BSI does not provide SOC 2.
Reporting, not scored
BSI publishes thorough material in formal standards language. It is accurate and useful for readers familiar with ISO terminology. Buyers new to ISO 42001 may need to work harder to extract the practical points.
4
Alcumus ISOQAR
Visit website
6.7/10
Alcumus ISOQAR
Visit website6.7 overall, fourth place. Alcumus ISOQAR is a mid-market all-rounder. It names the people who will conduct ISO 42001 work and offers separate gap analyses for the clauses and Annex A controls.
Read more
Its broad UKAS-accredited range supports combined audits for many buyers. Public information about the engagement remains limited, particularly pricing, lead times and the method used to calculate a combined audit.
What they certify: ISO/IEC 42001:2023 certification, UKAS accredited · Gap analysis against the clauses · Gap analysis against the Annex A controls.
What to watch for: ISOQAR publishes no method for sizing a combined audit. If you already hold ISO 27001, ask for the audit-day calculation and the saving from combining standards. No prices or accreditation date appear on the relevant page. The gap analysis is separate from certification, as the organisation preparing you cannot audit you for the certificate.
ISOQAR states on its own website that it is "now UKAS accredited for ISO/IEC 42001" [1]. UKAS lists Alcumus ISOQAR Limited in its first tranche [2].
Read more
The score of 9 matches NQA's because both hold one relevant accreditation, while BSI holds three. ISOQAR does not publish a grant date, so the date remains unconfirmed. We have asked for clarification.
(6.6 under the review method). ISOQAR has 26 reviews on reviews.io, with a 4.4 rating. Twelve concern training courses, and four concern audits.
Read more
Three of those four audit reviews received five stars [4].
The only review in this study that names ISO 42001 concerns a one-star ISO 42001 lead-auditor course. We found no review about an ISO 42001 audit in the last year.
ISOQAR publishes no prices and offers a quote request with a callback. It scores above providers that publish less about the pre-audit work because it describes two separate gap-analysis products.
Read more
A buyer can see that these are distinct purchases before making contact.
The separation between clause conformity and control selection reflects the structure of ISO/IEC 42001 clause 6.1.3. It gives buyers some evidence that ISOQAR has considered the standard beyond a generic checklist.
ISOQAR serves UK SMEs, mid-market organisations and supply chains. The research found no published figures to compare its value with other providers.
ISOQAR publishes no lead time or turnaround commitment. We found no particular public evidence that it moves faster or slower than comparable mid-market providers.
Read more
The score is an inference from the available public record, rather than a published commitment or direct client evidence.
ISOQAR uses customer portals to manage engagements. Its public material gives less evidence of API-based evidence collection or close integration with compliance software.
Read more
That describes what buyers can establish from the public record. Ask directly how the audit team will work with your existing systems, particularly if your AI product already generates continuous evidence.
ISOQAR has the strongest public record among the mid-sized bodies in this study. UKAS has accredited it since February 1993, and it publishes the only ISO 42001 case study here that names both the client and the person who conducted the work.
Read more
It also names three ISO 42001 practitioners. Their individual credentials do not appear alongside their names, which limits the score and keeps it off an 8.
ISOQAR holds UKAS accreditation across ISO 9001, ISO 14001, ISO 22000, ISO 22301, ISO/IEC 27001, ISO 45001, ISO 50001 and ISO 55001.
Read more
That covers ISO 27001, the existing standard most buyers in this study are likely to hold.
The company publishes no method for calculating a combined audit day count and has no SOC 2 offer. Those gaps keep it below the leading scores.
Reporting, not scored
ISOQAR writes clearly for organisations preparing for an audit. Its free responsible-AI guide is practical and easier to use than the standards-focused material from some larger bodies. It is less direct than NQA's buyer-focused writing.
5
LRQA
Visit website
6.4/10
LRQA
Visit website6.4 overall, fifth place. LRQA is a long-established UK certification body with the UKAS accreditation many UK buyers will seek.
Read more
It was accredited by UKAS in February 2026 and named in the UKAS first tranche. Its public record becomes thinner after accreditation. It publishes no prices or lead times, and the research found little public information about its auditors or sector experience. Those gaps keep it in the middle of the table.
What they certify: ISO/IEC 42001 certification, in two phases · Optional gap analysis with an auditor beforehand · Integrated audits across several management systems · Training: one-day introduction, internal auditor, lead auditor conversion.
What to watch for: Ask for pricing, lead times, named auditor details and relevant credentials. LRQA publishes no sector case studies for ISO 42001. It offers an optional gap analysis, which remains separate from the certification audit.
UKAS lists LRQA Limited in its first tranche [1]. Third-party reporting says UKAS granted the accreditation in February 2026.
Read more
The accreditation is reported rather than confirmed against a current register. LRQA is a long-established UK certification body, and the available evidence points to the UKAS scope a UK buyer would expect.
(7.7 under the review method). LRQA has 323 Trustpilot reviews with a headline rating of 4.9, but almost none concern audits.
Read more
Of the newest 200 reviews, 171 are in Dutch and 190 concern training courses [4].
Seven reviews concern an audit, with an average rating of 3.86. One is in English. LRQA is the only body in this study that has replied to a review.
The reviews support a picture of a traditional UKAS-accredited provider. The headline rating alone does not measure ISO 42001 audit quality.
LRQA publishes no prices, ranges or audit-day guidance. Buyers must request a quote before they can size the purchase.
Read more
Its offer appears suited to large, multi-entity organisations and complex enterprise supply chains. The research found no published figures to establish how its prices compare with other providers.
LRQA publishes no booking lead time. Its two-phase audit description gives no timescale for either phase.
Read more
The public record does not establish how quickly LRQA can deliver a particular audit, so the score remains at the midpoint.
LRQA's public material gives no clear evidence of API-based evidence collection or close integration with client compliance tools.
Read more
It also says little about cloud infrastructure or model development.
The audit experience may depend heavily on the auditor assigned. Ask how the team will use the systems and evidence your organisation already maintains.
LRQA has certified management systems since 1985 and can point to one publicly identified ISO 42001 certificate.
Read more
Emirates Health Services became one of the first organisations worldwide to certify to the standard in April 2024.
That combination gives LRQA a longer management-system record and some ISO 42001 evidence, although the public record is smaller than BSI's or Schellman's.
LRQA offers integrated audits across several management systems. Its training ladder also includes introductory, internal-auditor and lead-auditor courses, supporting the internal capability needed for a combined programme.
It scores level with BSI on this criterion.
Reporting, not scored
LRQA's public writing is clear and conventional. It assumes a reader who already understands certification terminology.
6
NQA Certification
Visit website
5.8/10
NQA Certification
Visit website5.8 overall, sixth place. NQA offers a substantial upper-mid-market proposition. Its absence from the main review platforms produces a score of zero for Reviews, one of only two such scores in the study.
Read more
That gap affects its ranking more than any other single weakness.
NQA's case is straightforward: it offers UKAS-accredited certification from an established mid-market body. Buyers must establish most of the practical details through an enquiry.
What they certify: ISO/IEC 42001 certification, UKAS accredited · The standard management-system set · Integrated audits.
What to watch for: NQA's ISO 42001 page blocks automated access, so part of this entry relies on third-party reporting rather than direct access to the source. Confirm the accreditation date directly. Ask about price, lead time, named auditors, the audit-day calculation and whether AI scope will be assessed by AI specialists or generalists.
UKAS accredited NQA for ISO/IEC 42001 in January 2026, among the earliest grants after BSI [1]. UKAS also lists NQA Certification in its first tranche [2].
Read more
NQA scores 9 rather than 10 because it holds one relevant accreditation, while BSI holds three. That distinction matters more to organisations selling into the EU or US than to a UK-only buyer.
We found no readable NQA review profile on Trustpilot, reviews.io or Gartner.
Read more
The score records a gap in NQA's public evidence. It does not assess the quality of its audits or establish that NQA has no satisfied clients.
NQA publishes no prices. Its ISO 42001 material gives buyers more detail about the certification process than BSI's public pages, so a prospective client can approach the enquiry with a clearer idea of the work involved.
Read more
NQA presents itself as a business-friendly provider for SMEs and mid-market SaaS organisations. The research found no published figures to test its value against other bodies.
NQA publishes no booking lead time. The score sits above the largest providers because a mid-market body may have more scheduling flexibility.
Read more
That is an inference from relative scale, not evidence published by NQA. It is therefore scored at 6 rather than higher.
NQA has experience auditing remote-first and cloud-hosted systems and accepts evidence from automated compliance dashboards, according to its published material.
Read more
We could not establish whether NQA assigns dedicated AI auditors or generalist auditors to AI scope. We have asked and recorded the question as unanswered.
NQA was formed in 1988 and has certified management systems since then. UKAS granted its ISO 42001 accreditation in January 2026, but NQA has not publicly named an ISO 42001 certificate it has issued.
Read more
The public record contains no AI case study, named auditor or published credentials for this standard. NQA has a long general certification history, with limited ISO 42001 evidence a buyer can check.
NQA offers integrated audits across its management-system range, including ISO 27001. That covers the standard many buyers in this study already hold.
Read more
NQA does not publish how it calculates a combined audit day count and does not offer SOC 2.
Reporting, not scored
NQA writes about ISO 42001 for organisations considering certification. The explanations remain technically useful without assuming that the reader works in auditing.
Its buyer-focused writing is the second clearest in the study after Tempo's.
7
TÜV UK
Visit website
5.4/10
TÜV UK
Visit website5.4 overall, seventh place. TÜV UK is the UK arm of TÜV NORD, one of three unrelated companies that use the TÜV name.
Read more
The practical task is identifying the correct legal entity and accreditation schedule. TÜV SÜD and TÜV Rheinland offer their own ISO 42001 services, with separate accreditations. Their certificates do not belong to TÜV UK.
What they certify: ISO/IEC 42001 certification, UKAS and RvA accredited · A broad management-system and product-safety portfolio · Integrated audits.
What to watch for: Confirm the legal entity on your quotation. TÜV UK Limited is the entity named in the UKAS programme. Read the accreditation schedule rather than relying on a TÜV logo. TÜV UK publishes no prices or lead times, so both need to be established through an enquiry.
TÜV NORD holds UKAS and RvA accreditation for ISO/IEC 42001, covering TÜV UK's relevant certification work [1].
Read more
UKAS lists TÜV UK Limited in its first tranche [3].
The two accreditations support UK and EU-facing work. The score is 9 rather than 10 because the study found no US accreditation.
We found no readable review profile for TÜV UK. A TÜV NORD group page contains one review about work in India from 2022.
Read more
The German page concerns vehicle inspection. There is nothing a UK buyer of an ISO 42001 audit can read, so this scores zero.
That is a finding about the available public evidence, not an assessment of audit quality. Buyers may still know and trust the wider TÜV brand, but this study found no relevant review record to score.
TÜV UK publishes no information about cost, audit days or inclusions for ISO 42001.
Read more
Its brand and international enterprise position may influence the price of an engagement, but the research found no published figures to support a direct comparison. BSI scores at the same level and publishes more free guidance to help buyers prepare for an enquiry.
TÜV UK publishes no booking lead time, turnaround commitment or other clear timescale.
Read more
The available evidence does not establish how quickly it can deliver a particular audit. The score therefore remains at the midpoint.
TÜV UK's public material gives little evidence that it works inside a client's existing compliance tools during an audit.
Read more
Its assessment experience in physical and regulated systems may suit AI embedded in industrial or safety-critical products. A software company delivering models as a service should ask how the audit team will handle cloud evidence, development records and automated compliance systems.
TÜV has a strong heritage and a high level of recognition. The group dates from 1869, and one ISO 42001 certificate, for Mentech Innovation, can be traced to TÜV UK, although we could not confirm the certificate date.
Read more
TÜV UK publishes no named auditors, credentials or AI case study. TÜV SÜD is a separate company, and certificates issued by TÜV SÜD do not belong to TÜV UK.
TÜV UK's broad portfolio includes ISO 27001 and ISO 9001, so combined certification should be possible for buyers holding those standards.
Read more
It publishes no method for calculating a combined audit day count and offers no SOC 2.
Reporting, not scored
TÜV UK writes in standards and engineering language. That suits its traditional client base, though software teams new to ISO 42001 may find the material harder to use.
8
Intertek Certification
Visit website
5.1/10
Intertek Certification
Visit website5.1 overall, eighth place. Intertek is properly accredited to certify ISO 42001. The accreditation comes from JAS-ANZ rather than UKAS, which will matter to some UK buyers and have little effect on others.
Read more
JAS-ANZ granted the accreditation in 2025. It is an IAF multilateral agreement signatory, so Intertek's certificate is internationally recognised. This UK-focused ranking gives the accreditation a score of 6 rather than 9 because UK procurement teams often name UKAS specifically. A global ranking would place Intertek higher.
What they certify: ISO/IEC 42001 certification, JAS-ANZ accredited · A broad testing, inspection and certification portfolio · ISO 42001 AI Foundation training course, UK.
What to watch for: If your customer requires UKAS accreditation, a JAS-ANZ certificate may not meet its stated procurement requirement, despite being internationally recognised. Ask whether UKAS accreditation has been granted and what would happen to a JAS-ANZ certificate if it is. Businesses with an Asia-Pacific footprint may place greater value on JAS-ANZ accreditation.
JAS-ANZ accredited Intertek to certify ISO/IEC 42001:2023 globally. Intertek announced the accreditation in 2025 [1], before the first UKAS grants.
Read more
Intertek is not currently confirmed as UKAS-accredited for this standard, although UKAS lists Intertek Certification Ltd in its first tranche [2].
JAS-ANZ signs the IAF multilateral agreement, which supports international recognition and portability. The score is 6, matching Schellman's ANAB accreditation because both are recognised outside the UK, while UK procurement commonly asks for UKAS by name.
(2.5 under the review method). Intertek has an unclaimed Trustpilot profile with 17 reviews. Fifteen received one or two stars, and none received a reply [4].
Read more
Two reviews concern certification, both rated one star. The newer review is from January 2025. The rest describe unanswered calls and emails across the group's testing businesses. This is a group profile, not a review record specific to Intertek's UK certification arm.
Intertek publishes no cost or audit-day information in its ISO 42001 material.
Read more
Its global FTSE 100 testing, inspection and certification portfolio may allow it to combine ISO 42001 with existing ISO 27001 work, product testing, laboratory assurance or supply-chain work. The research found no published figures to establish whether that produces better value than other providers.
Intertek publishes no booking lead time or turnaround commitment.
Read more
The available evidence does not establish the delivery speed of a specific audit, so the score remains at the midpoint.
Intertek is a large testing and inspection organisation with deep experience in physical engineering, manufacturing and supply chains.
Read more
It uses standard remote-auditing video tools, but its public material gives limited evidence of API-based evidence collection or compliance-software integration.
Intertek's UK ISO 42001 AI Foundation course shows investment in building capability. Buyers should ask how the certification team will handle evidence from their existing systems.
Intertek has strong recognition across global supply chains, manufacturing and international corporate markets.
Read more
Its public record gives less evidence of a specialist technology-certification approach.
JAS-ANZ accredited it for ISO/IEC 42001 in 2025, but no certificate it has issued is publicly named. The research found no AI case study, named auditor or published credentials for this standard.
Intertek's testing, inspection and certification range gives it a broad basis for combined audits.
Read more
It publishes no method for calculating a combined audit day count and does not offer SOC 2.
Reporting, not scored
Intertek's material uses standards language throughout. It is aimed at readers already familiar with certification and may require more work from a buyer approaching ISO 42001 for the first time.
The same ranking, weighted by company size
What matters to a twenty-person startup is not what matters to a five-thousand-person group. Each cut re-weights the same scores.
Questions buyers ask
Who can certify my company to ISO 42001?
+
Only a certification body accredited for ISO/IEC 42001 can issue your company an accredited certificate. A consultancy may help you prepare, and accreditation rules then prevent it from auditing a client it has prepared, so preparation and certification are two separate purchases.
Does an ISO 42001 certificate need to be UKAS accredited?
+
It depends on who is asking for it. A certificate issued outside a body's accreditation scope will not satisfy a contract that names UKAS, and UK procurement commonly does. Ask which accreditation body granted the certification body its accreditation and for which standards, then check it against that body's public record before signing.
How much does ISO 42001 certification cost in the UK?
+
Initial certification runs £3,500 to £20,000 in the only published price range in this study, surveillance £1,600 to £9,000 a year and recertification £3,500 to £14,000. Headcount, number of sites and how many AI systems are in scope move the quote most. Every other body on this list quotes on enquiry, which is the widest single gap in this market.
How long does ISO 42001 certification take?
+
Six to twelve months from a standing start, less if you already hold ISO 27001. The audit runs in two stages a few weeks apart, and the certificate lasts three years with an annual surveillance visit.
Does ISO 27001 count towards ISO 42001 certification?
+
It gives you a head start rather than a credit. The management-system structure carries across - scope, risk processes, internal audit and management review - and the AI-specific controls in Annex A still have to be addressed. A certification body accredited for ISO 27001 is also not thereby accredited for ISO/IEC 42001.
Can an ISO 42001 certification body pay to rank higher on this list?
+
No. A labelled listing can be bought and a score cannot. The criteria and weights are published so you can check any ranking against the method, corrections are reviewed within two working days, and payment affects what a body can tell us and what it is shown of the workings - never its position.
Sarah Rice
Editor
Sarah Rice is a PR specialist & digital marketing expert who has spent more than 30 years working with SEO & GEO agencies, PR agencies and brands across a huge range of sectors. She is Director of Rice PR and Director & Editor of The HR World. Earlier in her career, she was Head of Public Affairs and Press Manager at RAC and Head of Campaigns at JBP, and has also worked with DC Thomas and a number of charities.
- Director, Bristol Women in Business Charter
- Masters, Creative Writing