See an original, reproducible text-extraction test of official Europass standard and beta PDFs, including keyword recovery, reading order, parser errors, and limitations.
Short answer: both official Europass PDFs were machine-readable in this controlled test, and every tested keyword survived. But “ATS-friendly” is too broad for a universal yes: the standard export produced a section-order issue in CVLander’s parser and an exception in pypdf, while the beta export merged the job title with the employer and omitted dates that had been entered in the editor.
Both PDFs preserved the wording and tested keywords, which is a useful baseline. The structural differences and extractor failure are exactly why job seekers should test the final file and keep claims narrow: a familiar format is not a compatibility certificate.
The two official Europass PDFs in this controlled test were text-based and retained all tested keywords, but they also showed reading-order, field-boundary, date-export, and parser-compatibility issues. Treat Europass as potentially machine-readable, not universally ATS-safe.
Neither won every check. The standard PDF preserved the visual boundary between title and employer but produced a heading-order issue in CVLander’s parser and an exception in pypdf. The beta PDF extracted in all three libraries but joined title and employer and omitted entered dates from the downloaded file.