The diagnosis and epidemiological studies of Q fever depend on serology. Among the main methods employed are the enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) and the immunofluorescent assay test (IFAT). We show that two commercial assays representing the two methods with two different cut-off titres can lead to significant differences in diagnostic and seroprevalence estimates. This in turn emphasizes the need for a standardized gold method to compare the various assays; whether this standard is 'in-house' or commercially obtained.