APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk ManagementvsCFTC System Safeguards (17 CFR 37, 38, 39, 49)
See exactly how APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management controls map to CFTC System Safeguards (17 CFR 37, 38, 39, 49). Pre-computed mappings, identified gaps, and coverage analysis.
Need this as a report you can hand to an assessor? A coverage crosswalk for this pair can be built to order.
According to the TheArtOfService Compliance Knowledge Graph:
APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management maps to CFTC System Safeguards (17 CFR 37, 38, 39, 49) with 93% coverage across 40 directly mapped controls. Analysis of 43 APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management controls identifies 3 compliance gaps, primarily concentrated in Service Provider Management.
Source: TheArtOfService Knowledge Graph | 43 controls analysed | 686 frameworks | 309K+ cross-framework mappings
Control Mappings
Showing 20 of 52 mapped controls across 10 domains. Sign up to explore all 309K+ mappings across 686 frameworks.
Operational Risk Management Framework(14 mappings)
Critical Operations(4 mappings)
Business Continuity(2 mappings)
+32 more mappings
Plus AI-powered gap analysis, compliance advisory, PDF exports, and cross-mapping for all 686 frameworks.
Create Free Account →Free forever, no credit card required
A APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management to CFTC System Safeguards (17 CFR 37, 38, 39, 49) crosswalk, built to order
The table above lists candidate mappings. A crosswalk answers the narrower question you are probably here for: which CFTC System Safeguards (17 CFR 37, 38, 39, 49) controls your existing APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management work already satisfies, which are real gaps, and the reasoning behind every claim so you can check it. One pair, $299, one time.
This direction has not been through crosswalk review and sign off, so no coverage figure is published for it. Reporting an unreviewed number would be worse than reporting none. It can be built to order at the same price as a pair that is already on the shelf.
If the two frameworks turn out to have too little in common for a crosswalk to help you, we say so and refund it rather than send a number worth nothing.
This direction has not been through crosswalk review and sign off, so no coverage figure is published for it. Reporting an unreviewed number would be worse than reporting none. It can be built to order at the same price as a pair that is already on the shelf.
If the two frameworks turn out to have too little in common for a crosswalk to help you, we say so and refund it rather than send a number worth nothing.
- Every evidenced control, with the reasoning behind it
- Every gap, with what it requires
- Its level of review stated plainly, not a bare number
Why this page shows two different percentages. The 93% in the header counts how many APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management controls carry at least one candidate mapping in the graph, before any review. The crosswalk percentage counts something stricter: how many CFTC System Safeguards (17 CFR 37, 38, 39, 49) controls are actually evidenced, after a pass that argued against each mapping and kept only what survived. They answer different questions and they are not meant to agree.
A crosswalk narrows the work. It does not replace an audit, and your assessor may take a different view on individual controls. Mappings between frameworks are judgements, not text printed in either standard, which is why every claim in the report shows its reasoning. Questions go to support@theartofservice.com.
Related Comparisons
Other APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management comparisons
Other CFTC System Safeguards (17 CFR 37, 38, 39, 49) comparisons
Stop Paying Consultants to Read Spreadsheets
AI-powered compliance intelligence across 686 frameworks, at a fraction of consulting costs.
Free
- ✓ 686 framework browser
- ✓ Cross-framework mappings (309K+)
- ✓ 824 compliance assessments
- ✓ 3 AI queries & searches per day
Professional
- ✓ Unlimited AI Compliance Advisory
- ✓ Unlimited full-text search
- ✓ Framework self-assessment
- ✓ PDF, Excel & CSV exports
What are the key differences between APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management and CFTC System Safeguards (17 CFR 37, 38, 39, 49)?
APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management has 43 controls across its framework, while CFTC System Safeguards (17 CFR 37, 38, 39, 49) covers 39 controls. Direct mapping analysis identifies 40 overlapping controls (93% coverage). The frameworks diverge most significantly in Service Provider Management, where 1 APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management controls have no direct CFTC System Safeguards (17 CFR 37, 38, 39, 49) equivalent.
How many controls map between APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management and CFTC System Safeguards (17 CFR 37, 38, 39, 49)?
Of 43 total APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management controls, 40 map directly to CFTC System Safeguards (17 CFR 37, 38, 39, 49) controls, representing 93% coverage. The remaining 3 controls represent compliance gaps requiring additional documentation or compensating controls to satisfy both frameworks simultaneously.
What are the compliance gaps when mapping APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management to CFTC System Safeguards (17 CFR 37, 38, 39, 49)?
3 APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management controls have no direct equivalent in CFTC System Safeguards (17 CFR 37, 38, 39, 49). The highest concentration of gaps is in Service Provider Management with 1 unmapped controls. These gaps represent areas where additional controls, policies, or documentation must be created to achieve compliance with both frameworks.
Which control domains have the most gaps between APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management and CFTC System Safeguards (17 CFR 37, 38, 39, 49)?
The domain with the highest gap count is Service Provider Management (1 gaps). Export the full domain-by-domain gap breakdown via the Professional tier to generate a prioritised remediation roadmap.
Related Resources
This platform provides educational compliance tools, not legal, regulatory, or professional compliance advice. Cross-framework mappings are AI-assisted interpretations and do not reproduce or replace official standards. Framework names and trademarks belong to their respective owners. Consult qualified professionals for your specific compliance requirements. See our Terms of Service.