APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk ManagementvsNIST SP 800-171 Rev 3
See exactly how APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management controls map to NIST SP 800-171 Rev 3. Pre-computed mappings, identified gaps, and coverage analysis.
A reviewed coverage crosswalk for this pair is available. See which NIST SP 800-171 Rev 3 controls you already evidence.
According to the TheArtOfService Compliance Knowledge Graph:
APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management maps to NIST SP 800-171 Rev 3 with 40% coverage across 17 directly mapped controls. Analysis of 43 APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management controls identifies 26 compliance gaps, primarily concentrated in Operational Risk Management Framework.
Source: TheArtOfService Knowledge Graph | 43 controls analysed | 686 frameworks | 309K+ cross-framework mappings
Control Mappings
Showing 20 of 28 mapped controls across 8 domains. Sign up to explore all 309K+ mappings across 686 frameworks.
Operational Risk Management Framework(4 mappings)
Critical Operations(1 mappings)
Business Continuity(4 mappings)
Service Provider Management(10 mappings)
Third Party(1 mappings)
+8 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
The APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management to NIST SP 800-171 Rev 3 crosswalk
The table above lists candidate mappings. A crosswalk answers the narrower question you are probably here for: which NIST SP 800-171 Rev 3 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.
14 of 97 NIST SP 800-171 Rev 3 controls are evidenced by work you have already done for APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management. 83 are genuine gaps.
A sample of what the report says
Incidents and near misses must be identified, escalated, recorded and addressed promptly.
Grounded in CPS230-27 Identification and Escalation of Incidents and Near Misses. Confidence high, survived the refutation pass.
Define, establish, modify, disable, and remove account types; assign managers; specify membership conditions; authorize access; monitor account use; notify managers on triggering events; require re-authorization at defined frequencies.
Every one of the 14 evidenced controls and 83 gaps in the report carries this much reasoning, so you can check the claim rather than take it on trust.
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 40% 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 NIST SP 800-171 Rev 3 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 NIST SP 800-171 Rev 3 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 NIST SP 800-171 Rev 3?
APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management has 43 controls across its framework, while NIST SP 800-171 Rev 3 covers 97 controls. Direct mapping analysis identifies 17 overlapping controls (40% coverage). The frameworks diverge most significantly in Operational Risk Management Framework, where 9 APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management controls have no direct NIST SP 800-171 Rev 3 equivalent.
How many controls map between APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management and NIST SP 800-171 Rev 3?
Of 43 total APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management controls, 17 map directly to NIST SP 800-171 Rev 3 controls, representing 40% coverage. The remaining 26 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 NIST SP 800-171 Rev 3?
26 APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management controls have no direct equivalent in NIST SP 800-171 Rev 3. The highest concentration of gaps is in Operational Risk Management Framework with 9 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 NIST SP 800-171 Rev 3?
The domain with the highest gap count is Operational Risk Management Framework (9 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.