Cross-Framework Mapping

APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk ManagementvsSOC 2

See exactly how APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management controls map to SOC 2. Pre-computed mappings, identified gaps, and coverage analysis.

57
Controls Mapped
0
Gaps Found
88%
Coverage

A reviewed coverage crosswalk for this pair is available. See which SOC 2 controls you already evidence.

According to the TheArtOfService Compliance Knowledge Graph:

APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management maps to SOC 2 with 88% coverage across 38 directly mapped controls. Analysis of 43 APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management controls identifies 5 compliance gaps, primarily concentrated in Regulatory.

Source: TheArtOfService Knowledge Graph | 43 controls analysed | 686 frameworks | 309K+ cross-framework mappings

Control Mappings

Showing 20 of 57 mapped controls across 10 domains. Sign up to explore all 309K+ mappings across 686 frameworks.

Operational Risk Management Framework(20 mappings)

CPS230-11Identification, Assessment and Management of Operational Risk
SOC2-CC3.2COSO principle 7: Identifies risks and analyzes to determine how managed
CPS230-13Board Accountability for Operational Risk Management3 targets
SOC2-CC1.2COSO principle 2: Board exercises oversight responsibility
SOC2-CC7.4Responds to identified security incidents through defined procedures
SOC2-CC7.5Identifies the root cause of security incidents
CPS230-14Board Setting of Senior Manager Roles and Responsibilities4 targets
SOC2-CC1.3COSO principle 3: Management establishes structures, reporting lines, and authorities
SOC2-CC1.4COSO principle 4: Demonstrates commitment to attract and retain competent individuals
SOC2-CC1.5COSO principle 5: Holds individuals accountable for internal control responsibilities
SOC2-CC2.2COSO principle 14: Internally communicates information including objectives and responsibilities
CPS230-15Operational Risk Elements of the Risk Management Framework3 targets
SOC2-CC3.1COSO principle 6: Specifies objectives to identify and assess risks
SOC2-CC5.1COSO principle 10: Selects and develops control activities to mitigate risks
SOC2-CC5.3COSO principle 12: Deploys control activities through policies and procedures
CPS230-16Internal Audit Review of the Business Continuity Plan
SOC2-CC4.1COSO principle 16: Selects and develops ongoing and separate evaluations
CPS230-8Board Oversight, Approval of the BCP, Tolerance Levels and Service Provider Policy
SOC2-CC1.2COSO principle 2: Board exercises oversight responsibility
CPS230-9Management of the Full Range of Operational Risks3 targets
SOC2-CC1.3COSO principle 3: Management establishes structures, reporting lines, and authorities
SOC2-CC3.2COSO principle 7: Identifies risks and analyzes to determine how managed
SOC2-CC8.1Change management processes are in place
CPS230-P12Key Principles for Operational Risk, Resilience and Service Providers2 targets
SOC2-CC1.1COSO principle 1: Demonstrates commitment to integrity and ethical values
SOC2-CC9.1Identifies, selects and develops risk mitigation activities
CPS230-P18Integration with the Risk Management Framework and Recovery Planning
SOC2-CC9.1Identifies, selects and develops risk mitigation activities
CPS230-P26Assessment of Business and Strategic Decisions on the Risk Profile
SOC2-CC3.4COSO principle 9: Identifies and assesses changes that could impact internal controls

+37 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

Coverage crosswalk

The APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management to SOC 2 crosswalk

The table above lists candidate mappings. A crosswalk answers the narrower question you are probably here for: which SOC 2 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.

Coverage does not run both ways. APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management into SOC 2 lands at 31.1%, while SOC 2 into APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management lands at 48.8%, on the same two control sets. That is not a rounding difference. It is the whole reason these are two separate reports: one asks what your APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management evidence buys you for SOC 2, the other asks the reverse.

APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management into SOC 2
31.1%

19 of 61 SOC 2 controls are evidenced by work you have already done for APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management. 42 are genuine gaps.

51.5%CC - Common Criteria (Security)
66.7%A - Availability
0%C - Confidentiality
0%P - Privacy
Machine verified. Claude Code on the Max plan, judged in context, signed off 2026-08-19. 39 candidate mappings were examined and 0 were removed by a pass whose job was to argue against them.Mappings were judged by Claude Code rather than read line by line by a practitioner. Every claim shows its reasoning so you can check it. Ask and a practitioner will review this pair.

A sample of what the report says

Evidenced: SOC2-A1.1 Maintains capacity to meet availability commitments

Technology capability must meet current and projected business requirements.

Grounded in CPS230-P25 Information and Technology Capability and Asset Health. Confidence high, survived the refutation pass.

Gap: SOC2-A1.2 Environmental protections, data backups, and recovery infrastructure support availability

Authorizes, designs, develops or acquires, implements, operates, approves, maintains, and monitors environmental protections, software, data back-up processes, and recovery infrastructure to meet its objectives

Every one of the 19 evidenced controls and 42 gaps in the report carries this much reasoning, so you can check the claim rather than take it on trust.

SOC 2 into APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management
48.8%

21 of 43 APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management controls are evidenced by work you have already done for SOC 2. 22 are genuine gaps.

66.7%Operational Risk Management Framework
71.4%Business Continuity
50%Critical Operations
20%Service Provider Management
Machine verified. Claude Code on the Max plan, judged in context, signed off 2026-08-19. 37 candidate mappings were examined and 0 were removed by a pass whose job was to argue against them.Mappings were judged by Claude Code rather than read line by line by a practitioner. Every claim shows its reasoning so you can check it. Ask and a practitioner will review this pair.

A sample of what the report says

Evidenced: CPS 230 para 13 Identification, Assessment and Management of Operational Risk

Entity wide risk identification and analysis is operational risk identification and assessment.

Grounded in SOC2-CC3.2 COSO principle 7: Identifies risks and analyzes to determine how managed. Confidence high, survived the refutation pass.

Gap: CPS 230 para 12 Key Principles for Operational Risk, Resilience and Service Providers

The entity must effectively manage its operational risks and set and maintain appropriate standards for conduct and compliance, hold its critical operations within tolerance levels through severe disruption, and manage the risks arising...

Every one of the 21 evidenced controls and 22 gaps in the report carries this much reasoning, so you can check the claim rather than take it on trust.

APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management to SOC 2
$299
per framework pair, one time
  • 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 88% 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 SOC 2 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.

Stop Paying Consultants to Read Spreadsheets

AI-powered compliance intelligence across 686 frameworks, at a fraction of consulting costs.

$0/forever

Free

  • 686 framework browser
  • Cross-framework mappings (309K+)
  • 824 compliance assessments
  • 3 AI queries & searches per day
Get Started Free
Recommended
$149/month

Professional

  • Unlimited AI Compliance Advisory
  • Unlimited full-text search
  • Framework self-assessment
  • PDF, Excel & CSV exports
Start 7-Day Free Trial →

What are the key differences between APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management and SOC 2?

APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management has 43 controls across its framework, while SOC 2 covers 61 controls. Direct mapping analysis identifies 38 overlapping controls (88% coverage). The frameworks diverge most significantly in Regulatory, where 2 APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management controls have no direct SOC 2 equivalent.

How many controls map between APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management and SOC 2?

Of 43 total APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management controls, 38 map directly to SOC 2 controls, representing 88% coverage. The remaining 5 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 SOC 2?

5 APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management controls have no direct equivalent in SOC 2. The highest concentration of gaps is in Regulatory with 2 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 SOC 2?

The domain with the highest gap count is Regulatory (2 gaps). Export the full domain-by-domain gap breakdown via the Professional tier to generate a prioritised remediation roadmap.

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.