COSO Internal Control - Integrated Framework (2013)vsCOBIT 2019
See exactly how COSO Internal Control - Integrated Framework (2013) controls map to COBIT 2019. 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:
COSO Internal Control - Integrated Framework (2013) maps to COBIT 2019 with 20% coverage across 13 directly mapped controls. Analysis of 64 COSO Internal Control - Integrated Framework (2013) controls identifies 59 compliance gaps, primarily concentrated in Superseded batch representation – COSO Internal Control - Integrated Framework (2013).
Source: TheArtOfService Knowledge Graph | 64 controls analysed | 704 frameworks | 307K+ cross-framework mappings
Control Mappings
Showing 20 of 25 mapped controls across 5 domains. Sign up to explore all 307K+ mappings across 704 frameworks.
Control Activities – COSO Internal Control - Integrated Framework (2013)(6 mappings)
Information and Communication – COSO Internal Control - Integrated Framework (2013)(2 mappings)
Monitoring Activities – COSO Internal Control - Integrated Framework (2013)(6 mappings)
Control Environment – COSO Internal Control - Integrated Framework (2013)(6 mappings)
+5 more mappings
Plus AI-powered gap analysis, compliance advisory, PDF exports, and cross-mapping for all 704 frameworks.
Create Free Account →Free forever, no credit card required
A COSO Internal Control - Integrated Framework (2013) to COBIT 2019 crosswalk, built to order
The table above lists candidate mappings. A crosswalk answers the narrower question you are probably here for: which COBIT 2019 controls your existing COSO Internal Control - Integrated Framework (2013) 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 20% in the header counts how many COSO Internal Control - Integrated Framework (2013) controls carry at least one candidate mapping in the graph, before any review. The crosswalk percentage counts something stricter: how many COBIT 2019 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 COSO Internal Control - Integrated Framework (2013) comparisons
Other COBIT 2019 comparisons
Stop Paying Consultants to Read Spreadsheets
AI-powered compliance intelligence across 704 frameworks, at a fraction of consulting costs.
Free
- ✓ 704 framework browser
- ✓ Cross-framework mappings (307K+)
- ✓ 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 COSO Internal Control - Integrated Framework (2013) and COBIT 2019?
COSO Internal Control - Integrated Framework (2013) has 64 controls across its framework, while COBIT 2019 covers 299 controls. Direct mapping analysis identifies 13 overlapping controls (20% coverage). The frameworks diverge most significantly in Superseded batch representation – COSO Internal Control - Integrated Framework (2013), where 47 COSO Internal Control - Integrated Framework (2013) controls have no direct COBIT 2019 equivalent.
How many controls map between COSO Internal Control - Integrated Framework (2013) and COBIT 2019?
Of 64 total COSO Internal Control - Integrated Framework (2013) controls, 13 map directly to COBIT 2019 controls, representing 20% coverage. The remaining 59 controls represent compliance gaps requiring additional documentation or compensating controls to satisfy both frameworks simultaneously.
What are the compliance gaps when mapping COSO Internal Control - Integrated Framework (2013) to COBIT 2019?
59 COSO Internal Control - Integrated Framework (2013) controls have no direct equivalent in COBIT 2019. The highest concentration of gaps is in Superseded batch representation – COSO Internal Control - Integrated Framework (2013) with 47 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 COSO Internal Control - Integrated Framework (2013) and COBIT 2019?
The domain with the highest gap count is Superseded batch representation – COSO Internal Control - Integrated Framework (2013) (47 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.