TheArtOfService
Cross-Framework Mapping

DORAvsNIS2 Directive

See exactly how DORA controls map to NIS2 Directive. Pre-computed mappings, identified gaps, and coverage analysis.

50
Controls Mapped
0
Gaps Found
92%
Coverage

A reviewed coverage crosswalk for this pair is available. See which NIS2 Directive controls you already evidence.

According to the TheArtOfService Compliance Knowledge Graph:

DORA maps to NIS2 Directive with 92% coverage across 24 directly mapped controls. Analysis of 26 DORA controls identifies 2 compliance gaps, primarily concentrated in DORA Chapters VI-VII: Information Sharing, Penalties and Data Protection.

Source: TheArtOfService Knowledge Graph | 26 controls analysed | 686 frameworks | 309K+ cross-framework mappings

Control Mappings

Showing 20 of 50 mapped controls across 5 domains. Sign up to explore all 309K+ mappings across 686 frameworks.

DORA Chapter II: ICT Risk Management(20 mappings)

DORA-Art.10Detection
→nis2-directive::Art.21.2.bIncident handling
DORA-Art.11Response and recovery
→nis2-directive::Art.21.2.cBusiness continuity, backup management, disaster recovery and crisis management
DORA-Art.12Backup policies and procedures, restoration and recovery
→nis2-directive::Art.21.2.cBusiness continuity, backup management, disaster recovery and crisis management
DORA-Art.13Learning and evolving5 targets
→nis2-directive::Art.20.2Train the management body, and offer equivalent training to staff on a regular basis
→nis2-directive::Art.21.2.bIncident handling
→nis2-directive::Art.21.2.eSecurity in acquisition, development and maintenance, including vulnerability handling and disclosure
→nis2-directive::Art.21.2.gBasic cyber hygiene practices and cybersecurity training
→nis2-directive::Art.23.4.dSubmit a final report within one month, and a progress report where the incident is still running
DORA-Art.14Communication5 targets
→nis2-directive::Art.21.2.cBusiness continuity, backup management, disaster recovery and crisis management
→nis2-directive::Art.21.2.eSecurity in acquisition, development and maintenance, including vulnerability handling and disclosure
→nis2-directive::Art.21.2.jMulti-factor or continuous authentication, secured communications and secured emergency communications
→nis2-directive::Art.23.1Notify significant incidents to the CSIRT or competent authority, and warn affected service recipients
→nis2-directive::Art.23.2Tell affected service recipients about significant cyber threats and the remedies open to them
DORA-Art.16Simplified ICT risk management framework
→nis2-directive::Art.21.1Take proportionate all-hazards measures calibrated to the entity's own risk exposure
DORA-Art.5Governance and organisation2 targets
→nis2-directive::Art.20.1Management body approves the cybersecurity risk-management measures and oversees their implementation
→nis2-directive::Art.20.2Train the management body, and offer equivalent training to staff on a regular basis
DORA-Art.6ICT risk management framework3 targets
→nis2-directive::Art.21.1Take proportionate all-hazards measures calibrated to the entity's own risk exposure
→nis2-directive::Art.21.2.aPolicies on risk analysis and on information system security
→nis2-directive::Art.21.2.fPolicies and procedures to assess the effectiveness of the cybersecurity risk-management measures
DORA-Art.7ICT systems, protocols and tools
→nis2-directive::Art.21.2.gBasic cyber hygiene practices and cybersecurity training

+30 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 DORA to NIS2 Directive crosswalk

The table above lists candidate mappings. A crosswalk answers the narrower question you are probably here for: which NIS2 Directive controls your existing DORA work already satisfies, which are real gaps, and the reasoning behind every claim so you can check it. One pair, $299, one time.

DORA into NIS2 Directive
60.7%

17 of 28 NIS2 Directive controls are evidenced by work you have already done for DORA. 11 are genuine gaps.

69.2%NIS2 Chapter IV: Cybersecurity Risk-Management Measures (Article 21)
83.3%NIS2 Chapter IV: Incident Reporting (Article 23)
100%NIS2 Chapter IV: Governance (Article 20)
100%NIS2 Chapter VII: Supervision and Enforcement
Machine verified. Claude Code on the Max plan, judged in context, signed off 2026-08-20. 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: Art.20.1 Management body approves the cybersecurity risk-management measures and oversees their...

Management body ownership, approval and oversight of the ICT risk framework is NIS2's board approval duty.

Grounded in DORA-Art.5 Governance and organisation. Confidence high, survived the refutation pass.

Gap: Art.21.1 Take proportionate all-hazards measures calibrated to the entity's own risk exposure

Above the enumerated list in Article 21(2) sits a duty to size the whole programme correctly. Measures must be technical, operational and organisational together, must protect both the network and information systems and the physical...

Every one of the 17 evidenced controls and 11 gaps in the report carries this much reasoning, so you can check the claim rather than take it on trust.

NIS2 Directive into DORA
65.4%

17 of 26 DORA controls are evidenced by work you have already done for NIS2 Directive. 9 are genuine gaps.

81.8%DORA Chapter II: ICT Risk Management
75%DORA Chapter III: ICT-Related Incident Management
75%DORA Chapter V: ICT Third-Party Risk Management
25%DORA Chapter IV: Digital Operational Resilience Testing
Machine verified. Claude Code on the Max plan, judged in context, signed off 2026-08-20. 36 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: DORA-Art.10 Detection

Incident handling's detect and triage capability with severity levels is DORA's detection requirement.

Grounded in nis2-directive::Art.21.2.b Incident handling. Confidence high, survived the refutation pass.

Gap: DORA-Art.16 Simplified ICT risk management framework

Specified smaller and non-interconnected financial entities are subject to a simplified ICT risk management framework with proportionate requirements (sound systems, monitoring, business continuity, incident handling and testing).

Every one of the 17 evidenced controls and 9 gaps in the report carries this much reasoning, so you can check the claim rather than take it on trust.

DORA to NIS2 Directive
$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 92% in the header counts how many DORA controls carry at least one candidate mapping in the graph, before any review. The crosswalk percentage counts something stricter: how many NIS2 Directive 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 DORA comparisons

DORA vs FedRAMP Moderate26 mappingsDORA vs NIST SP 800-53 Revision 5.1 HIGH26 mappingsDORA vs FedRAMP High26 mappingsDORA vs NIST SP 800-53 Rev 526 mappingsDORA vs Cloud Security Alliance Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) v4.0.126 mappingsDORA vs NIST SP 800-53 Rev 5 MODERATE25 mappingsDORA vs CIS Controls v825 mappingsDORA vs ISO 27002:202225 mappings

Other NIS2 Directive comparisons

NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 vs NIS2 Directive26 mappingsC5 (Germany) vs NIS2 Directive26 mappingsISO 27002:2022 vs NIS2 Directive26 mappingsISO 27001:2022 vs NIS2 Directive26 mappingsFedRAMP High vs NIS2 Directive20 mappingsFedRAMP Moderate vs NIS2 Directive20 mappingsNIST SP 800-53 Rev 5 MODERATE vs NIS2 Directive20 mappingsNIST SP 800-53 Revision 5.1 HIGH vs NIS2 Directive20 mappings

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 →

Popular framework comparisons

NIST CSF vs NIST 800-53ISO 27001 vs NIST CSFCMMC vs NIST 800-53FedRAMP vs NIST 800-53NIST CSF vs SOC 2HIPAA vs NIST 800-53ISO 27001 vs SOC 2ISO 27001 vs ISO 27701

What are the key differences between DORA and NIS2 Directive?

DORA has 26 controls across its framework, while NIS2 Directive covers 28 controls. Direct mapping analysis identifies 24 overlapping controls (92% coverage). The frameworks diverge most significantly in DORA Chapters VI-VII: Information Sharing, Penalties and Data Protection, where 1 DORA controls have no direct NIS2 Directive equivalent.

How many controls map between DORA and NIS2 Directive?

Of 26 total DORA controls, 24 map directly to NIS2 Directive controls, representing 92% coverage. The remaining 2 controls represent compliance gaps requiring additional documentation or compensating controls to satisfy both frameworks simultaneously.

What are the compliance gaps when mapping DORA to NIS2 Directive?

2 DORA controls have no direct equivalent in NIS2 Directive. The highest concentration of gaps is in DORA Chapters VI-VII: Information Sharing, Penalties and Data Protection 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 DORA and NIS2 Directive?

The domain with the highest gap count is DORA Chapters VI-VII: Information Sharing, Penalties and Data Protection (1 gaps). Export the full domain-by-domain gap breakdown via the Professional tier to generate a prioritised remediation roadmap.

Related Resources

How to Map Controls Across Frameworks|Multi-Framework Compliance Guide|Compliance Glossary

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.