Equator Principles (EP4, 2020)vsUN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs)
See exactly how Equator Principles (EP4, 2020) controls map to UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs). 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:
Equator Principles (EP4, 2020) maps to UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs) with 17% coverage across 2 directly mapped controls. Analysis of 12 Equator Principles (EP4, 2020) controls identifies 10 compliance gaps, primarily concentrated in Annexes: implementation requirements – Equator Principles (EP4, 2020).
Source: TheArtOfService Knowledge Graph | 12 controls analysed | 1,016 frameworks | 316K+ cross-framework mappings
Control Mappings
Showing 4 of 4 control mappings across 2 domains. Sign up to explore all 316K+ mappings across 1,016 frameworks.
Equator Principles - Scope and Assessment(2 mappings)
Equator Principles - Management and Stakeholder Engagement(2 mappings)
A Equator Principles (EP4, 2020) to UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs) crosswalk, built to order
The table above lists candidate mappings. A crosswalk answers the narrower question you are probably here for: which UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs) controls your existing Equator Principles (EP4, 2020) 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 17% in the header counts how many Equator Principles (EP4, 2020) controls carry at least one candidate mapping in the graph, before any review. The crosswalk percentage counts something stricter: how many UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs) 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 Equator Principles (EP4, 2020) comparisons
Other UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs) comparisons
Stop Paying Consultants to Read Spreadsheets
Cross-framework mappings across 1,016 frameworks, at a fraction of consulting costs.
Free
- ✓ 1,016 framework browser
- ✓ Cross-framework mappings (316K+)
- ✓ 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 Equator Principles (EP4, 2020) and UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs)?
Equator Principles (EP4, 2020) has 12 controls across its framework, while UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs) covers 26 controls. Direct mapping analysis identifies 2 overlapping controls (17% coverage). The frameworks diverge most significantly in Annexes: implementation requirements – Equator Principles (EP4, 2020), where 2 Equator Principles (EP4, 2020) controls have no direct UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs) equivalent.
How many controls map between Equator Principles (EP4, 2020) and UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs)?
Of 12 total Equator Principles (EP4, 2020) controls, 2 map directly to UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs) controls, representing 17% coverage. The remaining 10 controls represent compliance gaps requiring additional documentation or compensating controls to satisfy both frameworks simultaneously.
What are the compliance gaps when mapping Equator Principles (EP4, 2020) to UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs)?
10 Equator Principles (EP4, 2020) controls have no direct equivalent in UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs). The highest concentration of gaps is in Annexes: implementation requirements – Equator Principles (EP4, 2020) 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 Equator Principles (EP4, 2020) and UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs)?
The domain with the highest gap count is Annexes: implementation requirements – Equator Principles (EP4, 2020) (2 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.