TheArtOfService
Cross-Framework Mapping

FATF Recommendation 16 — Virtual Asset Travel RulevsNATO AQAP 2110 — Quality Assurance Requirements for Design, Development, and Production

See exactly how FATF Recommendation 16 — Virtual Asset Travel Rule controls map to NATO AQAP 2110 — Quality Assurance Requirements for Design, Development, and Production. Pre-computed mappings, identified gaps, and coverage analysis.

16
Controls Mapped
6
Gaps Found
23%
Coverage

According to the TheArtOfService Compliance Knowledge Graph:

FATF Recommendation 16 — Virtual Asset Travel Rule maps to NATO AQAP 2110 — Quality Assurance Requirements for Design, Development, and Production with 23% coverage across 5 directly mapped controls. Analysis of 22 FATF Recommendation 16 — Virtual Asset Travel Rule controls identifies 17 compliance gaps — primarily concentrated in Implementation.

Source: TheArtOfService Knowledge Graph | 22 controls analysed | 693 frameworks | 819K+ cross-framework mappings

Control Mappings

Showing 16 of 16 mapped controls across 1 domains. Sign up to explore all 819K+ mappings across 693 frameworks.

Implementation(16 mappings)

BS65000-IM-01Resilience Assessment
→AQAP-5.7Dependability Requirements
BS65000-IM-03Continuous Improvement4 targets
→AQAP-5.10Internal Audit (NATO)
→AQAP-5.12Corrective Action
→AQAP-5.5Nonconformity Notification
→AQAP-5.7Dependability Requirements
ISO-8000-IMP-02Quality Improvement4 targets
→AQAP-5.10Internal Audit (NATO)
→AQAP-5.12Corrective Action
→AQAP-5.5Nonconformity Notification
→AQAP-5.9Government Surveillance
ISO-8000-IMP-03Sector Applications4 targets
→AQAP-4.1Application of ISO 9001:2015
→AQAP-5.8Subcontractor QMS
→AQAP-5.9Government Surveillance
→ISO 13485 Cl. 7.3.1Design and Development Planning
PBD-IMP-03Organisational Integration3 targets
→AQAP-5.10Internal Audit (NATO)
→AQAP-5.12Corrective Action
→AQAP-5.5Nonconformity Notification

Related Comparisons

Other FATF Recommendation 16 — Virtual Asset Travel Rule comparisons

FATF Recommendation 16 — Virtual Asset Travel Rule vs ILO Nursing Personnel Convention C149 (1977)14 mappingsFATF Recommendation 16 — Virtual Asset Travel Rule vs 6th Anti-Money Laundering Directive (AMLD6, Directive (EU) 2018/1673)14 mappingsFATF Recommendation 16 — Virtual Asset Travel Rule vs ISO 8000 — Data Quality14 mappingsFATF Recommendation 16 — Virtual Asset Travel Rule vs Privacy by Design (PbD) — Seven Foundational Principles13 mappingsFATF Recommendation 16 — Virtual Asset Travel Rule vs BS 65000:2014 — Guidance on Organizational Resilience13 mappingsFATF Recommendation 16 — Virtual Asset Travel Rule vs EU Taxonomy Regulation (Regulation 2020/852)12 mappingsFATF Recommendation 16 — Virtual Asset Travel Rule vs Australia Consumer Data Right — Banking (CDR)12 mappingsFATF Recommendation 16 — Virtual Asset Travel Rule vs EU Digital Markets Act12 mappings

Other NATO AQAP 2110 — Quality Assurance Requirements for Design, Development, and Production comparisons

ILO Nursing Personnel Convention C149 (1977) vs NATO AQAP 2110 — Quality Assurance Requirements for Design, Development, and Production8 mappings6th Anti-Money Laundering Directive (AMLD6, Directive (EU) 2018/1673) vs NATO AQAP 2110 — Quality Assurance Requirements for Design, Development, and Production8 mappingsISO 8000 — Data Quality vs NATO AQAP 2110 — Quality Assurance Requirements for Design, Development, and Production8 mappingsPrivacy by Design (PbD) — Seven Foundational Principles vs NATO AQAP 2110 — Quality Assurance Requirements for Design, Development, and Production8 mappingsBS 65000:2014 — Guidance on Organizational Resilience vs NATO AQAP 2110 — Quality Assurance Requirements for Design, Development, and Production8 mappingsAS9100D:2016 — Quality Management Systems for Aviation, Space, and Defence vs NATO AQAP 2110 — Quality Assurance Requirements for Design, Development, and Production7 mappingsNIST SP 800-171A Rev 3 — Assessing CUI Security Requirements vs NATO AQAP 2110 — Quality Assurance Requirements for Design, Development, and Production7 mappingsFDA Quality Management System Regulation (QMSR) vs NATO AQAP 2110 — Quality Assurance Requirements for Design, Development, and Production7 mappings

Stop Paying Consultants to Read Spreadsheets

AI-powered compliance intelligence across 693 frameworks — at a fraction of consulting costs.

$0/forever

Free

  • ✓ 693 framework browser
  • ✓ Cross-framework mappings (819K+)
  • ✓ 824 compliance assessments
  • ✓ 3 AI queries & searches per day
Get Started Free
Recommended
$49/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 FATF Recommendation 16 — Virtual Asset Travel Rule and NATO AQAP 2110 — Quality Assurance Requirements for Design, Development, and Production?

FATF Recommendation 16 — Virtual Asset Travel Rule has 22 controls across its framework, while NATO AQAP 2110 — Quality Assurance Requirements for Design, Development, and Production covers 20 controls. Direct mapping analysis identifies 5 overlapping controls (23% coverage). The frameworks diverge most significantly in Implementation, where 11 FATF Recommendation 16 — Virtual Asset Travel Rule controls have no direct NATO AQAP 2110 — Quality Assurance Requirements for Design, Development, and Production equivalent.

How many controls map between FATF Recommendation 16 — Virtual Asset Travel Rule and NATO AQAP 2110 — Quality Assurance Requirements for Design, Development, and Production?

Of 22 total FATF Recommendation 16 — Virtual Asset Travel Rule controls, 5 map directly to NATO AQAP 2110 — Quality Assurance Requirements for Design, Development, and Production controls — representing 23% coverage. The remaining 17 controls represent compliance gaps requiring additional documentation or compensating controls to satisfy both frameworks simultaneously.

What are the compliance gaps when mapping FATF Recommendation 16 — Virtual Asset Travel Rule to NATO AQAP 2110 — Quality Assurance Requirements for Design, Development, and Production?

17 FATF Recommendation 16 — Virtual Asset Travel Rule controls have no direct equivalent in NATO AQAP 2110 — Quality Assurance Requirements for Design, Development, and Production. The highest concentration of gaps is in Implementation with 11 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 FATF Recommendation 16 — Virtual Asset Travel Rule and NATO AQAP 2110 — Quality Assurance Requirements for Design, Development, and Production?

The domain with the highest gap count is Implementation (11 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.