Cross-Framework Mapping

FATF Recommendation 16 — Virtual Asset Travel RulevsUK FCA/PRA Operational Resilience Framework

See exactly how FATF Recommendation 16 — Virtual Asset Travel Rule controls map to UK FCA/PRA Operational Resilience Framework. Pre-computed mappings, identified gaps, and coverage analysis.

12
Controls Mapped
10
Gaps Found
32%
Coverage

According to the TheArtOfService Compliance Knowledge Graph:

FATF Recommendation 16 — Virtual Asset Travel Rule maps to UK FCA/PRA Operational Resilience Framework with 32% coverage across 7 directly mapped controls. Analysis of 22 FATF Recommendation 16 — Virtual Asset Travel Rule controls identifies 15 compliance gaps — primarily concentrated in Implementation.

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

Control Mappings

Showing 12 of 12 mapped controls across 2 domains. Sign up to explore all 819K+ mappings across 693 frameworks.

Implementation(11 mappings)

BS65000-IM-01Resilience Assessment3 targets
SYSC 15A.6.2Lessons Learned from Incidents
SYSC 15A.6.3Regulatory Reporting
SYSC 15A.6.4Outsourcing and Third-Party Risk
BS65000-IM-03Continuous Improvement4 targets
SYSC 15A.6.1Continuous Improvement
SYSC 15A.6.2Lessons Learned from Incidents
SYSC 15A.6.3Regulatory Reporting
SYSC 15A.6.4Outsourcing and Third-Party Risk
ISO-8000-IMP-02Quality Improvement
SYSC 15A.6.1Continuous Improvement
ISO-8000-IMP-03Sector Applications
SYSC 15A.6.4Outsourcing and Third-Party Risk
PBD-IMP-02Design Methodology
SYSC 15A.3.3Consumer and Market Impact Assessment
PBD-IMP-03Organisational Integration
SYSC 15A.6.1Continuous Improvement

Travel Rule Requirements(1 mappings)

FATF-TR-TRR-03Unhosted Wallets
SYSC 15A.3.3Consumer and Market Impact Assessment

Related Comparisons

Other FATF Recommendation 16 — Virtual Asset Travel Rule comparisons

Other UK FCA/PRA Operational Resilience Framework comparisons

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 →

What are the key differences between FATF Recommendation 16 — Virtual Asset Travel Rule and UK FCA/PRA Operational Resilience Framework?

FATF Recommendation 16 — Virtual Asset Travel Rule has 22 controls across its framework, while UK FCA/PRA Operational Resilience Framework covers 20 controls. Direct mapping analysis identifies 7 overlapping controls (32% coverage). The frameworks diverge most significantly in Implementation, where 10 FATF Recommendation 16 — Virtual Asset Travel Rule controls have no direct UK FCA/PRA Operational Resilience Framework equivalent.

How many controls map between FATF Recommendation 16 — Virtual Asset Travel Rule and UK FCA/PRA Operational Resilience Framework?

Of 22 total FATF Recommendation 16 — Virtual Asset Travel Rule controls, 7 map directly to UK FCA/PRA Operational Resilience Framework controls — representing 32% coverage. The remaining 15 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 UK FCA/PRA Operational Resilience Framework?

15 FATF Recommendation 16 — Virtual Asset Travel Rule controls have no direct equivalent in UK FCA/PRA Operational Resilience Framework. The highest concentration of gaps is in Implementation with 10 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 UK FCA/PRA Operational Resilience Framework?

The domain with the highest gap count is Implementation (10 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.