HKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF)vsITIL 4
See exactly how HKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF) controls map to ITIL 4. Pre-computed mappings, identified gaps, and coverage analysis.
According to the TheArtOfService Compliance Knowledge Graph:
HKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF) maps to ITIL 4 with 12% coverage across 5 directly mapped controls. Analysis of 43 HKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF) controls identifies 38 compliance gaps — primarily concentrated in iCAST.
Source: TheArtOfService Knowledge Graph | 43 controls analysed | 725 frameworks | 445K+ cross-framework mappings
Control Mappings
Showing 5 of 5 mapped controls across 2 domains. Sign up to explore all 445K+ mappings across 725 frameworks.
Domain 3: Protection(2 mappings)
Domain 5: Response and Recovery(3 mappings)
Related Comparisons
Other HKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF) comparisons
Other ITIL 4 comparisons
Stop Paying Consultants to Read Spreadsheets
AI-powered compliance intelligence across 725 frameworks — at a fraction of consulting costs.
Free
- ✓ 725 framework browser
- ✓ Cross-framework mappings (445K+)
- ✓ 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 HKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF) and ITIL 4?
HKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF) has 43 controls across its framework, while ITIL 4 covers 53 controls. Direct mapping analysis identifies 5 overlapping controls (12% coverage). The frameworks diverge most significantly in iCAST, where 5 HKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF) controls have no direct ITIL 4 equivalent.
How many controls map between HKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF) and ITIL 4?
Of 43 total HKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF) controls, 5 map directly to ITIL 4 controls — representing 12% coverage. The remaining 38 controls represent compliance gaps requiring additional documentation or compensating controls to satisfy both frameworks simultaneously.
What are the compliance gaps when mapping HKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF) to ITIL 4?
38 HKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF) controls have no direct equivalent in ITIL 4. The highest concentration of gaps is in iCAST with 5 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 HKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF) and ITIL 4?
The domain with the highest gap count is iCAST (5 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.