Cross-Framework Mapping

ISO 27001:2022vsAPRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management

See exactly how ISO 27001:2022 controls map to APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management. Pre-computed mappings, identified gaps, and coverage analysis.

54
Controls Mapped
39
Gaps Found
31%
Coverage

A reviewed coverage crosswalk for this pair is available. See which APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management controls you already evidence.

According to the TheArtOfService Compliance Knowledge Graph:

ISO 27001:2022 maps to APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management with 31% coverage across 29 directly mapped controls. Analysis of 93 ISO 27001:2022 controls identifies 71 compliance gaps, primarily concentrated in Technological controls – ISO 27001:2022.

Source: TheArtOfService Knowledge Graph | 93 controls analysed | 686 frameworks | 310K+ cross-framework mappings

Control Mappings

Showing 20 of 54 mapped controls across 3 domains. Sign up to explore all 310K+ mappings across 686 frameworks.

Organizational controls – ISO 27001:2022(20 mappings)

iso-27001-2022::5.1Policies for information security3 targets
CPS230-13Board Accountability for Operational Risk Management
CPS230-15Operational Risk Elements of the Risk Management Framework
CPS230-37Service Provider Management Policy
iso-27001-2022::5.19Information security in supplier relationships3 targets
CPS230-37Service Provider Management Policy
CPS230-39Register of Material Service Providers
CPS230-P15Precondition for Reliance on a Service Provider
iso-27001-2022::5.2Information security roles and responsibilities
CPS230-14Board Setting of Senior Manager Roles and Responsibilities
iso-27001-2022::5.20Addressing information security within supplier agreements2 targets
CPS230-50Formal Agreement Content for Material Arrangements
CPS230-P48Required Content of the Service Provider Management Policy
iso-27001-2022::5.21Managing information security in the ICT supply chain2 targets
CPS230-43Due Diligence Before Entering or Modifying a Material Arrangement
CPS230-P48Required Content of the Service Provider Management Policy
iso-27001-2022::5.22Monitoring, review and change management of supplier services2 targets
CPS230-46Ongoing Risk Management of Each Material Arrangement
CPS230-47Monitoring and Senior Management Reporting on Material Arrangements
iso-27001-2022::5.23Information security for use of cloud services
CPS230-43Due Diligence Before Entering or Modifying a Material Arrangement
iso-27001-2022::5.24Information security incident management planning and preparation
CPS230-27Identification and Escalation of Incidents and Near Misses
iso-27001-2022::5.25Assessment and decision on information security events
CPS230-27Identification and Escalation of Incidents and Near Misses
iso-27001-2022::5.26Response to information security incidents
CPS230-27Identification and Escalation of Incidents and Near Misses
iso-27001-2022::5.27Learning from information security incidents2 targets
CPS230-P31Remediation of Material Operational Risk Weaknesses
CPS230-P45Annual Update of the Business Continuity Plan
iso-27001-2022::5.29Information security during disruption
CPS230-20Prevention, Adaptation and Return to Normal Operations

+34 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 ISO 27001:2022 to APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management crosswalk

The table above lists candidate mappings. A crosswalk answers the narrower question you are probably here for: which APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management controls your existing ISO 27001:2022 work already satisfies, which are real gaps, and the reasoning behind every claim so you can check it. One pair, $299, one time.

Coverage does not run both ways. ISO 27001:2022 into APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management lands at 44.2%, while APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management into ISO 27001:2022 lands at 19.4%, on the same two control sets. That is not a rounding difference. It is the whole reason these are two separate reports: one asks what your ISO 27001:2022 evidence buys you for APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management, the other asks the reverse.

ISO 27001:2022 into APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management
44.2%

19 of 43 APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management controls are evidenced by work you have already done for ISO 27001:2022. 24 are genuine gaps.

80%Service Provider Management
71.4%Business Continuity
16.7%Operational Risk Management Framework
25%Critical Operations
Machine verified. Claude Code on the Max plan, judged in context, signed off 2026-08-19. 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: CPS 230 para 14 Prevention, Adaptation and Return to Normal Operations

Information security during disruption is prevention, adaptation and return to normal.

Grounded in iso-27001-2022::5.29 Information security during disruption. Confidence high, survived the refutation pass.

Gap: CPS 230 para 12 Key Principles for Operational Risk, Resilience and Service Providers

The entity must effectively manage its operational risks and set and maintain appropriate standards for conduct and compliance, hold its critical operations within tolerance levels through severe disruption, and manage the risks arising...

Every one of the 19 evidenced controls and 24 gaps in the report carries this much reasoning, so you can check the claim rather than take it on trust.

APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management into ISO 27001:2022
19.4%

18 of 93 ISO 27001:2022 controls are evidenced by work you have already done for APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management. 75 are genuine gaps.

45.9%Organizational controls
2.9%Technological controls
0%People controls
0%Physical controls
Machine verified. Claude Code on the Max plan, judged in context, signed off 2026-08-19. 34 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: 5.19 Information security in supplier relationships

A comprehensive service provider management policy covering the material risks is required.

Grounded in CPS230-37 Service Provider Management Policy. Confidence high, survived the refutation pass.

Gap: 5.1 Policies for information security

Write, approve and publish a top-level security policy plus topic-specific policies, and review them on a set cadence and after major change.

Every one of the 18 evidenced controls and 75 gaps in the report carries this much reasoning, so you can check the claim rather than take it on trust.

ISO 27001:2022 to APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management
$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 31% in the header counts how many ISO 27001:2022 controls carry at least one candidate mapping in the graph, before any review. The crosswalk percentage counts something stricter: how many APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management 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.

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 (310K+)
  • 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 →

What are the key differences between ISO 27001:2022 and APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management?

ISO 27001:2022 has 93 controls across its framework, while APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management covers 43 controls. Direct mapping analysis identifies 29 overlapping controls (31% coverage). The frameworks diverge most significantly in Technological controls – ISO 27001:2022, where 29 ISO 27001:2022 controls have no direct APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management equivalent.

How many controls map between ISO 27001:2022 and APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management?

Of 93 total ISO 27001:2022 controls, 29 map directly to APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management controls, representing 31% coverage. The remaining 71 controls represent compliance gaps requiring additional documentation or compensating controls to satisfy both frameworks simultaneously.

What are the compliance gaps when mapping ISO 27001:2022 to APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management?

71 ISO 27001:2022 controls have no direct equivalent in APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management. The highest concentration of gaps is in Technological controls – ISO 27001:2022 with 29 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 ISO 27001:2022 and APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management?

The domain with the highest gap count is Technological controls – ISO 27001:2022 (29 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.