Cross-Framework Mapping

ISO 27005:2022vsISO 14004:2016

See exactly how ISO 27005:2022 controls map to ISO 14004:2016. Pre-computed mappings, identified gaps, and coverage analysis.

13
Controls Mapped
32
Gaps Found
29%
Coverage

According to the TheArtOfService Compliance Knowledge Graph:

ISO 27005:2022 maps to ISO 14004:2016 with 29% coverage across 13 directly mapped controls. Analysis of 45 ISO 27005:2022 controls identifies 32 compliance gaps — primarily concentrated in Information security risk assessment process – ISO 27005:2022.

Source: TheArtOfService Knowledge Graph | 45 controls analysed | 723 frameworks | 332K+ cross-framework mappings

Control Mappings

Showing 13 of 13 mapped controls across 4 domains. Sign up to explore all 332K+ mappings across 723 frameworks.

Leveraging related ISMS processes – ISO 27005:2022(9 mappings)

iso-27005-2022::10.2Leadership and commitment
iso-14004-2016::5.1Leadership and commitment
iso-27005-2022::10.3Communication and consultation
iso-14004-2016::7.4Communication
iso-27005-2022::10.4Documented information
iso-14004-2016::7.5Documented information
iso-27005-2022::10.4.1General
iso-14004-2016::8.1.1General guidance: Operational control
iso-27005-2022::10.4.2Documented information about processes
iso-14004-2016::7.5Documented information
iso-27005-2022::10.4.3Documented information about results
iso-14004-2016::7.5Documented information
iso-27005-2022::10.5.1General
iso-14004-2016::8.1.1General guidance: Operational control
iso-27005-2022::10.6Management review
iso-14004-2016::9.3Management review
iso-27005-2022::10.8Continual improvement
iso-14004-2016::10.3Continual improvement

Context establishment – ISO 27005:2022(1 mappings)

iso-27005-2022::6.4.1General
iso-14004-2016::8.1.1General guidance: Operational control

Information security risk assessment process – ISO 27005:2022(2 mappings)

iso-27005-2022::7.1General
iso-14004-2016::8.1.1General guidance: Operational control
iso-27005-2022::7.3.1General
iso-14004-2016::8.1.1General guidance: Operational control

Information security risk treatment process – ISO 27005:2022(1 mappings)

iso-27005-2022::8.1General
iso-14004-2016::8.1.1General guidance: Operational control

Stop Paying Consultants to Read Spreadsheets

AI-powered compliance intelligence across 723 frameworks — at a fraction of consulting costs.

$0/forever

Free

  • 723 framework browser
  • Cross-framework mappings (332K+)
  • 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 ISO 27005:2022 and ISO 14004:2016?

ISO 27005:2022 has 45 controls across its framework, while ISO 14004:2016 covers 48 controls. Direct mapping analysis identifies 13 overlapping controls (29% coverage). The frameworks diverge most significantly in Information security risk assessment process – ISO 27005:2022, where 9 ISO 27005:2022 controls have no direct ISO 14004:2016 equivalent.

How many controls map between ISO 27005:2022 and ISO 14004:2016?

Of 45 total ISO 27005:2022 controls, 13 map directly to ISO 14004:2016 controls — representing 29% coverage. The remaining 32 controls represent compliance gaps requiring additional documentation or compensating controls to satisfy both frameworks simultaneously.

What are the compliance gaps when mapping ISO 27005:2022 to ISO 14004:2016?

32 ISO 27005:2022 controls have no direct equivalent in ISO 14004:2016. The highest concentration of gaps is in Information security risk assessment process – ISO 27005:2022 with 9 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 27005:2022 and ISO 14004:2016?

The domain with the highest gap count is Information security risk assessment process – ISO 27005:2022 (9 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.