ISO 27701:2019vsAPPI
See exactly how ISO 27701:2019 controls map to APPI. Pre-computed mappings, identified gaps, and coverage analysis.
A reviewed coverage crosswalk for this pair is available. See which APPI controls you already evidence.
According to the TheArtOfService Compliance Knowledge Graph:
ISO 27701:2019 maps to APPI with 32% coverage across 35 directly mapped controls. Analysis of 108 ISO 27701:2019 controls identifies 110 compliance gaps, primarily concentrated in PIMS-specific guidance related to ISO/IEC 27002, ISO 27701:2019.
Source: TheArtOfService Knowledge Graph | 108 controls analysed | 686 frameworks | 309K+ cross-framework mappings
Control Mappings
Showing 20 of 65 mapped controls across 4 domains. Sign up to explore all 309K+ mappings across 686 frameworks.
PIMS-specific requirements related to ISO/IEC 27001, ISO 27701:2019(2 mappings)
PIMS-specific guidance related to ISO/IEC 27002, ISO 27701:2019(7 mappings)
Additional ISO/IEC 27002 guidance for PII controllers, ISO 27701:2019(11 mappings)
+45 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
The ISO 27701:2019 to APPI crosswalk
The table above lists candidate mappings. A crosswalk answers the narrower question you are probably here for: which APPI controls your existing ISO 27701:2019 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 27701:2019 into APPI lands at 53.3%, while APPI into ISO 27701:2019 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 27701:2019 evidence buys you for APPI, the other asks the reverse.
16 of 30 APPI controls are evidenced by work you have already done for ISO 27701:2019. 14 are genuine gaps.
A sample of what the report says
Requires specific purposes of processing to be identified and documented in usable detail.
Grounded in iso-27701-2019::7.2.1 Identify and document purpose. Confidence high, survived the refutation pass.
Do not use personal information by a method that may encourage or induce an unlawful or unjust act.
Every one of the 16 evidenced controls and 14 gaps in the report carries this much reasoning, so you can check the claim rather than take it on trust.
21 of 108 ISO 27701:2019 controls are evidenced by work you have already done for APPI. 87 are genuine gaps.
A sample of what the report says
The purpose of use must be specified as far as possible and cannot drift beyond it.
Grounded in APPI-A17 Specification of the Purpose of Use. Confidence high, survived the refutation pass.
Every requirement of ISO/IEC 27001 that speaks of information security must be read as extending to the protection of privacy as it may be affected by the processing of personally identifiable information, so the management system is...
Every one of the 21 evidenced controls and 87 gaps in the report carries this much reasoning, so you can check the claim rather than take it on trust.
- 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 32% in the header counts how many ISO 27701:2019 controls carry at least one candidate mapping in the graph, before any review. The crosswalk percentage counts something stricter: how many APPI 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.
Related Comparisons
Other ISO 27701:2019 comparisons
Other APPI comparisons
Stop Paying Consultants to Read Spreadsheets
AI-powered compliance intelligence across 686 frameworks, at a fraction of consulting costs.
Free
- ✓ 686 framework browser
- ✓ Cross-framework mappings (309K+)
- ✓ 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 ISO 27701:2019 and APPI?
ISO 27701:2019 has 108 controls across its framework, while APPI covers 30 controls. Direct mapping analysis identifies 35 overlapping controls (32% coverage). The frameworks diverge most significantly in PIMS-specific guidance related to ISO/IEC 27002, ISO 27701:2019, where 44 ISO 27701:2019 controls have no direct APPI equivalent.
How many controls map between ISO 27701:2019 and APPI?
Of 108 total ISO 27701:2019 controls, 35 map directly to APPI controls, representing 32% coverage. The remaining 110 controls represent compliance gaps requiring additional documentation or compensating controls to satisfy both frameworks simultaneously.
What are the compliance gaps when mapping ISO 27701:2019 to APPI?
110 ISO 27701:2019 controls have no direct equivalent in APPI. The highest concentration of gaps is in PIMS-specific guidance related to ISO/IEC 27002, ISO 27701:2019 with 44 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 27701:2019 and APPI?
The domain with the highest gap count is PIMS-specific guidance related to ISO/IEC 27002, ISO 27701:2019 (44 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.