ISO/IEC 29147:2018vsIATF 16949:2016 - Quality Management System for Automotive Production
See exactly how ISO/IEC 29147:2018 controls map to IATF 16949:2016 - Quality Management System for Automotive Production. Pre-computed mappings, identified gaps, and coverage analysis.
According to the TheArtOfService Compliance Knowledge Graph:
ISO/IEC 29147:2018 maps to IATF 16949:2016 - Quality Management System for Automotive Production with 10% coverage across 5 directly mapped controls. Analysis of 40 ISO/IEC 29147:2018 controls identifies 43 compliance gaps — primarily concentrated in Clause 6: Receiving Vulnerability Reports.
Source: TheArtOfService Knowledge Graph | 40 controls analysed | 718 frameworks | 332K+ cross-framework mappings
Control Mappings
Showing 10 of 10 mapped controls across 4 domains. Sign up to explore all 332K+ mappings across 718 frameworks.
Clause 1-4: Introduction(4 mappings)
Legal(2 mappings)
Clause 5: Vulnerability Disclosure Concepts(2 mappings)
Clause 8-9: Coordination and Disclosure Policy(2 mappings)
Related Comparisons
Other ISO/IEC 29147:2018 comparisons
Other IATF 16949:2016 - Quality Management System for Automotive Production comparisons
Stop Paying Consultants to Read Spreadsheets
AI-powered compliance intelligence across 718 frameworks — at a fraction of consulting costs.
Free
- ✓ 718 framework browser
- ✓ Cross-framework mappings (332K+)
- ✓ 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/IEC 29147:2018 and IATF 16949:2016 - Quality Management System for Automotive Production?
ISO/IEC 29147:2018 has 40 controls across its framework, while IATF 16949:2016 - Quality Management System for Automotive Production covers 10 controls. Direct mapping analysis identifies 5 overlapping controls (10% coverage). The frameworks diverge most significantly in Clause 6: Receiving Vulnerability Reports, where 7 ISO/IEC 29147:2018 controls have no direct IATF 16949:2016 - Quality Management System for Automotive Production equivalent.
How many controls map between ISO/IEC 29147:2018 and IATF 16949:2016 - Quality Management System for Automotive Production?
Of 40 total ISO/IEC 29147:2018 controls, 5 map directly to IATF 16949:2016 - Quality Management System for Automotive Production controls — representing 10% coverage. The remaining 43 controls represent compliance gaps requiring additional documentation or compensating controls to satisfy both frameworks simultaneously.
What are the compliance gaps when mapping ISO/IEC 29147:2018 to IATF 16949:2016 - Quality Management System for Automotive Production?
43 ISO/IEC 29147:2018 controls have no direct equivalent in IATF 16949:2016 - Quality Management System for Automotive Production. The highest concentration of gaps is in Clause 6: Receiving Vulnerability Reports with 7 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/IEC 29147:2018 and IATF 16949:2016 - Quality Management System for Automotive Production?
The domain with the highest gap count is Clause 6: Receiving Vulnerability Reports (7 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.