ISO/IEC TR 24028:2020vsISO/IEC 38500:2024
See exactly how ISO/IEC TR 24028:2020 controls map to ISO/IEC 38500:2024. Pre-computed mappings, identified gaps, and coverage analysis.
Need this as a report you can hand to an assessor? A coverage crosswalk for this pair can be built to order.
According to the TheArtOfService Compliance Knowledge Graph:
ISO/IEC TR 24028:2020 maps to ISO/IEC 38500:2024 with 21% coverage across 12 directly mapped controls. Analysis of 58 ISO/IEC TR 24028:2020 controls identifies 46 compliance gaps, primarily concentrated in Mitigation measures – ISO/IEC TR 24028:2020.
Source: TheArtOfService Knowledge Graph | 58 controls analysed | 1,120 frameworks | 315K+ cross-framework mappings
Control Mappings
Showing 20 of 117 control mappings across 4 domains. Sign up to explore all 315K+ mappings across 1,120 frameworks.
Existing frameworks applicable to trustworthiness – ISO/IEC TR 24028:2020(2 mappings)
Stakeholders – ISO/IEC TR 24028:2020(4 mappings)
Vulnerabilities, threats and challenges – ISO/IEC TR 24028:2020(14 mappings)
+97 more mappings
Plus AI-powered gap analysis, compliance advisory, PDF exports, and cross-mapping for all 1,120 frameworks.
Create Free Account →Free forever, no credit card required
A ISO/IEC TR 24028:2020 to ISO/IEC 38500:2024 crosswalk, built to order
The table above lists candidate mappings. A crosswalk answers the narrower question you are probably here for: which ISO/IEC 38500:2024 controls your existing ISO/IEC TR 24028:2020 work already satisfies, which are real gaps, and the reasoning behind every claim so you can check it. One pair, $299, one time.
This direction has not been through crosswalk review and sign off, so no coverage figure is published for it. Reporting an unreviewed number would be worse than reporting none. It can be built to order at the same price as a pair that is already on the shelf.
If the two frameworks turn out to have too little in common for a crosswalk to help you, we say so and refund it rather than send a number worth nothing.
This direction has not been through crosswalk review and sign off, so no coverage figure is published for it. Reporting an unreviewed number would be worse than reporting none. It can be built to order at the same price as a pair that is already on the shelf.
If the two frameworks turn out to have too little in common for a crosswalk to help you, we say so and refund it rather than send a number worth nothing.
- 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 21% in the header counts how many ISO/IEC TR 24028:2020 controls carry at least one candidate mapping in the graph, before any review. The crosswalk percentage counts something stricter: how many ISO/IEC 38500:2024 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/IEC TR 24028:2020 comparisons
Other ISO/IEC 38500:2024 comparisons
Stop Paying Consultants to Read Spreadsheets
Cross-framework mappings across 1,120 frameworks, at a fraction of consulting costs.
Free
- ✓ 1,120 framework browser
- ✓ Cross-framework mappings (315K+)
- ✓ 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 TR 24028:2020 and ISO/IEC 38500:2024?
ISO/IEC TR 24028:2020 has 58 controls across its framework, while ISO/IEC 38500:2024 covers 53 controls. Direct mapping analysis identifies 12 overlapping controls (21% coverage). The frameworks diverge most significantly in Mitigation measures – ISO/IEC TR 24028:2020, where 18 ISO/IEC TR 24028:2020 controls have no direct ISO/IEC 38500:2024 equivalent.
How many controls map between ISO/IEC TR 24028:2020 and ISO/IEC 38500:2024?
Of 58 total ISO/IEC TR 24028:2020 controls, 12 map directly to ISO/IEC 38500:2024 controls, representing 21% coverage. The remaining 46 controls represent compliance gaps requiring additional documentation or compensating controls to satisfy both frameworks simultaneously.
What are the compliance gaps when mapping ISO/IEC TR 24028:2020 to ISO/IEC 38500:2024?
46 ISO/IEC TR 24028:2020 controls have no direct equivalent in ISO/IEC 38500:2024. The highest concentration of gaps is in Mitigation measures – ISO/IEC TR 24028:2020 with 18 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 TR 24028:2020 and ISO/IEC 38500:2024?
The domain with the highest gap count is Mitigation measures – ISO/IEC TR 24028:2020 (18 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 judged interpretations, grounded in the source text of both frameworks, 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.