TheArtOfService
Cross-Framework Mapping

MARS-E — Minimum Acceptable Risk Standards for ExchangesvsCISA Cross-Sector Cybersecurity Performance Goals (CPG) 2.0

See exactly how MARS-E — Minimum Acceptable Risk Standards for Exchanges controls map to CISA Cross-Sector Cybersecurity Performance Goals (CPG) 2.0. Pre-computed mappings, identified gaps, and coverage analysis.

46
Controls Mapped
0
Gaps Found
67%
Coverage

According to the TheArtOfService Compliance Knowledge Graph:

MARS-E — Minimum Acceptable Risk Standards for Exchanges maps to CISA Cross-Sector Cybersecurity Performance Goals (CPG) 2.0 with 67% coverage across 14 directly mapped controls. Analysis of 21 MARS-E — Minimum Acceptable Risk Standards for Exchanges controls identifies 7 compliance gaps — primarily concentrated in Security Controls.

Source: TheArtOfService Knowledge Graph | 21 controls analysed | 693 frameworks | 819K+ cross-framework mappings

Control Mappings

Showing 20 of 46 mapped controls across 1 domains. Sign up to explore all 819K+ mappings across 693 frameworks.

Security Controls(20 mappings)

CA-ITSG33-SC-01Security Control Catalogue4 targets
→BMA-12Incident Response Plan
→CPG-7.AIncident Response Plan
→CPG-7.DIncident Response Testing
→CPG-8.ANetwork Segmentation
KR-CSAP-SC-01Information Security Management4 targets
→BMA-12Incident Response Plan
→BMA-13Business Continuity and Recovery
→CPG-7.AIncident Response Plan
→CPG-7.DIncident Response Testing
KR-CSAP-SC-02Infrastructure and Network Security2 targets
→CPG-1.DMulti-Factor Authentication for Remote Access
→CPG-8.ANetwork Segmentation
MARSE-SC-01NIST 800-53 Moderate Baseline2 targets
→DS-1Security Safeguards
→DS-2Third-Party Data Sharing Controls
MARSE-SC-02Federal Tax Information Protection4 targets
→CPG-3.AEncrypt Sensitive Data at Rest
→CPG-3.BEncrypt Sensitive Data in Transit
→CPG-8.ANetwork Segmentation
→CPG-8.CEncrypted DNS
MARSE-SC-03Identity Verification3 targets
→CPG-1.ADefault Password Change
→CPG-1.CMulti-Factor Authentication for Privileged Users
→CPG-4.CCybersecurity Awareness Training
NRC73-CTL-01Access Control for CDAs
→CPG-6.BSupply Chain Incident Reporting

+26 more mappings

Plus AI-powered gap analysis, compliance advisory, PDF exports, and cross-mapping for all 693 frameworks.

Create Free Account →

Free forever — no credit card required

Related Comparisons

Other MARS-E — Minimum Acceptable Risk Standards for Exchanges comparisons

MARS-E — Minimum Acceptable Risk Standards for Exchanges vs NRC 10 CFR 73.54 — Nuclear Facility Cybersecurity15 mappingsMARS-E — Minimum Acceptable Risk Standards for Exchanges vs FAA Cybersecurity Framework for Aviation15 mappingsMARS-E — Minimum Acceptable Risk Standards for Exchanges vs CSA CCM v415 mappingsMARS-E — Minimum Acceptable Risk Standards for Exchanges vs FedRAMP Rev 515 mappingsMARS-E — Minimum Acceptable Risk Standards for Exchanges vs South Korea ISMS-P15 mappingsMARS-E — Minimum Acceptable Risk Standards for Exchanges vs TISAX — Trusted Information Security Assessment Exchange15 mappingsMARS-E — Minimum Acceptable Risk Standards for Exchanges vs PAS 1192-5:2015 — Security-Minded Approach to BIM and Digital Built Environments14 mappingsMARS-E — Minimum Acceptable Risk Standards for Exchanges vs Canada ITSG-33 — IT Security Risk Management14 mappings

Other CISA Cross-Sector Cybersecurity Performance Goals (CPG) 2.0 comparisons

CSA CCM v4 vs CISA Cross-Sector Cybersecurity Performance Goals (CPG) 2.023 mappingsTISAX — Trusted Information Security Assessment Exchange vs CISA Cross-Sector Cybersecurity Performance Goals (CPG) 2.023 mappingsFAA Cybersecurity Framework for Aviation vs CISA Cross-Sector Cybersecurity Performance Goals (CPG) 2.021 mappingsNIS2 Directive Implementing Acts vs CISA Cross-Sector Cybersecurity Performance Goals (CPG) 2.020 mappingsUK Defence Standard 05-138 — Cyber Security for Defence Suppliers vs CISA Cross-Sector Cybersecurity Performance Goals (CPG) 2.019 mappingsCSA STAR (Security, Trust, Assurance, and Risk) vs CISA Cross-Sector Cybersecurity Performance Goals (CPG) 2.019 mappingsSouth Korea ISMS-P vs CISA Cross-Sector Cybersecurity Performance Goals (CPG) 2.019 mappingsISO 27001:2022 vs CISA Cross-Sector Cybersecurity Performance Goals (CPG) 2.019 mappings

Stop Paying Consultants to Read Spreadsheets

AI-powered compliance intelligence across 693 frameworks — at a fraction of consulting costs.

$0/forever

Free

  • ✓ 693 framework browser
  • ✓ Cross-framework mappings (819K+)
  • ✓ 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 →

Popular framework comparisons

NIST CSF vs NIST 800-53ISO 27001 vs NIST CSFCMMC vs NIST 800-53FedRAMP vs NIST 800-53NIST CSF vs SOC 2HIPAA vs NIST 800-53ISO 27001 vs SOC 2ISO 27001 vs ISO 27701

What are the key differences between MARS-E — Minimum Acceptable Risk Standards for Exchanges and CISA Cross-Sector Cybersecurity Performance Goals (CPG) 2.0?

MARS-E — Minimum Acceptable Risk Standards for Exchanges has 21 controls across its framework, while CISA Cross-Sector Cybersecurity Performance Goals (CPG) 2.0 covers 40 controls. Direct mapping analysis identifies 14 overlapping controls (67% coverage). The frameworks diverge most significantly in Security Controls, where 7 MARS-E — Minimum Acceptable Risk Standards for Exchanges controls have no direct CISA Cross-Sector Cybersecurity Performance Goals (CPG) 2.0 equivalent.

How many controls map between MARS-E — Minimum Acceptable Risk Standards for Exchanges and CISA Cross-Sector Cybersecurity Performance Goals (CPG) 2.0?

Of 21 total MARS-E — Minimum Acceptable Risk Standards for Exchanges controls, 14 map directly to CISA Cross-Sector Cybersecurity Performance Goals (CPG) 2.0 controls — representing 67% coverage. The remaining 7 controls represent compliance gaps requiring additional documentation or compensating controls to satisfy both frameworks simultaneously.

What are the compliance gaps when mapping MARS-E — Minimum Acceptable Risk Standards for Exchanges to CISA Cross-Sector Cybersecurity Performance Goals (CPG) 2.0?

7 MARS-E — Minimum Acceptable Risk Standards for Exchanges controls have no direct equivalent in CISA Cross-Sector Cybersecurity Performance Goals (CPG) 2.0. The highest concentration of gaps is in Security Controls 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 MARS-E — Minimum Acceptable Risk Standards for Exchanges and CISA Cross-Sector Cybersecurity Performance Goals (CPG) 2.0?

The domain with the highest gap count is Security Controls (7 gaps). Export the full domain-by-domain gap breakdown via the Professional tier to generate a prioritised remediation roadmap.

Related Resources

How to Map Controls Across Frameworks|Multi-Framework Compliance Guide|Compliance Glossary

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.