NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0vsAPRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management
See exactly how NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 controls map to APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management. Pre-computed mappings, identified gaps, and coverage analysis.
A reviewed coverage crosswalk for this pair is available. See which APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management controls you already evidence.
According to the TheArtOfService Compliance Knowledge Graph:
NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 maps to APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management with 55% coverage across 58 directly mapped controls. Analysis of 106 NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 controls identifies 48 compliance gaps, primarily concentrated in PR - Protect.
Source: TheArtOfService Knowledge Graph | 106 controls analysed | 686 frameworks | 310K+ cross-framework mappings
Control Mappings
Showing 20 of 123 mapped controls across 7 domains. Sign up to explore all 310K+ mappings across 686 frameworks.
DE - Detect(2 mappings)
GV - Govern(18 mappings)
+103 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 NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 to APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management crosswalk
The table above lists candidate mappings. A crosswalk answers the narrower question you are probably here for: which APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management controls your existing NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 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. NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 into APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management lands at 69.8%, while APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management into NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 lands at 32.1%, 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 NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 evidence buys you for APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management, the other asks the reverse.
30 of 43 APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management controls are evidenced by work you have already done for NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0. 13 are genuine gaps.
A sample of what the report says
Both require mechanisms that keep operations running through adverse conditions.
Grounded in NIST-CSF-PR.IR-03 Mechanisms are implemented to achieve resilience requirements in normal and adverse situations. Confidence high, survived the refutation pass.
The entity must effectively manage its operational risks and set and maintain appropriate standards for conduct and compliance, hold its critical operations within tolerance levels through severe disruption, and manage the risks arising...
Every one of the 30 evidenced controls and 13 gaps in the report carries this much reasoning, so you can check the claim rather than take it on trust.
34 of 106 NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 controls are evidenced by work you have already done for APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management. 72 are genuine gaps.
A sample of what the report says
Legal, regulatory and compliance risk must be identified and managed.
Grounded in CPS230-9 Management of the Full Range of Operational Risks. Confidence high, survived the refutation pass.
Potentially adverse events are analyzed to better understand associated activities. Control from NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 framework, domain: DE - Detect.
Every one of the 34 evidenced controls and 72 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 55% in the header counts how many NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 controls carry at least one candidate mapping in the graph, before any review. The crosswalk percentage counts something stricter: how many APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management 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 NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 comparisons
Other APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management 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 (310K+)
- ✓ 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 NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 and APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management?
NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 has 106 controls across its framework, while APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management covers 43 controls. Direct mapping analysis identifies 58 overlapping controls (55% coverage). The frameworks diverge most significantly in PR - Protect, where 19 NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 controls have no direct APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management equivalent.
How many controls map between NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 and APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management?
Of 106 total NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 controls, 58 map directly to APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management controls, representing 55% coverage. The remaining 48 controls represent compliance gaps requiring additional documentation or compensating controls to satisfy both frameworks simultaneously.
What are the compliance gaps when mapping NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 to APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management?
48 NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 controls have no direct equivalent in APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management. The highest concentration of gaps is in PR - Protect with 19 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 NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 and APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management?
The domain with the highest gap count is PR - Protect (19 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.