TheArtOfService
Cross-Framework Mapping

NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0vsFedRAMP Rev 5

See exactly how NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 controls map to FedRAMP Rev 5. Pre-computed mappings, identified gaps, and coverage analysis.

60
Controls Mapped
43
Gaps Found
18%
Coverage

According to the TheArtOfService Compliance Knowledge Graph:

NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 maps to FedRAMP Rev 5 with 18% coverage across 19 directly mapped controls. Analysis of 103 NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 controls identifies 84 compliance gaps — primarily concentrated in GV - Govern.

Source: TheArtOfService Knowledge Graph | 103 controls analysed | 693 frameworks | 819K+ cross-framework mappings

Control Mappings

Showing 20 of 60 mapped controls across 6 domains. Sign up to explore all 819K+ mappings across 693 frameworks.

DE - Detect(7 mappings)

NIST-CSF-DE.AE-08Incidents are declared when adverse events meet defined criteria7 targets
→FEDRAMP-AC-1Access Control Policy and Procedures
→FEDRAMP-AC-2Account Management
→FEDRAMP-AU-2Event Logging
→FEDRAMP-AU-6Audit Record Review, Analysis, and Reporting
→FEDRAMP-CM-6Configuration Settings
→FEDRAMP-CP-9System Backup
→FEDRAMP-RA-5Vulnerability Monitoring and Scanning

GV - Govern(5 mappings)

NIST-CSF-GV.RM-03Cybersecurity risk management activities and outcomes are included in enterprise risk
→FEDRAMP-SR-1Supply Chain Risk Management Policy
NIST-CSF-GV.RM-04Strategic direction for cybersecurity risk management is established
→FEDRAMP-SR-1Supply Chain Risk Management Policy
NIST-CSF-GV.RM-07Opportunities for improvements are identified from risk assessments
→FEDRAMP-RA-3Risk Assessment
NIST-CSF-GV.SC-01Cybersecurity supply chain risk management program is established2 targets
→FEDRAMP-SR-1Supply Chain Risk Management Policy
→FEDRAMP-SR-3Supply Chain Controls and Processes

ID - Identify(8 mappings)

NIST-CSF-ID.AM-04Inventories of services provided by suppliers are maintained2 targets
→FEDRAMP-SR-1Supply Chain Risk Management Policy
→FEDRAMP-SR-3Supply Chain Controls and Processes
NIST-CSF-ID.IM-04Incident response plans and other cybersecurity plans are established and maintained3 targets
→FEDRAMP-IR-1Incident Response Policy
→FEDRAMP-IR-6Incident Reporting
→FEDRAMP-PE-6Monitoring Physical Access
NIST-CSF-ID.RA-09Integrity and accuracy of risk assessment results are verified
→FEDRAMP-RA-3Risk Assessment
NIST-CSF-ID.RA-10Critical suppliers are assessed on the basis of their risk2 targets
→FEDRAMP-SR-1Supply Chain Risk Management Policy
→FEDRAMP-SR-3Supply Chain Controls and Processes

+40 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 NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 comparisons

NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 vs NIST SP 800-82 Rev 3 — Guide to OT Security22 mappingsNIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 vs TISAX — Trusted Information Security Assessment Exchange21 mappingsNIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 vs CSA CCM v421 mappingsNIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 vs HKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF)20 mappingsNIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 vs ISO 27001:202220 mappingsNIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 vs South Korea Cloud Security Assurance Program (CSAP)20 mappingsNIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 vs Bermuda Monetary Authority (BMA) Cyber Risk Management Code of Conduct19 mappingsNIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 vs FAA Cybersecurity Framework for Aviation19 mappings

Other FedRAMP Rev 5 comparisons

South Korea ISMS-P vs FedRAMP Rev 537 mappingsFAA Cybersecurity Framework for Aviation vs FedRAMP Rev 535 mappingsTISAX — Trusted Information Security Assessment Exchange vs FedRAMP Rev 535 mappingsCSA CCM v4 vs FedRAMP Rev 534 mappingsASD Information Security Manual (ISM) vs FedRAMP Rev 534 mappingsCSA STAR (Security, Trust, Assurance, and Risk) vs FedRAMP Rev 533 mappingsNIST SP 800-82 Rev 3 — Guide to OT Security vs FedRAMP Rev 533 mappingsPAS 1192-5:2015 — Security-Minded Approach to BIM and Digital Built Environments vs FedRAMP Rev 533 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 NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 and FedRAMP Rev 5?

NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 has 103 controls across its framework, while FedRAMP Rev 5 covers 64 controls. Direct mapping analysis identifies 19 overlapping controls (18% coverage). The frameworks diverge most significantly in GV - Govern, where 24 NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 controls have no direct FedRAMP Rev 5 equivalent.

How many controls map between NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 and FedRAMP Rev 5?

Of 103 total NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 controls, 19 map directly to FedRAMP Rev 5 controls — representing 18% coverage. The remaining 84 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 FedRAMP Rev 5?

84 NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 controls have no direct equivalent in FedRAMP Rev 5. The highest concentration of gaps is in GV - Govern with 24 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 FedRAMP Rev 5?

The domain with the highest gap count is GV - Govern (24 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.