Cross-Framework Mapping

NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0vsISO 22301:2019

See exactly how NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 controls map to ISO 22301:2019. Pre-computed mappings, identified gaps, and coverage analysis.

205
Controls Mapped
0
Gaps Found
61%
Coverage

A reviewed coverage crosswalk for this pair is available. See which ISO 22301:2019 controls you already evidence.

According to the TheArtOfService Compliance Knowledge Graph:

NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 maps to ISO 22301:2019 with 61% coverage across 65 directly mapped controls. Analysis of 106 NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 controls identifies 41 compliance gaps, primarily concentrated in PR - Protect.

Source: TheArtOfService Knowledge Graph | 106 controls analysed | 868 frameworks | 315K+ cross-framework mappings

Control Mappings

Showing 20 of 205 mapped controls across 7 domains. Sign up to explore all 315K+ mappings across 868 frameworks.

DE - Detect(8 mappings)

NIST-CSF-DE.AE-04The estimated impact and scope of adverse events are understood
→iso-22301-2019::8.2.2Business impact analysis
NIST-CSF-DE.AE-06Information on adverse events is provided to authorized staff and tools
→iso-22301-2019::8.4.3Warning and communication
NIST-CSF-DE.AE-08Incidents are declared when adverse events meet the defined incident criteria2 targets
→iso-22301-2019::8.4.2Response structure
→iso-22301-2019::9.2.1General
NIST-CSF-DE.CM-01Networks and network services are monitored to find potentially adverse events2 targets
→iso-22301-2019::9.1Monitoring, measurement, analysis and evaluation
→iso-22301-2019::9.2.1General
NIST-CSF-DE.CM-09Computing hardware and software, runtime environments, and their data are monitored to find potentially adverse events2 targets
→iso-22301-2019::9.1Monitoring, measurement, analysis and evaluation
→iso-22301-2019::9.2.1General

GV - Govern(12 mappings)

NIST-CSF-GV.OC-01The organizational mission is understood and informs cybersecurity risk management6 targets
→iso-22301-2019::4.1Understanding the organization and its context
→iso-22301-2019::4.2Understanding the needs and expectations of interested parties
→iso-22301-2019::4.3Determining the scope of the business continuity management system
→iso-22301-2019::4.3.2Scope of the business continuity management system
→iso-22301-2019::5.1Leadership and commitment
→iso-22301-2019::6.1.1Determining risks and opportunities
NIST-CSF-GV.OC-02Internal and external stakeholders are understood, and their needs and expectations regarding cybersecurity risk management are understood and considered5 targets
→iso-22301-2019::4.1Understanding the organization and its context
→iso-22301-2019::4.2Understanding the needs and expectations of interested parties
→iso-22301-2019::4.2.1General
→iso-22301-2019::4.2.2Legal and regulatory requirements
→iso-22301-2019::4.3Determining the scope of the business continuity management system
NIST-CSF-GV.OC-03Legal, regulatory, and contractual requirements regarding cybersecurity - including privacy and civil liberties obligations - are understood and managed
→iso-22301-2019::4.1Understanding the organization and its context

+185 more mappings

Plus AI-powered gap analysis, compliance advisory, PDF exports, and cross-mapping for all 868 frameworks.

Create Free Account →

Free forever, no credit card required

Coverage crosswalk

The NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 to ISO 22301:2019 crosswalk

The table above lists candidate mappings. A crosswalk answers the narrower question you are probably here for: which ISO 22301:2019 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 ISO 22301:2019 lands at 47.4%, while ISO 22301:2019 into NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 lands at 23.6%, 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 ISO 22301:2019, the other asks the reverse.

NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 into ISO 22301:2019
47.4%

27 of 57 ISO 22301:2019 controls are evidenced by work you have already done for NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0. 30 are genuine gaps.

ISO 22301:2019 into NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0
23.6%

25 of 106 NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 controls are evidenced by work you have already done for ISO 22301:2019. 81 are genuine gaps.

NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 to ISO 22301:2019
$299
per framework pair, one time
  • 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 61% 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 ISO 22301:2019 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.

Stop Paying Consultants to Read Spreadsheets

Cross-framework mappings across 868 frameworks, at a fraction of consulting costs.

$0/forever

Free

  • ✓ 868 framework browser
  • ✓ Cross-framework mappings (315K+)
  • ✓ 824 compliance assessments
  • ✓ 3 AI queries & searches per day
Get Started Free
Recommended
$149/month

Professional

  • ✓ Unlimited AI Compliance Advisory
  • ✓ Unlimited full-text search
  • ✓ Framework self-assessment
  • ✓ PDF, Excel & CSV exports
Start 7-Day Free Trial →

What are the key differences between NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 and ISO 22301:2019?

NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 has 106 controls across its framework, while ISO 22301:2019 covers 57 controls. Direct mapping analysis identifies 65 overlapping controls (61% coverage). The frameworks diverge most significantly in PR - Protect, where 15 NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 controls have no direct ISO 22301:2019 equivalent.

How many controls map between NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 and ISO 22301:2019?

Of 106 total NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 controls, 65 map directly to ISO 22301:2019 controls, representing 61% coverage. The remaining 41 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 ISO 22301:2019?

41 NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 controls have no direct equivalent in ISO 22301:2019. The highest concentration of gaps is in PR - Protect with 15 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 ISO 22301:2019?

The domain with the highest gap count is PR - Protect (15 gaps). Export the full domain-by-domain gap breakdown via the Professional tier to generate a prioritised remediation roadmap.

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.