Cross-Framework Mapping

SOC 2vsAPRA CPS 220 Risk Management

See exactly how SOC 2 controls map to APRA CPS 220 Risk Management. Pre-computed mappings, identified gaps, and coverage analysis.

51
Controls Mapped
10
Gaps Found
26%
Coverage

A reviewed coverage crosswalk for this pair is available. See which SOC 2 controls you already evidence.

According to the TheArtOfService Compliance Knowledge Graph:

SOC 2 maps to APRA CPS 220 Risk Management with 26% coverage across 16 directly mapped controls. Analysis of 61 SOC 2 controls identifies 45 compliance gaps, primarily concentrated in P - Privacy.

Source: TheArtOfService Knowledge Graph | 61 controls analysed | 686 frameworks | 309K+ cross-framework mappings

Control Mappings

Showing 20 of 51 mapped controls across 1 domains. Sign up to explore all 309K+ mappings across 686 frameworks.

CC - Common Criteria (Security)(20 mappings)

SOC2-CC1.1COSO principle 1: Demonstrates commitment to integrity and ethical values3 targets
CPS220-02Board Responsibility for the Risk Management Framework
CPS220-P30Minimum Contents of the Risk Management Strategy
CPS220-P35Required Content of Risk Management Policies and Procedures
SOC2-CC1.2COSO principle 2: Board exercises oversight responsibility2 targets
CPS220-02Board Responsibility for the Risk Management Framework
CPS220-20Annual Board Risk Management Declaration
SOC2-CC1.3COSO principle 3: Management establishes structures, reporting lines, and authorities4 targets
CPS220-10Designated Risk Management Function
CPS220-P23Minimum Contents of the Risk Management Framework
CPS220-P40Chief Risk Officer Reporting Lines and Board Access
CPS220-P43Designated Compliance Function
SOC2-CC1.4COSO principle 4: Demonstrates commitment to attract and retain competent individuals3 targets
CPS220-10Designated Risk Management Function
CPS220-P43Designated Compliance Function
CPS220-P47Minimum Assessment Required by the Framework Review
SOC2-CC1.5COSO principle 5: Holds individuals accountable for internal control responsibilities3 targets
CPS220-02Board Responsibility for the Risk Management Framework
CPS220-20Annual Board Risk Management Declaration
CPS220-P23Minimum Contents of the Risk Management Framework
SOC2-CC2.1COSO principle 13: Obtains and generates relevant, quality information
CPS220-16Management Information System and Data Framework
SOC2-CC2.2COSO principle 14: Internally communicates information including objectives and responsibilities3 targets
CPS220-16Management Information System and Data Framework
CPS220-P23Minimum Contents of the Risk Management Framework
CPS220-P30Minimum Contents of the Risk Management Strategy
SOC2-CC2.3COSO principle 15: Communicates with external parties regarding matters affecting controls
CPS220-19APRA Notification of Framework Breach within 10 Business Days

+31 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

Coverage crosswalk

The SOC 2 to APRA CPS 220 Risk Management crosswalk

The table above lists candidate mappings. A crosswalk answers the narrower question you are probably here for: which APRA CPS 220 Risk Management controls your existing SOC 2 work already satisfies, which are real gaps, and the reasoning behind every claim so you can check it. One pair, $299, one time.

SOC 2 into APRA CPS 220 Risk Management
Not published yet

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.

APRA CPS 220 Risk Management into SOC 2
18%

11 of 61 SOC 2 controls are evidenced by work you have already done for APRA CPS 220 Risk Management. 50 are genuine gaps.

33.3%CC - Common Criteria (Security)
0%A - Availability
0%C - Confidentiality
0%P - Privacy
Machine verified. Claude Code on the Max plan, judged in context, signed off 2026-08-19. 51 candidate mappings were examined and 0 were removed by a pass whose job was to argue against them.Mappings were judged by Claude Code rather than read line by line by a practitioner. Every claim shows its reasoning so you can check it. Ask and a practitioner will review this pair.

A sample of what the report says

Evidenced: SOC2-CC1.2 COSO principle 2: Board exercises oversight responsibility

Board is ultimately responsible for the framework and for overseeing its operation by management.

Grounded in CPS220-02 Board Responsibility for the Risk Management Framework. Confidence high, survived the refutation pass.

Gap: SOC2-A1.1 Maintains capacity to meet availability commitments

Maintains, monitors, and evaluates current processing capacity and use of system components (infrastructure, data, and software) to manage capacity demand and to enable the implementation of additional capacity to help meet its objectives

Every one of the 11 evidenced controls and 50 gaps in the report carries this much reasoning, so you can check the claim rather than take it on trust.

APRA CPS 220 Risk Management to SOC 2
$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 26% in the header counts how many SOC 2 controls carry at least one candidate mapping in the graph, before any review. The crosswalk percentage counts something stricter: how many APRA CPS 220 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.

Stop Paying Consultants to Read Spreadsheets

AI-powered compliance intelligence across 686 frameworks, at a fraction of consulting costs.

$0/forever

Free

  • 686 framework browser
  • Cross-framework mappings (309K+)
  • 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 SOC 2 and APRA CPS 220 Risk Management?

SOC 2 has 61 controls across its framework, while APRA CPS 220 Risk Management covers 40 controls. Direct mapping analysis identifies 16 overlapping controls (26% coverage). The frameworks diverge most significantly in P - Privacy, where 18 SOC 2 controls have no direct APRA CPS 220 Risk Management equivalent.

How many controls map between SOC 2 and APRA CPS 220 Risk Management?

Of 61 total SOC 2 controls, 16 map directly to APRA CPS 220 Risk Management controls, representing 26% coverage. The remaining 45 controls represent compliance gaps requiring additional documentation or compensating controls to satisfy both frameworks simultaneously.

What are the compliance gaps when mapping SOC 2 to APRA CPS 220 Risk Management?

45 SOC 2 controls have no direct equivalent in APRA CPS 220 Risk Management. The highest concentration of gaps is in P - Privacy 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 SOC 2 and APRA CPS 220 Risk Management?

The domain with the highest gap count is P - Privacy (18 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.