SOC 2vsAPRA CPS 234
See exactly how SOC 2 controls map to APRA CPS 234. Pre-computed mappings, identified gaps, and coverage analysis.
A reviewed coverage crosswalk for this pair is available. See which APRA CPS 234 controls you already evidence.
According to the TheArtOfService Compliance Knowledge Graph:
SOC 2 maps to APRA CPS 234 with 49% coverage across 30 directly mapped controls. Analysis of 61 SOC 2 controls identifies 31 compliance gaps, primarily concentrated in P - Privacy.
Source: TheArtOfService Knowledge Graph | 61 controls analysed | 686 frameworks | 310K+ cross-framework mappings
Control Mappings
Showing 20 of 54 mapped controls across 4 domains. Sign up to explore all 310K+ mappings across 686 frameworks.
A - Availability(7 mappings)
C - Confidentiality(2 mappings)
CC - Common Criteria (Security)(11 mappings)
+34 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 SOC 2 to APRA CPS 234 crosswalk
The table above lists candidate mappings. A crosswalk answers the narrower question you are probably here for: which APRA CPS 234 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.
Coverage does not run both ways. SOC 2 into APRA CPS 234 lands at 75%, while APRA CPS 234 into SOC 2 lands at 27.9%, 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 SOC 2 evidence buys you for APRA CPS 234, the other asks the reverse.
18 of 24 APRA CPS 234 controls are evidenced by work you have already done for SOC 2. 6 are genuine gaps.
A sample of what the report says
Board oversight of the development and performance of internal control is the same accountability.
Grounded in SOC2-CC1.2 COSO principle 2: Board exercises oversight responsibility. Confidence high, survived the refutation pass.
The entity must maintain an information security capability sized to the threats facing its information assets and sufficient to keep the entity operating soundly.
Every one of the 18 evidenced controls and 6 gaps in the report carries this much reasoning, so you can check the claim rather than take it on trust.
17 of 61 SOC 2 controls are evidenced by work you have already done for APRA CPS 234. 44 are genuine gaps.
A sample of what the report says
Assets classified by sensitivity, which identifies and maintains the inventory of confidential information.
Grounded in CPS234-20 Information Asset Classification. Confidence high, survived the refutation pass.
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 17 evidenced controls and 44 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 49% 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 234 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 SOC 2 comparisons
Other APRA CPS 234 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 SOC 2 and APRA CPS 234?
SOC 2 has 61 controls across its framework, while APRA CPS 234 covers 24 controls. Direct mapping analysis identifies 30 overlapping controls (49% coverage). The frameworks diverge most significantly in P - Privacy, where 16 SOC 2 controls have no direct APRA CPS 234 equivalent.
How many controls map between SOC 2 and APRA CPS 234?
Of 61 total SOC 2 controls, 30 map directly to APRA CPS 234 controls, representing 49% coverage. The remaining 31 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 234?
31 SOC 2 controls have no direct equivalent in APRA CPS 234. The highest concentration of gaps is in P - Privacy with 16 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 234?
The domain with the highest gap count is P - Privacy (16 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.