Utah Consumer Privacy ActvsVirginia CDPA
See exactly how Utah Consumer Privacy Act controls map to Virginia CDPA. Pre-computed mappings, identified gaps, and coverage analysis.
Need this as a report you can hand to an assessor? A coverage crosswalk for this pair can be built to order.
According to the TheArtOfService Compliance Knowledge Graph:
Utah Consumer Privacy Act maps to Virginia CDPA with 85% coverage across 22 directly mapped controls. Analysis of 26 Utah Consumer Privacy Act controls identifies 5 compliance gaps, primarily concentrated in Utah Code 13-61 Part 1: Scope and Definitions.
Source: TheArtOfService Knowledge Graph | 26 controls analysed | 692 frameworks | 306K+ cross-framework mappings
Control Mappings
Showing 20 of 22 mapped controls across 5 domains. Sign up to explore all 306K+ mappings across 692 frameworks.
Rights(1 mappings)
Utah Code 13-61 Part 1: Scope and Definitions(1 mappings)
Utah Code 13-61 Part 2: Consumer Rights(7 mappings)
Utah Code 13-61 Part 3: Controller and Processor Duties(10 mappings)
Utah Code 13-61 Part 4: Enforcement(1 mappings)
+2 more mappings
Plus AI-powered gap analysis, compliance advisory, PDF exports, and cross-mapping for all 692 frameworks.
Create Free Account →Free forever, no credit card required
A Utah Consumer Privacy Act to Virginia CDPA crosswalk, built to order
The table above lists candidate mappings. A crosswalk answers the narrower question you are probably here for: which Virginia CDPA controls your existing Utah Consumer Privacy Act work already satisfies, which are real gaps, and the reasoning behind every claim so you can check it. One pair, $299, one time.
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.
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.
- 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 85% in the header counts how many Utah Consumer Privacy Act controls carry at least one candidate mapping in the graph, before any review. The crosswalk percentage counts something stricter: how many Virginia CDPA 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 Virginia CDPA comparisons
Stop Paying Consultants to Read Spreadsheets
AI-powered compliance intelligence across 692 frameworks, at a fraction of consulting costs.
Free
- ✓ 692 framework browser
- ✓ Cross-framework mappings (306K+)
- ✓ 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 Utah Consumer Privacy Act and Virginia CDPA?
Utah Consumer Privacy Act has 26 controls across its framework, while Virginia CDPA covers 35 controls. Direct mapping analysis identifies 22 overlapping controls (85% coverage). The frameworks diverge most significantly in Utah Code 13-61 Part 1: Scope and Definitions, where 1 Utah Consumer Privacy Act controls have no direct Virginia CDPA equivalent.
How many controls map between Utah Consumer Privacy Act and Virginia CDPA?
Of 26 total Utah Consumer Privacy Act controls, 22 map directly to Virginia CDPA controls, representing 85% coverage. The remaining 5 controls represent compliance gaps requiring additional documentation or compensating controls to satisfy both frameworks simultaneously.
What are the compliance gaps when mapping Utah Consumer Privacy Act to Virginia CDPA?
5 Utah Consumer Privacy Act controls have no direct equivalent in Virginia CDPA. The highest concentration of gaps is in Utah Code 13-61 Part 1: Scope and Definitions with 1 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 Utah Consumer Privacy Act and Virginia CDPA?
The domain with the highest gap count is Utah Code 13-61 Part 1: Scope and Definitions (1 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.