Comparative information for the previous period is disclosed for all quantitative metrics and amounts, and for narrative disclosures where relevant to understanding the current period. Metric definitions and calculations, including those behind targets, stay consistent over time; where a metric or target is redefined or replaced, or new information shows that an estimate for the prior period was wrong, the undertaking gives context and revised comparatives unless impracticable (disclosing that fact) and unless revised comparatives would not be useful. Where a standard requires more than one comparative period it prevails. Significant differences from previously reported amounts are explained with the difference quantified; topics reported for the first time need no comparatives; and after a major acquisition or disposal the undertaking explains how the transaction affects progress towards a target where that is needed to understand it.
This control maps to 1 controls across 1 other frameworks. If you already hold one of them, the evidence you collected for it is the starting point here rather than new work.
Every mapping shown was judged rather than inferred from wording similarity, and the ones that failed review are published too. See the coverage reports and what was rejected.
The graph holds this control, the 1 it maps to, and the evidence behind each claim, over MCP and REST.