APRA CPS 234 covers 39.5% of APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management
17 of the 43 controls in APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management are already satisfied by evidence you collected for APRA CPS 234. 26 are genuine gaps. Every claim below was judged against both control sets and then argued against; the ones that did not survive are published further down with the reason each failed.
This number is directional. It says how much of APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management your APRA CPS 234 evidence satisfies. The reverse pair is a different number, often very different, because a security standard has enormous depth for access control and almost none for lawful basis or data subject rights.
46 candidate mappings were examined and 0 were removed. Signed off 2026-08-19, review level machine verified. 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.
Where the gaps are
Coverage is never evenly spread. A source standard usually satisfies one part of a target almost completely and barely touches another, and which part is which is the thing worth knowing before you plan the work.
Theme level, not control level, deliberately. The per-control list of what is evidenced and what is a gap is the report itself, so publishing it here would be publishing the thing being sold.
Claims that held
A sample. Each one names the control whose evidence does the work, the control it satisfies, and why.
Both require the entity to assess a service provider capability before relying on it.
Both require evaluation of the controls a provider operates over entity assets.
Both place ultimate board accountability for oversight of the risk in question.
Both require the board to set clear roles and responsibilities for senior management.
Both require board oversight of management and the effectiveness of key controls.
Both require senior management to escalate material weaknesses to the board.
Both require technology capability maintained in proportion to business need and threat.
Both require capability actively maintained as the environment and assets change.
Claims that did not hold
Nothing proposed for this pair was rejected in review. That is unusual and worth knowing rather than hiding: it means the candidate set was small and every candidate held.
The full report
Everything above is a sample. The report is every evidenced control and every gap, with the reasoning and the source document behind each one, in a form you can hand to an assessor. $299, emailed immediately.
Buy this crosswalk