ISO 27001:2022ISO 22301:2019

ISO 27001:2022 covers 33.3% of ISO 22301:2019

19 of the 57 controls in ISO 22301:2019 are already satisfied by evidence you collected for ISO 27001:2022. 38 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.

33.3%
of the target already covered
19
controls evidenced
38
genuine gaps
84
claims rejected in review

This number is directional. It says how much of ISO 22301:2019 your ISO 27001:2022 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.

120 candidate mappings were examined and 84 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.

Operation, ISO 22301:201910 of 19 evidenced, 9 to do
Support, ISO 22301:20194 of 8 evidenced, 4 to do
Improvement, ISO 22301:20191 of 2 evidenced, 1 to do
Performance evaluation, ISO 22301:20192 of 8 evidenced, 6 to do
Leadership, ISO 22301:20191 of 5 evidenced, 4 to do
Context of the organization, ISO 22301:20191 of 8 evidenced, 7 to do
Planning, ISO 22301:20190 of 7 evidenced, 7 to do

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.

5.3610.1argued against and upheld
Nonconformity and corrective action

Non-compliance found by the check drives cause analysis and corrective action, which is what 10.1 requires.

5.314.2.2argued against and upheld
Legal and regulatory requirements

A maintained register of legal, statutory, regulatory and contractual obligations, kept current, is the artefact 4.2.2 asks for.

5.25.3argued against and upheld
Roles, responsibilities and authorities

Named ownership of roles, allocated explicitly and traceably, is what top management must assign and communicate.

6.37.2argued against and upheld
Competence

Role appropriate current training, with records of who holds it, evidences the competence obligation.

6.37.3argued against and upheld
Awareness

Awareness training for personnel and relevant parties is the awareness obligation directly.

5.377.5argued against and upheld
Documented information

Documented operating procedures, kept available to those who need them, are the documented information the system runs on.

5.337.5.3argued against and upheld
Control of documented information

Protecting records from loss, falsification and unauthorized access is the control of documented information required.

5.308.1argued against and upheld
Operational planning and control

ICT readiness planned, implemented, maintained and tested against continuity objectives is operational planning and control.

Claims that did not hold

84 proposed mappings for this pair were rejected. They are kept in the graph rather than deleted, so what was thrown out is as inspectable as what survived. A crosswalk that never rejects anything is not being judged.

5.2510.2
Continual improvement

retired metered-API path. 56 percent of its output was refuted wherever it was re-judged, so its residue is not trusted evidence. Superseded by judgement on the Claude Max plan 2026-08-19.

Claimed at high confidence before it was rejected.

5.2610.2
Continual improvement

retired metered-API path. 56 percent of its output was refuted wherever it was re-judged, so its residue is not trusted evidence. Superseded by judgement on the Claude Max plan 2026-08-19.

Claimed at high confidence before it was rejected.

5.14.4
Business continuity management system

retired metered-API path. 56 percent of its output was refuted wherever it was re-judged, so its residue is not trusted evidence. Superseded by judgement on the Claude Max plan 2026-08-19.

Claimed at high confidence before it was rejected.

5.24.4
Business continuity management system

retired metered-API path. 56 percent of its output was refuted wherever it was re-judged, so its residue is not trusted evidence. Superseded by judgement on the Claude Max plan 2026-08-19.

Claimed at high confidence before it was rejected.

5.374.4
Business continuity management system

retired metered-API path. 56 percent of its output was refuted wherever it was re-judged, so its residue is not trusted evidence. Superseded by judgement on the Claude Max plan 2026-08-19.

Claimed at medium confidence before it was rejected.

5.25.2
Policy

numbering-space collision: ISO 27001 Annex A control numbers matched against ISO 22301 management clause numbers

Claimed at high confidence before it was rejected.

5.35.3
Roles, responsibilities and authorities

numbering-space collision: ISO 27001 Annex A control numbers matched against ISO 22301 management clause numbers

Claimed at high confidence before it was rejected.

6.16.1
Actions to address risks and opportunities

numbering-space collision: ISO 27001 Annex A control numbers matched against ISO 22301 management clause numbers

Claimed at high confidence before it was rejected.

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