SOC 2 covers 48.8% of APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management
21 of the 43 controls in APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management are already satisfied by evidence you collected for SOC 2. 22 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.
What this leaves you to do
APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management has 43 controls. Holding SOC 2 already evidences 21 of them, so the work in front of you is 22 controls, not 43, which is 51% of the standard rather than all of it.
That is the whole claim. We do not know your hourly rate, how long a control takes you, or how many people you have, so there is no figure here in dollars or weeks. Every number in that sentence comes from the two counts above it and can be re-derived from the free tools without taking our word for any of it.
This number is directional. It says how much of APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management your SOC 2 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.
37 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.
Entity wide risk identification and analysis is operational risk identification and assessment.
Risk mitigation for potential business disruptions is prevention and return to normal operations.
Assessing and managing vendor risk is the precondition for relying on a provider.
Ongoing and separate evaluations are the review of operational risk management.
Board oversight of internal control performance is the accountability required.
Established structures, reporting lines and authorities are the senior manager roles.
Board oversight of internal control effectiveness is the same oversight duty.
Risk identification across the entity covers the full range of operational risks.
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