The NIST Cybersecurity Framework (CSF), ISO 27001, CIS Critical Security Controls, and SOC 2 are among the most widely adopted standards—but how do you know which one is right for your business?

This blog post will break down the key differences, overlaps, and best-use cases for each framework. We’ll also explore how SnapGRC, a leading compliance management platform, simplifies adherence to multiple frameworks through automation, real-time monitoring, and integrated risk assessments.

Understanding the NIST Cybersecurity Framework (CSF)

The NIST CSF is a voluntary framework developed by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) to help organisations manage cybersecurity risks. Unlike prescriptive standards, it provides a flexible, risk-based approach structured around five core functions:

• Identify – Understanding assets, risks, and governance.
• Protect – Implementing safeguards to secure systems.
• Detect – Continuous monitoring for cybersecurity events.
• Respond – Developing incident response plans.
• Recover – Ensuring resilience after an incident.

Best for: Organisations that need a scalable, adaptable approach to cybersecurity, particularly in industries like critical infrastructure, healthcare, and financial services. Since it’s not a certification, it’s ideal for internal risk assessments and maturity benchmarking.

NIST CSF vs. ISO 27001: Framework vs. Certifiable Standard

While the NIST CSF provides a high-level structure for managing cybersecurity risks, ISO 27001 is an internationally recognised certification standard for Information Security Management Systems (ISMS).

Key Differences:

Scope & Certification:

• NIST CSF is a guideline, not a certifiable standard—it helps organisations assess and improve their security posture.
• ISO 27001 is a rigorous certification requiring third-party audits, making it a preferred choice for global enterprises needing to demonstrate compliance.

Approach to Risk:

• NIST CSF is outcome-driven, allowing organisations to tailor controls based on their risk tolerance.
• ISO 27001 follows a risk management process (identify, assess, treat, monitor) with mandatory controls outlined in Annex A.

Industries & Use Cases:

NIST CSF is widely used in U.S. government contracts and critical infrastructure.

ISO 27001 is favoured by multinational corporations, especially in Europe and Asia, due to its global recognition.

How SnapGRC Helps: Many organisations adopt both frameworks to meet different compliance needs. SnapGRC’s automated mapping capabilities allow businesses to align NIST CSF with ISO 27001 controls, reducing duplication of effort and streamlining audits.

NIST CSF vs. CIS Controls: Operational Security vs. Strategic Framework

The CIS Critical Security Controls (CIS Controls) are a prioritised set of actionable best practices for securing IT systems. Unlike the NIST CSF’s broad risk management approach, CIS Controls focus on specific technical safeguards (e.g., inventory management, secure configurations, access controls).

Key Differences:

Structure:

NIST CSF is strategic, helping organisations assess overall cybersecurity maturity.

CIS Controls are tactical, offering a numbered list of security measures (e.g., Control 1: Inventory and Control of Hardware Assets).

Implementation:

NIST CSF requires organisations to define their own controls based on risk.

CIS Controls provide a ready-to-implement checklist, making them ideal for IT teams needing clear directives.

How SnapGRC Helps: For companies using both frameworks, SnapGRCs policy automation ensures that CIS technical controls align with NIST CSF’s "Protect" and "Detect" functions, ensuring cohesive security postures.

NIST CSF vs. SOC 2: Risk Management vs. Trust Assurance

SOC 2 (System and Organisation Controls 2) is a compliance audit focused on data security, availability, processing integrity, confidentiality, and privacy. Unlike NIST CSF, SOC 2 is not a framework but a reporting standard used to demonstrate security controls to customers and stakeholders.

Key Differences:

Purpose:

NIST CSF helps organizations improve cybersecurity.

SOC 2 proves to clients and regulators that security controls are in place.

Audience:

NIST CSF is primarily for internal risk management.

SOC 2 is a third-party attestation often required by B2B SaaS companies and cloud providers.

How SnapGRC Helps: Companies pursuing SOC 2 compliance can use SnapGRC to automate evidence collection, control testing, and audit readiness—while simultaneously mapping SOC 2 requirements to NIST CSF for a unified compliance strategy.

Which Framework Should You Choose? (Or Should You Combine Them?)

The right framework depends on your industry, compliance obligations, and business goals. 

Many organizations use multiple frameworks—for example:

A healthcare provider might use NIST CSF for risk management and SOC 2 for client assurance.

A financial firm could combine ISO 27001 (certification) + CIS Controls (technical safeguards).

How SnapGRC Simplifies Multi-Framework Compliance

Manually managing overlapping frameworks is time-consuming and error-prone. SnapGRC solves this by:

• Continuous Monitoring – Real-time tracking of compliance gaps and remediation steps.
• Audit-Ready Reporting – Generate evidence packs for auditors with a single click.
• Policy Automation – Ensure policies stay updated across all frameworks.

Whether you need NIST CSF for risk management, ISO 27001 for certification, CIS Controls for technical security, or SOC 2 for customer trust, SnapGRC helps you automate, integrate, and simplify compliance across frameworks.