Framework overlap

Does Azure Security Benchmark cover MiFID II / MiFIR?

You hold Azure Security Benchmark and have been told to do MiFID II / MiFIR. Here is how much overlaps, control by control.

25% of MiFID II / MiFIR you already have

Azure Security Benchmark already covers about 25% of MiFID II / MiFIR, leaving 6 of 8 controls as genuinely new work.

Already covered 1 Likely covered 1 New work 6

What is genuinely new work

Nothing in Azure Security Benchmark reaches these. This is the list to scope.

MiFID-II-Algorithmic-Trading-Article-17-HFT-RTS-6-Tick-Size-Direct-Electronic-Access-Market-Making
MiFID II Algorithmic Trading + Article 17 + HFT + RTS 6 + Tick Size + Direct Electronic Access + Market Making
MiFID-II-Best-Execution-Article-27-RTS-28-Order-Handling-Best-Possible-Result-Retail-Quality-Factors
MiFID II Best Execution + Article 27 + RTS 28 + Order Handling + Best Possible Result + Retail + Quality Factors
MiFID-II-Client-Categorisation-Suitability-Appropriateness-Articles-25-30-Annex-II-Retail-Professional-ECP
MiFID II Client Categorisation + Suitability + Appropriateness + Articles 25 + 30 + Annex II + Retail + Professional + ECP
MiFID-II-Conflicts-Inducements-Product-Governance-Articles-23-24-16-3-Commission-Delegated-Directive-2017-593
MiFID II Conflicts + Article 23 + Inducements + Article 24 + Product Governance + Article 16(3) + Commission Delegated Directive 2017/593
MiFID-II-Enforcement-Articles-69-71-Sanctions-Article-70-EUR-5M-10pct-Turnover-Product-Intervention-MiFIR-Article-40-42
MiFID II Enforcement + Articles 69-71 + Sanctions + Article 70 + EUR 5M + 10% turnover + Product Intervention + MiFIR Articles 40-42
MiFID-II-Governance-Management-Body-Articles-8-13-Organisation-16-Compliance-Article-22-Outsourcing
MiFID II Governance + Management Body + Articles 8-13 + Organisation + Article 16 + Compliance + Article 22 + Outsourcing
Show the 2 you already have
MiFID-II-Scope-Directive-2014-65-MiFIR-Regulation-600-2014-Effective-3-January-2018-ESMA-NCAs-Authorisation
MiFID II + MiFIR Scope + Directive 2014/65 + Regulation 600/2014 + 3 January 2018 + ESMA + NCAs + Authorisation
MiFIR-Transparency-Pre-Post-Articles-3-11-Equity-Non-Equity-Trading-Obligation-Article-23-26-27-Transaction-Reporting
MiFIR Transparency + Pre + Post + Articles 3-11 + Equity + Non-Equity + Trading Obligation + Article 23-26-27 Transaction Reporting

How this is calculated

Already covered means a mapping runs from a control in Azure Security Benchmark to that control. Likely covered means no direct mapping exists but both frameworks map to the same control in a third standard. New work means neither. We keep those separate rather than adding them into one friendlier number, because blending them would present a two-hop inference as a verified fact.

Coverage is not symmetric. Run it the other way and you will get a different number; both are correct.

From 332,959 cross-framework control mappings across 723 frameworks, 531 of them verified against their source documents. It does not tell you that you are compliant: a mapped control means the two standards ask for the same thing, not that you have done it.

Try another pair ยท Today's edition