--- title: "ISO/IEC 27005 vs ISO 31000 Comparison" canonical_url: "https://www.sorena.io/artifacts/global/iso-27005/iso-27005-vs-iso-31000" source_url: "https://www.sorena.io/artifacts/global/iso-27005/iso-27005-vs-iso-31000" author: "Sorena AI" description: "ISO/IEC 27005 vs ISO 31000 for ISO/IEC 27005 Information Security Risk Management: practical decisions, evidence, owners, review cadence, and source-linked implementation guidance." published_at: "2026-05-09" updated_at: "2026-05-09" keywords: - "ISO/IEC 27005 vs ISO 31000" - "ISO/IEC 27005" - "ISO/IEC 27005 Information Security Risk Management" - "ISO/IEC 27005 vs ISO 31000 checklist" - "ISO/IEC 27005 vs ISO 31000 evidence" - "ISO/IEC 27005 vs ISO 31000 implementation" - "global compliance" --- **[SORENA](https://www.sorena.io/)** - AI-Powered GRC Platform [Home](https://www.sorena.io/) | [Solutions](https://www.sorena.io/solutions) | [Artifacts](https://www.sorena.io/artifacts) | [About Us](https://www.sorena.io/about-us) | [Contact](https://www.sorena.io/contact) | [Portal](https://app.sorena.io) --- # ISO/IEC 27005 vs ISO 31000 Comparison ISO/IEC 27005 vs ISO 31000 for ISO/IEC 27005 Information Security Risk Management: practical decisions, evidence, owners, review cadence, and source-linked implementation guidance. *Side-by-side* *Global* *ISO/IEC 27005* ## ISO/IEC 27005 ISO/IEC 27005 vs ISO 31000 This comparison page helps choose the right risk-management approach by scope, evidence, approval, and review requirements. Applied to this decision area, this page focuses on scope, ownership, evidence, review triggers, and escalation criteria supported by source-linked risk-management guidance. The comparison explains which method applies to your risk context, what evidence is needed, and how to apply review gates for ISO/IEC 27005. ## ISO/IEC 27005 vs ISO 31000: scope, duties, evidence, and decision rule This comparison identifies when ISO/IEC 27005 is the right operating model, when ISO 31000 controls the analysis, and how to reuse evidence without mixing sources. - **ISO/IEC 27005**: ISO/IEC 27005 is the primary scoping column: use it to confirm covered facts, accountable owners, mandatory artifacts, timing, and enforcement exposure before assigning implementation work. - **ISO 31000**: ISO 31000 is the second workstream in this comparison. Use it to test where the comparator has different scope, owners, triggers, evidence, timing, enforcement, and reuse limits from ISO/IEC 27005. | Dimension | ISO/IEC 27005 | ISO 31000 | Operational implication | Sources | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | Scope and covered activity | ISO/IEC 27005 is guidance for information security risk management that supports ISO/IEC 27001 and risk-based control decisions. | ISO 31000 is broad risk-management guidance for any type of organizational risk, not only information security risk. | Write the scope memo so teams can see when ISO/IEC 27005 is the implementation structure, when ISO 31000 controls the obligation or assurance question, and where evidence can be reused without changing the source test. | [ISO/IEC 27005:2022 standard page](https://www.iso.org/standard/80585.html?ref=sorena.io) - This ISO listing supports the ISO/IEC 27005 side of the comparison by identifying it as guidance for managing information security risks in an ISMS context.
[ISO 31000:2018 standard page](https://www.iso.org/standard/65694.html?ref=sorena.io) - This ISO listing supports the comparator side by identifying ISO 31000 as organization-wide risk management guidance. | | Who must act | ISO/IEC 27005 ownership should sit with the team that can operate the relevant management system, control process, risk method, supplier relationship, incident process, privacy process, or AI governance scope. | ISO 31000 ownership should follow that source's role model, such as regulator-facing accountable body, service organization, framework owner, provider, customer, processor, deployer, supplier, or risk owner. | Do not copy owners from one side to the other; map accountable owners, reviewers, and approvers separately. | [ISO/IEC 27005:2022 standard page](https://www.iso.org/standard/80585.html?ref=sorena.io) - This ISO listing supports the ISO/IEC 27005 side of the comparison by identifying it as guidance for managing information security risks in an ISMS context.
[ISO 31000:2018 standard page](https://www.iso.org/standard/65694.html?ref=sorena.io) - This ISO listing supports the comparator side by identifying ISO 31000 as organization-wide risk management guidance. | | Trigger or threshold | ISO/IEC 27005 work is triggered by scope definition, implementation, certification readiness, customer assurance, control gaps, incidents, supplier changes, or management review. | ISO 31000 work is triggered by its own legal, assurance, framework, contract, customer, or risk-management event. | Route intake using this trigger for standards implementation, regulatory response, assurance report, framework mapping, customer request, or operational remediation. | [ISO/IEC 27005:2022 standard page](https://www.iso.org/standard/80585.html?ref=sorena.io) - This ISO listing supports the ISO/IEC 27005 side of the comparison by identifying it as guidance for managing information security risks in an ISMS context.
[ISO 31000:2018 standard page](https://www.iso.org/standard/65694.html?ref=sorena.io) - This ISO listing supports the comparator side by identifying ISO 31000 as organization-wide risk management guidance. | | Core obligations | ISO/IEC 27005 requires practical governance: scope, roles, risk or impact decisions, evidence, operating cadence, monitoring, review, and improvement. | ISO 31000 expects its own required or recommended outcomes, which may include legal duties, assurance criteria, control objectives, profiles, or risk methodology. | Translate both sides into a single task register only after labeling which requirement or guidance source each task satisfies. | [ISO/IEC 27005:2022 standard page](https://www.iso.org/standard/80585.html?ref=sorena.io) - This ISO listing supports the ISO/IEC 27005 side of the comparison by identifying it as guidance for managing information security risks in an ISMS context.
[ISO 31000:2018 standard page](https://www.iso.org/standard/65694.html?ref=sorena.io) - This ISO listing supports the comparator side by identifying ISO 31000 as organization-wide risk management guidance. | | Evidence and records | ISO/IEC 27005 evidence should show the process operating: owners, decisions, registers, control records, test results, review minutes, audit samples, or corrective actions. | ISO 31000 evidence should match its own proof model, such as regulatory records, attestation evidence, framework profiles, risk analysis, or contractual assurance. | Build an evidence matrix with one row per claim and columns for source, owner, artifact, date, review trigger, and reuse permission. | [ISO/IEC 27005:2022 standard page](https://www.iso.org/standard/80585.html?ref=sorena.io) - This ISO listing supports the ISO/IEC 27005 side of the comparison by identifying it as guidance for managing information security risks in an ISMS context.
[ISO 31000:2018 standard page](https://www.iso.org/standard/65694.html?ref=sorena.io) - This ISO listing supports the comparator side by identifying ISO 31000 as organization-wide risk management guidance. | | Timing and cadence | ISO/IEC 27005 timing follows implementation, audit, certification, review, supplier, incident, or change cycles rather than a single universal deadline. | ISO 31000 timing follows the legal effective date, assurance period, framework version, contract milestone, or publication lifecycle that applies to that side. | Track dates separately so an ISO review cycle does not get mistaken for a statutory deadline or assurance reporting period. | [ISO/IEC 27005:2022 standard page](https://www.iso.org/standard/80585.html?ref=sorena.io) - This ISO listing supports the ISO/IEC 27005 side of the comparison by identifying it as guidance for managing information security risks in an ISMS context.
[ISO 31000:2018 standard page](https://www.iso.org/standard/65694.html?ref=sorena.io) - This ISO listing supports the comparator side by identifying ISO 31000 as organization-wide risk management guidance. | | Enforcement or assurance route | ISO/IEC 27005 is usually tested through certification audits, internal audits, customer assurance, management review, or governance review, depending on how the organization adopts it. | ISO 31000 may be enforced, audited, attested, assessed, or used voluntarily depending on whether it is law, assurance criteria, a framework, or guidance. | Separate audit readiness from legal compliance and from voluntary framework maturity so executives see the actual consequence of gaps. | [ISO/IEC 27005:2022 standard page](https://www.iso.org/standard/80585.html?ref=sorena.io) - This ISO listing supports the ISO/IEC 27005 side of the comparison by identifying it as guidance for managing information security risks in an ISMS context.
[ISO 31000:2018 standard page](https://www.iso.org/standard/65694.html?ref=sorena.io) - This ISO listing supports the comparator side by identifying ISO 31000 as organization-wide risk management guidance. | | Overlap and reuse | ISO/IEC 27005 can supply reusable management-system evidence, control operation records, risk decisions, and review outputs. | ISO 31000 can reuse some of that evidence when the control, process, risk, or duty is genuinely the same. | Reuse evidence only after checking scope, actor, date, data type, service, supplier, and acceptance criteria; otherwise keep separate records. | [ISO/IEC 27005:2022 standard page](https://www.iso.org/standard/80585.html?ref=sorena.io) - This ISO listing supports the ISO/IEC 27005 side of the comparison by identifying it as guidance for managing information security risks in an ISMS context.
[ISO 31000:2018 standard page](https://www.iso.org/standard/65694.html?ref=sorena.io) - This ISO listing supports the comparator side by identifying ISO 31000 as organization-wide risk management guidance. | | Practical decision rule | Use ISO/IEC 27005 when the main work is building, operating, reviewing, or proving a management-system or standards-based control process. | Use ISO 31000 when the main work is satisfying that side's law, assurance route, framework outcome, risk method, or external reporting expectation. | If both apply, keep the primary obligation visible and use the other side as supporting structure, not as a substitute source. | [ISO/IEC 27005:2022 standard page](https://www.iso.org/standard/80585.html?ref=sorena.io) - This ISO listing supports the ISO/IEC 27005 side of the comparison by identifying it as guidance for managing information security risks in an ISMS context.
[ISO 31000:2018 standard page](https://www.iso.org/standard/65694.html?ref=sorena.io) - This ISO listing supports the comparator side by identifying ISO 31000 as organization-wide risk management guidance. | Sources for Scope and covered activity - ISO/IEC 27005: - [ISO/IEC 27005:2022 standard page](https://www.iso.org/standard/80585.html?ref=sorena.io) - This ISO listing supports the ISO/IEC 27005 side of the comparison by identifying it as guidance for managing information security risks in an ISMS context. - Quote: "Guidance on managing information security risks" Sources for Scope and covered activity - ISO 31000: - [ISO 31000:2018 standard page](https://www.iso.org/standard/65694.html?ref=sorena.io) - This ISO listing supports the comparator side by identifying ISO 31000 as organization-wide risk management guidance. - Quote: "Risk management - Guidelines" Sources for Scope and covered activity - operational implication: - [ISO/IEC 27005:2022 standard page](https://www.iso.org/standard/80585.html?ref=sorena.io) - This ISO listing supports the ISO/IEC 27005 side of the comparison by identifying it as guidance for managing information security risks in an ISMS context. - Quote: "Guidance on managing information security risks" - [ISO 31000:2018 standard page](https://www.iso.org/standard/65694.html?ref=sorena.io) - This ISO listing supports the comparator side by identifying ISO 31000 as organization-wide risk management guidance. - Quote: "Risk management - Guidelines" Sources for Who must act - ISO/IEC 27005: - [ISO/IEC 27005:2022 standard page](https://www.iso.org/standard/80585.html?ref=sorena.io) - This ISO listing supports the ISO/IEC 27005 side of the comparison by identifying it as guidance for managing information security risks in an ISMS context. - Quote: "Guidance on managing information security risks" Sources for Who must act - ISO 31000: - [ISO 31000:2018 standard page](https://www.iso.org/standard/65694.html?ref=sorena.io) - This ISO listing supports the comparator side by identifying ISO 31000 as organization-wide risk management guidance. - Quote: "Risk management - Guidelines" Sources for Who must act - operational implication: - [ISO/IEC 27005:2022 standard page](https://www.iso.org/standard/80585.html?ref=sorena.io) - This ISO listing supports the ISO/IEC 27005 side of the comparison by identifying it as guidance for managing information security risks in an ISMS context. - Quote: "Guidance on managing information security risks" - [ISO 31000:2018 standard page](https://www.iso.org/standard/65694.html?ref=sorena.io) - This ISO listing supports the comparator side by identifying ISO 31000 as organization-wide risk management guidance. - Quote: "Risk management - Guidelines" Sources for Trigger or threshold - ISO/IEC 27005: - [ISO/IEC 27005:2022 standard page](https://www.iso.org/standard/80585.html?ref=sorena.io) - This ISO listing supports the ISO/IEC 27005 side of the comparison by identifying it as guidance for managing information security risks in an ISMS context. - Quote: "Guidance on managing information security risks" Sources for Trigger or threshold - ISO 31000: - [ISO 31000:2018 standard page](https://www.iso.org/standard/65694.html?ref=sorena.io) - This ISO listing supports the comparator side by identifying ISO 31000 as organization-wide risk management guidance. - Quote: "Risk management - Guidelines" Sources for Trigger or threshold - operational implication: - [ISO/IEC 27005:2022 standard page](https://www.iso.org/standard/80585.html?ref=sorena.io) - This ISO listing supports the ISO/IEC 27005 side of the comparison by identifying it as guidance for managing information security risks in an ISMS context. - Quote: "Guidance on managing information security risks" - [ISO 31000:2018 standard page](https://www.iso.org/standard/65694.html?ref=sorena.io) - This ISO listing supports the comparator side by identifying ISO 31000 as organization-wide risk management guidance. - Quote: "Risk management - Guidelines" Sources for Core obligations - ISO/IEC 27005: - [ISO/IEC 27005:2022 standard page](https://www.iso.org/standard/80585.html?ref=sorena.io) - This ISO listing supports the ISO/IEC 27005 side of the comparison by identifying it as guidance for managing information security risks in an ISMS context. - Quote: "Guidance on managing information security risks" Sources for Core obligations - ISO 31000: - [ISO 31000:2018 standard page](https://www.iso.org/standard/65694.html?ref=sorena.io) - This ISO listing supports the comparator side by identifying ISO 31000 as organization-wide risk management guidance. - Quote: "Risk management - Guidelines" Sources for Core obligations - operational implication: - [ISO/IEC 27005:2022 standard page](https://www.iso.org/standard/80585.html?ref=sorena.io) - This ISO listing supports the ISO/IEC 27005 side of the comparison by identifying it as guidance for managing information security risks in an ISMS context. - Quote: "Guidance on managing information security risks" - [ISO 31000:2018 standard page](https://www.iso.org/standard/65694.html?ref=sorena.io) - This ISO listing supports the comparator side by identifying ISO 31000 as organization-wide risk management guidance. - Quote: "Risk management - Guidelines" Sources for Evidence and records - ISO/IEC 27005: - [ISO/IEC 27005:2022 standard page](https://www.iso.org/standard/80585.html?ref=sorena.io) - This ISO listing supports the ISO/IEC 27005 side of the comparison by identifying it as guidance for managing information security risks in an ISMS context. - Quote: "Guidance on managing information security risks" Sources for Evidence and records - ISO 31000: - [ISO 31000:2018 standard page](https://www.iso.org/standard/65694.html?ref=sorena.io) - This ISO listing supports the comparator side by identifying ISO 31000 as organization-wide risk management guidance. - Quote: "Risk management - Guidelines" Sources for Evidence and records - operational implication: - [ISO/IEC 27005:2022 standard page](https://www.iso.org/standard/80585.html?ref=sorena.io) - This ISO listing supports the ISO/IEC 27005 side of the comparison by identifying it as guidance for managing information security risks in an ISMS context. - Quote: "Guidance on managing information security risks" - [ISO 31000:2018 standard page](https://www.iso.org/standard/65694.html?ref=sorena.io) - This ISO listing supports the comparator side by identifying ISO 31000 as organization-wide risk management guidance. - Quote: "Risk management - Guidelines" Sources for Timing and cadence - ISO/IEC 27005: - [ISO/IEC 27005:2022 standard page](https://www.iso.org/standard/80585.html?ref=sorena.io) - This ISO listing supports the ISO/IEC 27005 side of the comparison by identifying it as guidance for managing information security risks in an ISMS context. - Quote: "Guidance on managing information security risks" Sources for Timing and cadence - ISO 31000: - [ISO 31000:2018 standard page](https://www.iso.org/standard/65694.html?ref=sorena.io) - This ISO listing supports the comparator side by identifying ISO 31000 as organization-wide risk management guidance. - Quote: "Risk management - Guidelines" Sources for Timing and cadence - operational implication: - [ISO/IEC 27005:2022 standard page](https://www.iso.org/standard/80585.html?ref=sorena.io) - This ISO listing supports the ISO/IEC 27005 side of the comparison by identifying it as guidance for managing information security risks in an ISMS context. - Quote: "Guidance on managing information security risks" - [ISO 31000:2018 standard page](https://www.iso.org/standard/65694.html?ref=sorena.io) - This ISO listing supports the comparator side by identifying ISO 31000 as organization-wide risk management guidance. - Quote: "Risk management - Guidelines" Sources for Enforcement or assurance route - ISO/IEC 27005: - [ISO/IEC 27005:2022 standard page](https://www.iso.org/standard/80585.html?ref=sorena.io) - This ISO listing supports the ISO/IEC 27005 side of the comparison by identifying it as guidance for managing information security risks in an ISMS context. - Quote: "Guidance on managing information security risks" Sources for Enforcement or assurance route - ISO 31000: - [ISO 31000:2018 standard page](https://www.iso.org/standard/65694.html?ref=sorena.io) - This ISO listing supports the comparator side by identifying ISO 31000 as organization-wide risk management guidance. - Quote: "Risk management - Guidelines" Sources for Enforcement or assurance route - operational implication: - [ISO/IEC 27005:2022 standard page](https://www.iso.org/standard/80585.html?ref=sorena.io) - This ISO listing supports the ISO/IEC 27005 side of the comparison by identifying it as guidance for managing information security risks in an ISMS context. - Quote: "Guidance on managing information security risks" - [ISO 31000:2018 standard page](https://www.iso.org/standard/65694.html?ref=sorena.io) - This ISO listing supports the comparator side by identifying ISO 31000 as organization-wide risk management guidance. - Quote: "Risk management - Guidelines" Sources for Overlap and reuse - ISO/IEC 27005: - [ISO/IEC 27005:2022 standard page](https://www.iso.org/standard/80585.html?ref=sorena.io) - This ISO listing supports the ISO/IEC 27005 side of the comparison by identifying it as guidance for managing information security risks in an ISMS context. - Quote: "Guidance on managing information security risks" Sources for Overlap and reuse - ISO 31000: - [ISO 31000:2018 standard page](https://www.iso.org/standard/65694.html?ref=sorena.io) - This ISO listing supports the comparator side by identifying ISO 31000 as organization-wide risk management guidance. - Quote: "Risk management - Guidelines" Sources for Overlap and reuse - operational implication: - [ISO/IEC 27005:2022 standard page](https://www.iso.org/standard/80585.html?ref=sorena.io) - This ISO listing supports the ISO/IEC 27005 side of the comparison by identifying it as guidance for managing information security risks in an ISMS context. - Quote: "Guidance on managing information security risks" - [ISO 31000:2018 standard page](https://www.iso.org/standard/65694.html?ref=sorena.io) - This ISO listing supports the comparator side by identifying ISO 31000 as organization-wide risk management guidance. - Quote: "Risk management - Guidelines" Sources for Practical decision rule - ISO/IEC 27005: - [ISO/IEC 27005:2022 standard page](https://www.iso.org/standard/80585.html?ref=sorena.io) - This ISO listing supports the ISO/IEC 27005 side of the comparison by identifying it as guidance for managing information security risks in an ISMS context. - Quote: "Guidance on managing information security risks" Sources for Practical decision rule - ISO 31000: - [ISO 31000:2018 standard page](https://www.iso.org/standard/65694.html?ref=sorena.io) - This ISO listing supports the comparator side by identifying ISO 31000 as organization-wide risk management guidance. - Quote: "Risk management - Guidelines" Sources for Practical decision rule - operational implication: - [ISO/IEC 27005:2022 standard page](https://www.iso.org/standard/80585.html?ref=sorena.io) - This ISO listing supports the ISO/IEC 27005 side of the comparison by identifying it as guidance for managing information security risks in an ISMS context. - Quote: "Guidance on managing information security risks" - [ISO 31000:2018 standard page](https://www.iso.org/standard/65694.html?ref=sorena.io) - This ISO listing supports the comparator side by identifying ISO 31000 as organization-wide risk management guidance. - Quote: "Risk management - Guidelines" ### How should teams decide between ISO/IEC 27005 and ISO 31000 for compliance planning? - Start with the trigger: certification, risk review, cloud/customer assurance, incident, supplier, privacy, AI governance, law, or framework mapping. - Identify the binding or chosen source for each claim before assigning controls or collecting evidence. - Reuse evidence only where the same owner, scope, time period, system, supplier, data type, and acceptance criteria apply. Sources for the practical decision rule: - [ISO/IEC 27005:2022 standard page](https://www.iso.org/standard/80585.html?ref=sorena.io) - This ISO listing supports the ISO/IEC 27005 side of the comparison by identifying it as guidance for managing information security risks in an ISMS context. - Quote: "Guidance on managing information security risks" - [ISO 31000:2018 standard page](https://www.iso.org/standard/65694.html?ref=sorena.io) - This ISO listing supports the comparator side by identifying ISO 31000 as organization-wide risk management guidance. - Quote: "Risk management - Guidelines" ## What decision should teams make about ISO/IEC 27005 vs ISO 31000 under ISO/IEC 27005 Information Security Risk Management? For this risk-management use case, separate the decision model from the outcome. Capture scope, assumptions, owner, controls, and residual position before escalation or treatment. The first decision is whether ISO/IEC 27005 vs ISO 31000 changes scope, risk, control selection, evidence, certification readiness, customer commitments, or regulatory mapping. If it does, treat it as an accountable management-system decision rather than a side note. ISO/IEC 27005 is useful when it turns broad intent into repeatable work: make information security risk decisions consistent, explainable, comparable, and usable by risk owners and control owners. The page should therefore end in ownership, evidence, and review cadence, not only a definition. - Use ISO/IEC 27005 when the problem is information security risk management in an ISMS or similar information-security process. - Use ISO 31000 when the problem is broader organization-wide risk management and the information-security process is only one part of the decision. - If both apply, keep ISO/IEC 27005 as the information-security method and use ISO 31000 as the wider risk-management frame, but do not merge the records without a clear owner and scope. Sources for this answer: - [ISO/IEC 27005:2022 standard page](https://www.iso.org/standard/80585.html?ref=sorena.io) - This ISO listing supports the ISO/IEC 27005 side of the comparison by identifying it as guidance for managing information security risks in an ISMS context. - [ISO/IEC 27001:2022 standard page](https://www.iso.org/standard/27001?ref=sorena.io) - This ISO listing supports the ISMS context because ISO/IEC 27005 risk work is used alongside ISO/IEC 27001 requirements. ## Which records should prove ISO/IEC 27005 vs ISO 31000 is implemented correctly? Evidence should be collected where the work actually happens. For ISO/IEC 27005, that usually means risk criteria, scenario library, asset and threat assumptions, likelihood and impact rationale, inherent and residual ratings, treatment decisions, approvals, review dates, and control links. A strong evidence set tells a visitor, auditor, customer, or decision owner what was decided, why it was reasonable, who approved it, and when it must be reviewed again. - Artifact-specific evidence: risk criteria, scenarios, likelihood and impact rationale, treatment decisions, residual-risk approvals, and review records. - Decision record: scope, assumption, risk or obligation, owner, approval, and date. - Operation record: ticket, log, review, test, contract clause, register entry, or control sample showing the process ran. - Review record: result, exception, corrective action, next owner, and next review date. Sources for this answer: - [ISO/IEC 27001:2022 standard page](https://www.iso.org/standard/27001?ref=sorena.io) - This ISO listing supports the ISMS context because ISO/IEC 27005 risk work is used alongside ISO/IEC 27001 requirements. - [NIST SP 800-30 Rev. 1](https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/Legacy/SP/nistspecialpublication800-30r1.pdf?ref=sorena.io) - This NIST publication supports the comparator side by identifying SP 800-30 Rev. 1 as guidance for conducting risk assessments. ## How should teams turn ISO/IEC 27005 vs ISO 31000 into a repeatable workflow? Build the workflow around a small number of durable checkpoints: intake, classification, owner assignment, evidence request, decision, review, and escalation. This keeps the work usable across audits, customer assurance, and operational reviews. Avoid overfitting the workflow to one audit cycle. The same record should help during normal operations, change review, incident response, supplier review, or management review depending on the topic. - Intake: describe the system, service, supplier, control, incident, AI system, or process affected. - Classification: decide whether this is scope, risk, treatment, evidence, contract, incident, privacy, continuity, or AI governance work. - Escalation: route exceptions to the person or forum that can accept risk or fund remediation. Sources for this answer: - [NIST SP 800-30 Rev. 1](https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/Legacy/SP/nistspecialpublication800-30r1.pdf?ref=sorena.io) - This NIST publication supports the comparator side by identifying SP 800-30 Rev. 1 as guidance for conducting risk assessments. - [ISO 31000:2018 standard page](https://www.iso.org/standard/65694.html?ref=sorena.io) - This ISO listing supports the comparator side by identifying ISO 31000 as organization-wide risk management guidance. *Recommended next step* *Placement: after implementation guidance* ## Operationalize ISO/IEC 27005 vs ISO 31000 Define owner, evidence requirements, evidence requests, and the next review date before approval. - [Open Assessment Autopilot for ISO/IEC 27005](/solutions/assessment.md): Convert ISO/IEC 27005 vs ISO 31000 into accountable tasks, evidence requests, and review checkpoints. - [Talk through implementation](/contact.md): Review your current scope, evidence gaps, and next implementation steps. ## What mistakes make ISO/IEC 27005 vs ISO 31000 weak or hard to audit? When implementation documentation is not tied to a real owner, system, supplier, recovery target, control sample, risk decision, and operations context, it can appear complete but leaves no defensible evidence when reviewed. Another failure is mixing standards and regulations without stating which source creates the requirement. Use ISO standards to structure management-system practice, and use legal sources separately when a binding obligation applies. - Do not cite a standard title as evidence that a process is operating. - Do not reuse an old audit artifact after the scope, service, supplier, or risk has changed. - Do not hide exceptions; record them as risk acceptance, corrective action, or management-review inputs. Sources for this answer: - [ISO 31000:2018 standard page](https://www.iso.org/standard/65694.html?ref=sorena.io) - This ISO listing supports the comparator side by identifying ISO 31000 as organization-wide risk management guidance. - [ISO/IEC 27005:2022 standard page](https://www.iso.org/standard/80585.html?ref=sorena.io) - This ISO listing supports the ISO/IEC 27005 side of the comparison by identifying it as guidance for managing information security risks in an ISMS context. ## How should teams review and improve ISO/IEC 27005 vs ISO 31000 over time? Review should happen when assets, threats, suppliers, business processes, controls, or risk appetite change and at planned risk review intervals. If the review changes the decision, update the register, workflow, control evidence, or contract record that downstream teams rely on. Improvement is strongest when the same evidence supports multiple needs: certification audits, customer assurance, regulatory mapping, supplier governance, incident reviews, and management review. - Set a review date and a change-trigger rule. - Track findings until closure and connect them to corrective actions or risk acceptance. - Use management review to decide resourcing, risk appetite, scope changes, and evidence quality. Sources for this answer: - [ISO/IEC 27005:2022 standard page](https://www.iso.org/standard/80585.html?ref=sorena.io) - This ISO listing supports the ISO/IEC 27005 side of the comparison by identifying it as guidance for managing information security risks in an ISMS context. - [ISO/IEC 27001:2022 standard page](https://www.iso.org/standard/27001?ref=sorena.io) - This ISO listing supports the ISMS context because ISO/IEC 27005 risk work is used alongside ISO/IEC 27001 requirements. ## Primary sources - [ISO/IEC 27005:2022 standard page](https://www.iso.org/standard/80585.html?ref=sorena.io) - This ISO listing supports the ISO/IEC 27005 side of the comparison by identifying it as guidance for managing information security risks in an ISMS context. - Quote: "Guidance on managing information security risks" - [ISO/IEC 27001:2022 standard page](https://www.iso.org/standard/27001?ref=sorena.io) - This ISO listing supports the ISMS context because ISO/IEC 27005 risk work is used alongside ISO/IEC 27001 requirements. - Quote: "Information security management systems - Requirements" - [NIST SP 800-30 Rev. 1](https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/Legacy/SP/nistspecialpublication800-30r1.pdf?ref=sorena.io) - This NIST publication supports the comparator side by identifying SP 800-30 Rev. 1 as guidance for conducting risk assessments. - Quote: "Guide for Conducting Risk Assessments" - [ISO 31000:2018 standard page](https://www.iso.org/standard/65694.html?ref=sorena.io) - This ISO listing supports the comparator side by identifying ISO 31000 as organization-wide risk management guidance. - Quote: "Risk management - Guidelines" ## Related Topic Guides - [ISO/IEC 27005 Asset And Scenario Modeling FAQ](/artifacts/global/iso-27005/faq/asset-and-scenario-modeling.md): How should teams model assets and scenarios under ISO/IEC 27005 risk assessments? Practical answer with owners, evidence, review triggers, and external source references. - [ISO/IEC 27005 Compliance Guide](/artifacts/global/iso-27005/compliance.md): ISO/IEC 27005 Compliance for ISO/IEC 27005 Information Security Risk Management: practical decisions, evidence, owners, review cadence, and source-linked implementation guidance. - [ISO/IEC 27005 Impact FAQ](/artifacts/global/iso-27005/faq/impact.md): How should teams handle Impact under ISO/IEC 27005? Practical answer with owners, evidence, review triggers, and external source references. - [ISO/IEC 27005 Inherent vs Residual Risk FAQ](/artifacts/global/iso-27005/faq/inherent-vs-residual-risk.md): How should teams distinguish inherent risk from residual risk under ISO/IEC 27005? Practical answer with owners, evidence, review triggers, and external source references. - [ISO/IEC 27005 Likelihood FAQ](/artifacts/global/iso-27005/faq/likelihood.md): How should teams handle Likelihood under ISO/IEC 27005? Practical answer with owners, evidence, review triggers, and external source references. - [ISO/IEC 27005 Qualitative vs Quantitative Method Comparison](/artifacts/global/iso-27005/qualitative-vs-quantitative-method.md): Qualitative vs Quantitative Method for ISO/IEC 27005 Information Security Risk Management: practical decisions, evidence, owners, review cadence, and source-linked implementation guidance. - [ISO/IEC 27005 Residual Risk Approval Guide](/artifacts/global/iso-27005/residual-risk-approval.md): ISO/IEC 27005 Residual Risk Approval for ISO/IEC 27005 Information Security Risk Management: practical decisions, evidence, owners, review cadence, and source-linked implementation guidance. - [ISO/IEC 27005 Residual Risk Approval Workflow](/artifacts/global/iso-27005/residual-risk-approval-workflow.md): ISO/IEC 27005 Residual Risk Approval Workflow for ISO/IEC 27005 Information Security Risk Management: practical decisions, evidence, owners, review cadence, and source-linked implementation guidance. - [ISO/IEC 27005 Review Cadence FAQ](/artifacts/global/iso-27005/faq/review-cadence.md): How should teams handle Review Cadence under ISO/IEC 27005? Practical answer with owners, evidence, review triggers, and external source references. - [ISO/IEC 27005 Risk Acceptance FAQ](/artifacts/global/iso-27005/faq/risk-acceptance.md): How should teams handle Risk Acceptance under ISO/IEC 27005? Practical answer with owners, evidence, review triggers, and external source references. - [ISO/IEC 27005 Risk Assessment Template and Workflow](/artifacts/global/iso-27005/risk-assessment-template.md): ISO/IEC 27005 Risk Assessment Template for ISO/IEC 27005 Information Security Risk Management: practical decisions, evidence, owners, review cadence, and source-linked implementation guidance. - [ISO/IEC 27005 Risk Criteria Guide](/artifacts/global/iso-27005/risk-criteria.md): ISO/IEC 27005 Risk Criteria for ISO/IEC 27005 Information Security Risk Management: practical decisions, evidence, owners, review cadence, and source-linked implementation guidance. - [ISO/IEC 27005 Risk Criteria Setup Workflow](/artifacts/global/iso-27005/risk-criteria-setup-workflow.md): ISO/IEC 27005 Risk Criteria Setup Workflow for ISO/IEC 27005 Information Security Risk Management: practical decisions, evidence, owners, review cadence, and source-linked implementation guidance. - [ISO/IEC 27005 Risk Management FAQ](/artifacts/global/iso-27005/faq.md): ISO/IEC 27005 FAQ for ISO/IEC 27005 Information Security Risk Management: practical decisions, evidence, owners, review cadence, and source-linked implementation guidance. - [ISO/IEC 27005 Risk Owners FAQ](/artifacts/global/iso-27005/faq/risk-owners.md): How should teams handle Risk Owners under ISO/IEC 27005? Practical answer with owners, evidence, review triggers, and external source references. - [ISO/IEC 27005 Risk Register Workflow](/artifacts/global/iso-27005/risk-register-workflow.md): ISO/IEC 27005 Risk Register Workflow for ISO/IEC 27005 Information Security Risk Management: practical decisions, evidence, owners, review cadence, and source-linked implementation guidance. - [ISO/IEC 27005 Risk Treatment Plan Template](/artifacts/global/iso-27005/risk-treatment-plan-template.md): ISO/IEC 27005 Risk Treatment Plan Template for ISO/IEC 27005 Information Security Risk Management: practical decisions, evidence, owners, review cadence, and source-linked implementation guidance. - [ISO/IEC 27005 Scenario Library Guide](/artifacts/global/iso-27005/scenario-library.md): ISO/IEC 27005 Scenario Library for ISO/IEC 27005 Information Security Risk Management: practical decisions, evidence, owners, review cadence, and source-linked implementation guidance. - [ISO/IEC 27005 Treatment Options FAQ](/artifacts/global/iso-27005/faq/treatment-options.md): How should teams handle Treatment Options under ISO/IEC 27005? Practical answer with owners, evidence, review triggers, and external source references. - [ISO/IEC 27005 vs FAIR Comparison](/artifacts/global/iso-27005/iso-27005-vs-fair.md): ISO/IEC 27005 vs FAIR for ISO/IEC 27005 Information Security Risk Management: practical decisions, evidence, owners, review cadence, and source-linked implementation guidance. - [ISO/IEC 27005 vs NIST SP 800-30 Comparison](/artifacts/global/iso-27005/iso-27005-vs-nist-800-30.md): ISO/IEC 27005 vs NIST SP 800-30 for ISO/IEC 27005 Information Security Risk Management: practical decisions, evidence, owners, review cadence, and source-linked implementation guidance. --- [Privacy Policy](https://www.sorena.io/privacy) | [Terms of Use](https://www.sorena.io/terms-of-use) | [DMCA](https://www.sorena.io/dmca) | [About Us](https://www.sorena.io/about-us) (c) 2026 Sorena AB (559573-7338). All rights reserved. Source: https://www.sorena.io/artifacts/global/iso-27005/iso-27005-vs-iso-31000