Disclosure · 13 filers

Vendor Risk Management

13 companies wrote this into a filing in the last 14 days, up from 9. Below: which of them, and what the corpus says they now owe.

Data measured , page built 22 September 2026 at 16:18 UTC.

13filers, current period
9the period before
5controls it touches
5frameworks
first appears Feb 2008 2008 2026 109 filings in the busiest month
Vendor Risk Management in 10-K and 10-Q filings, by month. The marked line is the first month any public company in our record used the phrase; everything left of it is nobody writing it down.
Companies disclosing it 13 wrote this into a filing with the SEC
What it obligates 5 controls across 5 frameworks whose text speaks to it
Employers hiring for it 547 open US roles name it, and the ones below are hiring now

The long view, in annual and quarterly filings

A 10-K or 10-Q is a periodic report, so this counts how often the phrase appears in routine annual and quarterly reporting. It moves far more slowly and the numbers are larger. Every month since 2008. The last point is the current month and is still filling, so it always looks lower than it will be.

 
054109
2008 peak 109 in March 2026 2026

Who disclosed it

From SEC full-text search over 8-K filings. Every row links to the filing itself.

CompanyFormFiled
TRUSTMARK CORP TRMK8-K2026-09-10filing
MILLERKNOLL, INC. MLKN10-K2026-07-20filing
Bank7 Corp. BSVN8-K2026-09-17filing
Jefferies Financial Group Inc. JEF10-Q2026-07-09filing
Crypto Co CRCW10-K/A2026-06-24filing
CLOROX CO /DE/ CLX10-K2026-08-07filing
Nutanix, Inc. NTNX10-K2026-09-18filing
TIPTREE INC. TIPT8-K2026-07-29filing
Serve Robotics Inc. /DE/ SERV10-Q2026-08-06filing
BROADRIDGE FINANCIAL SOLUTIONS, INC. BR10-K2026-08-04filing
InnovAge Holding Corp. INNV10-K2026-09-09filing
COLONY BANKCORP INC CBAN8-K2026-06-24filing
Axos Financial, Inc. AX10-K2026-08-20filing

The full search on EDGAR

Who is hiring for it

A sample of the open roles naming this phrase. An employer paying a salary against something is the least ambiguous demand signal there is, and every row links to the posting so the claim can be checked rather than believed. The total above is the whole US market; these are the ones we hold the posting for.

RolePosted
Senior Manager, Information Security
Tonix Pharmaceuticals Holding Corp. · Frederick, MD
2026-08-21
Security Risk & Compliance Analyst
Jamf Holding Corp. · US Remote
2026-08-20
Director of Procurement - Technology, Engineering, & Product
fuboTV Inc. /FL · New York, NY
2026-08-19
Senior Security Engineer I, Customer Trust EMEA (Remote Eligible in the UK)
SMARTSHEET INC · -REMOTE, UK-
2026-08-03
Finance Business Partner - Project Controllership
Volta Inc. · London, UK
2026-07-28
Director, Strategic Procurement
Squarespace, Inc. · New York City
2026-07-24
Vendor Management Program Manager
Sezzle Inc. · Argentina, Remote
2026-07-10
Vendor Management Program Manager
Sezzle Inc. · Chile, Remote
2026-07-10
Vendor Management Program Manager
Sezzle Inc. · Mexico, Remote
2026-07-10
Vendor Management Program Manager
Sezzle Inc. · Brazil, Remote
2026-07-10
Vendor Management Program Manager
Sezzle Inc. · Bogota, Colombia
2026-07-10
Vendor Management Program Manager
Sezzle Inc. · Latin America
2026-07-10
Senior Security Engineer - End-User, Infrastructure & AI Security
PubMatic, Inc. · Gurugram, IN
2026-06-05
Senior Security Engineer - End-User, Infrastructure & AI Security
PubMatic, Inc. · Pune, IN
2026-06-05

Which industries file it

Companies grouped by the industry classification on their own filing. A count, not a survey.

IndustryCompanies
Banking70
Chemicals and pharmaceuticals37
Software and IT services34
Instruments and medical devices19
Retail17
Holding and investment offices15
Services and entertainment13
Insurance11
Electronics and electrical equipment10
Pipelines and communications10

What it obligates

Our corpus holds 5 controls across 5 frameworks whose text speaks to this. Not a judgement: these controls say so, and each is one lookup from its source document. Ordered by how much each framework has to say about it, so the one that will cost you the most work is first. Every name opens that framework in the corpus.

FrameworkControls
NIST SP 800-183 verified
United States
1
Oregon Consumer Privacy Act verified
United States - Oregon
1
Kuwait National Cybersecurity Framework verified
Kuwait
1
GLI-33
International (Gaming)
1
Israel Protection of Privacy Law (5741-1981) verified
Israel
1

What an auditor will ask you to produce

The artefacts named on those controls, most frequently cited first.

How it usually fails

Recorded when each control was verified against its source. This is where programmes that think they are covered turn out not to be.

NIST SP 800-161 Cybersecurity Supply Chain Risk Management Evidence & Implementation Kit

191 controls sit behind NIST SP 800-161 Rev 1, and this is the documentation set for them: an adopt-ready artifact per control, and the evidence an auditor asks for against each.

See what is in it, $249

The same set every buyer of this kit receives. Nothing here is produced on request.

NIST SP 800-161 Rev 1 Cloud Security Alliance Cloud Co…299 shared controlsC5 (Germany)217 shared controlsNIST SP 800-53 Rev 5215 shared controlsNIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0165 shared controlsAWS Well-Architected Security Pi…156 shared controlsNIST SP 800-53 Revision 5.1 HIGH140 shared controlsISO 27001:2022132 shared controlsISO 27002:2022132 shared controlsCIS Controls v8127 shared controlsAzure Security Benchmark121 shared controls
NIST SP 800-161 Rev 1 holds 191 controls. They appear again inside 34 other frameworks in our corpus; the 10 strongest are shown. Thickness and size both carry the number of controls shared, so work done once counts in every framework on this diagram.
191If you already run NIST SP 800-161 Rev 1, that is the 191 controls behind this disclosure, already evidenced.
213And ISO 27001:2022 is not a separate programme. 213 of its controls are the same controls. If it is on next year's plan, that part of it is already done.
213And ISO 27002:2022 is not a separate programme. 213 of its controls are the same controls. If it is on next year's plan, that part of it is already done.
114And ISO 27701:2019 is not a separate programme. 114 of its controls are the same controls. If it is on next year's plan, that part of it is already done.

Run as two programmes

404 controls

NIST SP 800-161 Rev 1 and ISO 27001:2022 scoped separately, each with its own evidence, its own owner and its own budget line. This is how almost everybody does it.

Run once, counted twice

213 already done

213 of ISO 27001:2022's controls are controls you evidenced for NIST SP 800-161 Rev 1. Same artefacts, same owner, no second effort. The mapping is the only reason anybody knows.

first appears Feb 2008 2008 2026 109 filings in the busiest month
Vendor Risk Management in 10-K and 10-Q filings, by month. The marked line is the first month any public company in our record used the phrase; everything left of it is nobody writing it down.

What this actually means

Why now
13 public companies wrote this into an 8-K in the last seven days, 44% more than the seven before. That is not sentiment or a survey. It is a count of companies choosing to put a phrase into a document they are legally accountable for.
Who already cares
547 open US roles name this work today, which suggests increased attention to it beyond what any filing says. A job advertisement clears a budget holder and a filing clears legal, so the two answer to different people. We have not measured which moves first, only that both are moving.
What comes into scope
Once the phrase is on the record it maps to obligations within NIST SP 800-161 Rev 1, DORA, NIST SP 800-161. 232 controls behind those, and the difference between asserting them and evidencing them is the whole of the work.
Who is quietly ahead
Anyone already running NIST SP 800-161 Rev 1 has done 213 of the controls that carry ISO 27001:2022 too. Same evidence, second standard. Most organisations run those as two programmes with two budgets because nobody told them the mapping existed.
Who is exposed
0 companies disclosed this for the first time in the last ninety days, out of 315 in total. A first mention is a company deciding it can no longer not say it. Whoever has not yet is either genuinely unaffected or has not looked, and nothing here distinguishes the two.

What this obligates

The instruments in our corpus that govern this disclosure, and how many controls sit behind each. This is not a filing count. It is what applies once a company has written the phrase down.

3 frameworks, 232 controls between them.

NIST SP 800-161 Rev 1 Cloud Security Alliance Cloud Co…299 shared controlsC5 (Germany)217 shared controlsNIST SP 800-53 Rev 5215 shared controlsNIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0165 shared controlsAWS Well-Architected Security Pi…156 shared controlsNIST SP 800-53 Revision 5.1 HIGH140 shared controlsISO 27001:2022132 shared controlsISO 27002:2022132 shared controlsCIS Controls v8127 shared controlsAzure Security Benchmark121 shared controls
NIST SP 800-161 Rev 1 holds 191 controls. They appear again inside 34 other frameworks in our corpus; the 10 strongest are shown. Thickness and size both carry the number of controls shared, so work done once counts in every framework on this diagram.

What closing it also moves

The same controls appear in other frameworks through mappings held in our corpus. Work done here is already progress there. This is the part that is not in EDGAR and not in any public dataset: it comes from mappings built and verified by hand, control by control.

ISO 27001:2022213
ISO 27002:2022213
ISO 27701:2019114
ISO 22301:201974
NIS2 Directive50
PCI DSS 4.018

Counted as controls reached through cross-framework mappings. It measures overlap of work, not compliance with the named framework.

Run as two programmes

404 controls

NIST SP 800-161 Rev 1 and ISO 27001:2022 scoped separately, each with its own evidence, its own owner and its own budget line. This is how almost everybody does it.

Run once, counted twice

213 already done

213 of ISO 27001:2022's controls are controls you evidenced for NIST SP 800-161 Rev 1. Same artefacts, same owner, no second effort. The mapping is the only reason anybody knows.

191If you already run NIST SP 800-161 Rev 1, that is the 191 controls behind this disclosure, already evidenced.
213And ISO 27001:2022 is not a separate programme. 213 of its controls are the same controls. If it is on next year's plan, that part of it is already done.
213And ISO 27002:2022 is not a separate programme. 213 of its controls are the same controls. If it is on next year's plan, that part of it is already done.
114And ISO 27701:2019 is not a separate programme. 114 of its controls are the same controls. If it is on next year's plan, that part of it is already done.

If that number surprised you, the same measurement across every topic we track:
What changed this week →

This is what it looks like when the same failure is named by standards bodies who never spoke to each other:
How compliance programmes fail →

And the companies that have already written this into a filing:
Vendor Risk Management filers →

Tell me when Vendor Risk Management files something new

One email when a public company newly discloses this, naming the company and what our corpus says it puts in scope. Nothing else, and one click to stop.

Where this comes from

The left half is public record: SEC full-text search over 8-K filings, counted across a 14 day window against the equivalent window before it. You can check every row.

The right half is ours: 723 frameworks and 20,473 controls, 531 of those frameworks verified against their source documents, with the auditor evidence and common failure modes recorded control by control. Controls appear here because their own text names this term.

Cite this

The Art of Service Signals. Vendor Risk Management corporate disclosure activity: 13 filers against 9 in the prior period, in 10-K and 10-Q filings, this quarter against the same quarter last year. Accessed 23 September 2026. https://signals.theartofservice.com/t/vendor-risk-management/

Free to use with attribution, no permission needed. The chart downloads as an SVG with the source printed on it. If you cite it we would like to know, but you do not need to ask.

Today's edition · How programmes fail · The obligation index