Comparison Overview

Lloyds Banking Group

VS

Truist

Lloyds Banking Group

25 Gresham Street, London, UK, GB, EC2V 7HN
Last Update: 2025-11-20

Our purpose is Helping Britain Prosper. We do this by creating a more sustainable and inclusive future for people and businesses, shaping finance as a force for good. We're part of an ever-changing industry and are currently on a journey to shape the financial services of the future, whilst supporting our customers’ changing needs. The scale and reach of our Group means we can offer a broad range of opportunities to learn, grow and develop. Our values-led culture and approach to inclusion and diversity means we can all make a real difference together.

NAICS: 52
NAICS Definition: Finance and Insurance
Employees: 61,434
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
1

Truist

None, None, Charlotte, North Carolina, US, 28202
Last Update: 2025-11-27
Between 750 and 799

Truist Financial Corporation is a purpose-driven financial services company committed to inspiring and building better lives and communities. As a leading U.S. commercial bank, Truist has leading market share in many of the high-growth markets across the country. Truist offers a wide range of products and services through our wholesale and consumer businesses, including consumer and small business banking, commercial banking, corporate and investment banking, wealth management, payments, and specialized lending businesses. Headquartered in Charlotte, North Carolina, Truist is a top-10 commercial bank with total assets of $535 billion as of March 31, 2024. Truist Bank, Member FDIC. Learn more at Truist.com. Learn more at Truist.com and see social media terms and conditions at Truist.com/SocialTerms.

NAICS: 52
NAICS Definition: Finance and Insurance
Employees: 27,142
Subsidiaries: 6
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
1

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/lloyds-banking-group.jpeg
Lloyds Banking Group
ISO 27001
ISO 27001 certification not verified
Not verified
SOC2 Type 1
SOC2 Type 1 certification not verified
Not verified
SOC2 Type 2
SOC2 Type 2 certification not verified
Not verified
GDPR
GDPR certification not verified
Not verified
PCI DSS
PCI DSS certification not verified
Not verified
HIPAA
HIPAA certification not verified
Not verified
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/truistfinancialcorporation.jpeg
Truist
ISO 27001
ISO 27001 certification not verified
Not verified
SOC2 Type 1
SOC2 Type 1 certification not verified
Not verified
SOC2 Type 2
SOC2 Type 2 certification not verified
Not verified
GDPR
GDPR certification not verified
Not verified
PCI DSS
PCI DSS certification not verified
Not verified
HIPAA
HIPAA certification not verified
Not verified
Compliance Summary
Lloyds Banking Group
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Truist
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Financial Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Lloyds Banking Group in 2025.

Incidents vs Financial Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Truist in 2025.

Incident History — Lloyds Banking Group (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Lloyds Banking Group cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Truist (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Truist cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/lloyds-banking-group.jpeg
Lloyds Banking Group
Incidents

Date Detected: 6/2006
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Physical Theft
Blog: Blog
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/truistfinancialcorporation.jpeg
Truist
Incidents

Date Detected: 12/2021
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: External System Breach (Hacking)
Blog: Blog

FAQ

Lloyds Banking Group company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Truist company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Lloyds Banking Group and Truist have experienced a similar number of publicly disclosed cyber incidents.

In the current year, Truist company and Lloyds Banking Group company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Truist company nor Lloyds Banking Group company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Both Truist company and Lloyds Banking Group company have disclosed experiencing at least one data breach.

Neither Truist company nor Lloyds Banking Group company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Lloyds Banking Group company nor Truist company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Lloyds Banking Group nor Truist holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Truist company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Lloyds Banking Group company.

Lloyds Banking Group company employs more people globally than Truist company, reflecting its scale as a Financial Services.

Neither Lloyds Banking Group nor Truist holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Lloyds Banking Group nor Truist holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Lloyds Banking Group nor Truist holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Lloyds Banking Group nor Truist holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Lloyds Banking Group nor Truist holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Lloyds Banking Group nor Truist holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

Angular is a development platform for building mobile and desktop web applications using TypeScript/JavaScript and other languages. Prior to versions 19.2.16, 20.3.14, and 21.0.1, there is a XSRF token leakage via protocol-relative URLs in angular HTTP clients. The vulnerability is a Credential Leak by App Logic that leads to the unauthorized disclosure of the Cross-Site Request Forgery (XSRF) token to an attacker-controlled domain. Angular's HttpClient has a built-in XSRF protection mechanism that works by checking if a request URL starts with a protocol (http:// or https://) to determine if it is cross-origin. If the URL starts with protocol-relative URL (//), it is incorrectly treated as a same-origin request, and the XSRF token is automatically added to the X-XSRF-TOKEN header. This issue has been patched in versions 19.2.16, 20.3.14, and 21.0.1. A workaround for this issue involves avoiding using protocol-relative URLs (URLs starting with //) in HttpClient requests. All backend communication URLs should be hardcoded as relative paths (starting with a single /) or fully qualified, trusted absolute URLs.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 7.7
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:N/SC:H/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X
Description

Forge (also called `node-forge`) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript. An Uncontrolled Recursion vulnerability in node-forge versions 1.3.1 and below enables remote, unauthenticated attackers to craft deep ASN.1 structures that trigger unbounded recursive parsing. This leads to a Denial-of-Service (DoS) via stack exhaustion when parsing untrusted DER inputs. This issue has been patched in version 1.3.2.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 8.7
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X
Description

Forge (also called `node-forge`) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript. An Integer Overflow vulnerability in node-forge versions 1.3.1 and below enables remote, unauthenticated attackers to craft ASN.1 structures containing OIDs with oversized arcs. These arcs may be decoded as smaller, trusted OIDs due to 32-bit bitwise truncation, enabling the bypass of downstream OID-based security decisions. This issue has been patched in version 1.3.2.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 6.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X
Description

Suricata is a network IDS, IPS and NSM engine developed by the OISF (Open Information Security Foundation) and the Suricata community. Prior to versions 7.0.13 and 8.0.2, working with large buffers in Lua scripts can lead to a stack overflow. Users of Lua rules and output scripts may be affected when working with large buffers. This includes a rule passing a large buffer to a Lua script. This issue has been patched in versions 7.0.13 and 8.0.2. A workaround for this issue involves disabling Lua rules and output scripts, or making sure limits, such as stream.depth.reassembly and HTTP response body limits (response-body-limit), are set to less than half the stack size.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
Description

Suricata is a network IDS, IPS and NSM engine developed by the OISF (Open Information Security Foundation) and the Suricata community. In versions from 8.0.0 to before 8.0.2, a NULL dereference can occur when the entropy keyword is used in conjunction with base64_data. This issue has been patched in version 8.0.2. A workaround involves disabling rules that use entropy in conjunction with base64_data.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H