# EM-LND-15 provider comparison

Claude and Grok agree that Risk Landscape is a governed view definition with immutable snapshots and Assurance Coverage View is an explicit-denominator projection. Neither receives independent subject-model identity or a runtime/model identifier. Both preserve mastership of risks, requirements, obligations, assessments, audits, findings and observations, keep control facets independent, treat applicability as an assessment, retain expired conclusions as readable but non-current, and reject completed cards or documents as proof of conformity or effectiveness.

The reconciled shape adopts Grok's sharper distinction between subject identity and citation identity. View definitions, snapshots and projection runs may have registry/citation identifiers, but they cannot bear obligations, own residual risk, become control targets or mint subject facts. A snapshot binds the exact view-definition version, as-of time and scenario; its body is immutable and its current status is derived at read time.

Each projection declares exactly one measure type, explicit denominator and numerator rule. Numerator items must belong to the denominator and have a current, in-scope determination for that criterion. Missing applicability is first-class undetermined and stays outside both binding obligation and denominator; it is never coerced to N/A, compliant, effective or zero. Cross-criterion or cross-scenario aggregation requires an explicit comparability verdict, and caveats survive every UI and export.

Control remains identifier-unassigned after the WM-XCT-027 split. This blocks implementable control-facet ownership but does not justify making either view a subject. Until Control is allocated or facets are re-homed on assigned masters, the profile records pending-master markers and forbids views from presenting Control as resolved.