PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to compare and contrast the corporate governance standards of Cyprus, Russia, and Kazakhstan to those of the UK to facilitate investment decisions. The paper aims to discover governance gaps creating a potential for alignment to UK standards.Design/methodology/approachThe paper is a qualitative case study of four countries based on the OECD criteria of 118 corporate governance measures.FindingsThe findings indicate that the corporate governance standards in Cyprus match 92 per cent of the UK standards, Russian standards match 75 per cent, and Kazakhstan ones 63 per cent. The greatest contrast to the UK standards were for Cyprus in the area of disclosure and transparency category, Russia's was in the area of responsibilities of the board, and Kazakhstan's was highest in the two areas mentioned above and low overall.Research limitations/implicationsThe paper identifies areas of governance that could be aligned to UK standards. Further research is needed to compare the governance standards of the countries studied to international standards other than those of the UK's.Practical implicationsThe paper provides insight on governance for investors in the three countries and aids effective investment decisions.Social implicationsThe paper identifies areas of governance needing regulatory adjustment in the three countries and could influence government and industry policy.Originality/valueThe originality of the paper lies in identifying gaps in governance among the four countries. Thus the paper provides information for investors as to the corporate governance they are likely to experience, and facilitates development in governance regulation.