A perfect-looking page can still lock people out
Automated testing against WCAG 2.1 and 2.2 success criteria, so you know where your site creates barriers for people using assistive technology before a customer, an auditor, or a lawsuit finds out first.
Decorative targeting display: concentric rings and arc segments settle into place, then a scan sweep circles twice around the audit name at the centre.
Legal Exposure
A Developer can never understand the needs of disabled users.
A page can look perfect and still shut people out entirely. Websites that are inaccessible to people with disabilities may violate applicable accessibility and anti-discrimination laws, exposing organizations to complaints, regulatory action, and potential legal consequences.
Screen reader user
Non-visual navigation
Relies on headings, labels, and alt text to build a mental map of the page. A missing label or broken heading order doesn't slow them down. It hides the page.
Keyboard-only user
No mouse, ever
Tabs through every interactive element in order. A focus trap or invisible focus state doesn't slow them down. It stops them.
Low-vision user
200% zoom, high contrast
Low-contrast text and layouts that don't reflow turn a normal page into unreadable noise.
Industry Quote
The power of the Web is in its universality. Access by everyone regardless of disability is an essential aspect.
What the scan covers
- Can a user navigate, read, and interact with your product, especially people using keyboards or assistive tools.
- Checks text, colours, forms, buttons, images, and page structure for common accessibility barriers.
- Identifies issues that can make your website difficult or frustrating for people with vision disabilities.
Why a passing glance isn't enough.
How the accessibility audit works
The app loads your page in a headless browser, waits for the page and network activity to settle, and then runs an automated accessibility analysis. The scan checks against applicable WCAG 2.x success criteria along with additional accessibility best-practice rules.
Every violation is sorted into Critical, Serious, Moderate or Minor. The report shows the failing element and the WCAG criterion behind it, so a developer can find the problem without hunting for it. You can export the results as a PDF for a client or a dev team.
- Cited criterion
Every finding cites its WCAG criterion
Each issue is mapped to the specific WCAG success criterion it violates, making it easy to understand the accessibility requirement, verify the problem, and prioritize the fix.
- Exact selector
The element that fails
A CSS selector, not a page name. Paste it into devtools and the offending node is sitting right in front of you.
- Fixed weight
Ranked by who it blocks
Critical, Serious, Moderate, Minor, each with a fixed weight in the score, set by how completely it stops someone. The queue arrives sorted.
- Plain-English cost
Who it locks out, in plain terms
Each finding says which users hit the barrier and how (screen reader, keyboard, low vision), so you can brief the fix without translating jargon.
- Shareable link
A link you can send to anyone
The report gets its own URL the moment it finishes, and stays live 30 days without an account. Claim it and it stays for good.
- Limited Seats
₹999/mo
Pro Subscription
Solo developers & personal sites
100 credits/month
- 1 domain
- Shareable report links
- PDF export for accessibility reports
- WCAG 2.2 AA Compliance Support
What the report cannot tell you
Automated testing finds only part of what goes wrong for real people. Keyboard traps in custom widgets, confusing screen reader announcements and unclear wording all need a real person to test them. Treat a clean report as a good start, not as a certificate of compliance.
Frequently asked questions
Everything you need to know about how the Accessibility Audit works.
We launch a real headless browser against your page, inject axe-core, and run it against WCAG 2.1/2.2 A/AA/AAA rules once the page reaches network-idle, the same engine behind most commercial accessibility scanners.
Because they hit different barriers. A screen reader user depends on labels, alt text, and heading order to build a mental map of the page; a keyboard-only user depends on visible focus and a sane tab order. A page can pass for one and fail the other.
Severity reflects impact on someone using assistive technology. Critical issues (e.g. a missing form label) can block a task entirely. Serious issues cause major friction. Moderate and Minor issues are usability or best-practice gaps still worth fixing.
No. It maps to WCAG 2.1/2.2, which underlies ADA (US), EN 301 549 (EU), and most accessibility legislation worldwide, and automated tools catch roughly 57% of WCAG issues; the rest (keyboard traps, screen reader announcements, cognitive load) need manual testing by a human.
Yes, accessibility reports include a PDF export with full violation details, element selectors, and remediation guidance, branded and ready to share with your dev team or client.
Typically 30 seconds depending on page complexity, with a live progress stream as each WCAG rule runs, no blank spinner.
