Website accessibility checker
Test a single page in minutes. Our scanner uses axe-core rules aligned with WCAG 2.1 issues you can act on—contrast, names, keyboard traps, ARIA mistakes, and more. No account required for the public flow.
Run a free scan
Paste a URL. We load the page in a real browser, run automated checks, and give you a shareable report.
What an accessibility checker actually does
An automated checker crawls the DOM you ship to users and applies rules that approximate WCAG success criteria. It is excellent at finding missing names, broken contrast ratios, invalid ARIA, and structural problems like skipped headings. It cannot fully evaluate whether your content “makes sense” for every assistive technology user, or whether a complex widget behaves correctly in every state—that still needs manual testing and sometimes user research.
Treat the checker as a fast triage layer: it tells you where risk clusters on a page so designers and developers can prioritize fixes before release. Pair it with keyboard-only navigation, a screen reader smoke test on primary flows, and policy review if you have legal exposure.
Who this is for
Marketing teams use scans before campaigns go live. Product engineers run them on staging URLs. Agencies attach reports to handoffs so clients see objective numbers instead of subjective “looks fine to me” reviews. Content editors catch alt-text gaps and ambiguous link text early.
If you manage a CMS, run the checker on templates and on representative content pages—home, contact, checkout, account—because issues often hide in one-off embeds or third-party widgets.
How to interpret scores
We summarize axe results into a 0–100 style score and severity buckets. A higher score usually means fewer high-impact violations, but a “good” score is not a guarantee of compliance. One critical blocker on checkout can matter more than several minor cosmetic issues elsewhere.
Use severity counts to build a backlog: fix critical and serious items first, especially on paths that affect purchases, forms, and authentication. Then chip away at moderate and minor items during regular maintenance.
Limits of automation
Automated tools cannot judge every WCAG criterion. Color contrast can be misread when text sits on gradients or images. Custom components may look fine visually but expose wrong roles to assistive tech. Video captions, live regions, and timing-sensitive interactions require human review.
After automated fixes, schedule a short manual pass: tab through every interactive element, activate dialogs with Escape and Enter, and run a screen reader on your primary task (e.g., “add to cart”).
What to do next
Start with one high-traffic page. Fix the issues the report lists, redeploy, and scan again. Compare the new public report URL so stakeholders can see progress. When you are ready for deeper coverage, combine single-page scans with a full QA checklist and—if needed—an accessibility specialist for complex products.
Bookmark our issue library for explanations of common rules, and read the guides on contrast, forms, and headings so your team shares the same vocabulary.
Questions people ask
- Does this replace a manual audit?
- No. It accelerates finding many technical issues, but manual testing and expert review are still important for complex sites and legal risk.
- Which WCAG level does this check?
- Automated rules map to many WCAG 2.1 Level A and AA issues, but not every criterion can be tested automatically.
- Can I share the report?
- Yes. Public reports are built for sharing with teammates and clients; each scan gets its own URL.
- Will scanning affect my site?
- We request pages like a normal browser visit. Respect robots.txt and rate limits on your side if you scan very frequently.