If you're trying to comply with WCAG 2.1 AA — whether under ADA Title II or as general best practice — automated scanners are your starting point. But with multiple free options available, which one should you use?
We tested Accessalyze, WAVE (WebAIM's browser extension), and axe DevTools (Deque's browser extension) on the same set of 20 government websites to compare detection coverage, usability, and practical use cases. Here's the honest breakdown.
See how 321 websites scored →
View the 2026 ReportBefore diving into the comparison, it's important to set expectations. No automated WCAG scanner catches all violations. The consensus in the accessibility community, backed by multiple research studies, is that automated tools detect approximately 30–50% of WCAG success criterion failures.
Issues that require human judgment — whether alt text is meaningful, whether content reading order is logical, whether plain language is used, whether a page is navigable by screen reader in practice — cannot be detected by automated rules. All three tools discussed here have this limitation.
Use automated scanning as a floor, not a ceiling. It tells you about the violations you definitely have. It doesn't tell you about all the violations you might have.
What it is: A cloud-based WCAG 2.1 AA scanner that scans any public URL without requiring a browser extension or account. Built specifically for ADA Title II compliance use cases, with a focus on government website accessibility.
Best for: Government agencies running an initial compliance check; sharing results with non-technical leadership; quick spot-checks on public URLs; comparing your site against peer organizations.
What it is: A browser extension (Chrome, Firefox) from WebAIM that overlays accessibility icons directly on the page, showing exactly where violations occur in context. Also available as a hosted service for scanning individual URLs.
Best for: Content editors and non-developers who need to understand where issues are on a page; training sessions and accessibility awareness; understanding the visual impact of structural issues.
What it is: An accessibility testing engine available as a browser extension, JavaScript library, and integrated testing framework. The open-source axe-core library powers many other accessibility tools. Known for its zero-false-positive design philosophy.
Best for: Development teams who want to catch accessibility issues before deployment; automated testing in CI/CD pipelines; organizations with dedicated front-end developers doing accessibility work.
| Feature | Accessalyze | WAVE | axe DevTools |
|---|---|---|---|
| No installation required | ✅ Yes | ❌ Extension needed | ❌ Extension/code needed |
| WCAG 2.1 AA coverage | ✅ Full | ⚠️ Partial (2.0 primary) | ✅ Full (free partial) |
| Shareable public report links | ✅ Yes, free | ❌ Paid only | ❌ No |
| CI/CD integration | ❌ Not free tier | ❌ No | ✅ Yes (open source) |
| Visual in-page feedback | ❌ Report-based | ✅ Yes, best-in-class | ⚠️ In DevTools panel |
| Scans authenticated pages | ❌ Public URLs only | ✅ Yes (with extension) | ✅ Yes |
| Zero false positives | ⚠️ Low false positive rate | ⚠️ Some false positives | ✅ By design |
| Government-specific benchmarking | ✅ Yes (leaderboard) | ❌ No | ❌ No |
| Free tier | ✅ Full scan, no account | ✅ Extension free; API paid | ✅ Extension free; Pro paid |
We ran all three tools on 20 government websites and compared which violations each tool detected. Results are approximate percentages of confirmed WCAG 2.1 AA issues found on each site:
| Violation Type | Accessalyze | WAVE | axe |
|---|---|---|---|
| Color contrast failures | ✅ High | ✅ High | ✅ High |
| Missing alt text | ✅ High | ✅ High | ✅ High |
| Missing form labels | ✅ High | ✅ High | ✅ High |
| ARIA violations | ✅ Good | ⚠️ Moderate | ✅ Best |
| Keyboard accessibility | ⚠️ Moderate | ⚠️ Moderate | ✅ Good |
| WCAG 2.1-specific criteria | ✅ Good | ❌ Limited | ⚠️ Good (Pro) |
| Focus indicators | ⚠️ Moderate | ✅ Good | ⚠️ Moderate |
| Skip link presence | ✅ Yes | ✅ Yes | ✅ Yes |
| Reading order / structure | ❌ Manual review | ✅ Visual indicators | ❌ Manual review |
Don't choose just one tool — a layered approach catches the most issues:
All three tools are legitimate, genuinely useful, and free to start. The "best" tool depends entirely on your workflow:
Whatever tool you use, remember that the goal isn't a perfect automated score — it's actually accessible websites that people with disabilities can use. Automated scanning is the beginning of that work, not the end.
Enter any URL and get a WCAG 2.1 AA compliance report in seconds. No browser extension, no account, no credit card.
Start Free Scan →See real website accessibility scores: Browse 244+ free accessibility audits →
Try it yourself
Enter your website URL to get a free accessibility score.