Guide
How much does an accessibility audit cost?
Last updated: 29 June 2026
"How much will an accessibility audit cost?" is one of the first questions teams ask when the EU Accessibility Act or an ADA letter lands on their desk — and the honest answer is "it depends," because an "audit" can mean anything from a five-minute automated scan to a multi-week expert review with assistive-technology testing. This guide breaks down what actually drives the price so you can choose the right level for your situation. (General information, not legal or financial advice — figures vary by provider, region, and scope.)
What drives the cost
- Scope. One landing page is cheap; a 200-page site, or a web app with many dynamic states, is not. Most of the cost scales with the number of distinct templates and flows that need checking, not raw page count.
- Method. Automated testing is fast and inexpensive but only catches part of WCAG. Manual expert review and screen-reader/keyboard testing are where the real time — and cost — goes.
- Who does it. A specialist accessibility agency or certified consultant costs far more per hour than doing a first pass in-house with a tool.
- Deliverable. A raw list of issues is cheaper than a formal, client- or regulator-ready report (or a VPAT) with severity ranking and remediation guidance.
- One-off vs ongoing. A single audit is a fixed cost; sites change, so many teams budget for re-checks, which adds up over time.
- Remediation. Finding issues is only half the job — fixing them is often the larger expense, whether you do it in-house or pay the auditor to.
The three common options
1. Automated tools & browser extensions — lowest cost
Scanners (axe, WAVE, Lighthouse, WCAGwise) are free or low-cost and return results in seconds. They reliably catch a meaningful slice of WCAG issues — missing alt text, low contrast, missing form labels, structural problems. The catch: automated testing cannot detect everything (it can't judge whether alt text is meaningful, or whether a keyboard journey makes sense), so a clean scan is not the same as "compliant." See how the checkers compare and what scans catch vs miss.
2. Professional manual audit — highest cost
A specialist manually reviews your site, tests with screen readers and keyboard, and writes up findings against WCAG. This is the most thorough option and the most expensive — typically the largest line item in an accessibility budget, billed as a professional-services engagement. It's the right choice for high-risk sites, legal exposure, or when you need an independent, defensible report.
3. DIY-with-a-tool first, then targeted manual — the middle path
The cost-effective route for most teams: run an automated scan to clear the mechanical issues cheaply, fix what it finds, then spend manual-testing budget only on what automation can't cover. You walk into any paid audit with the easy problems already solved, so the expensive expert hours go to the hard parts — not to flagging missing alt text you could have caught for free.
How to keep the cost down
- Scan and fix the obvious issues yourself first — every issue you remediate before a paid audit is expert time you don't pay for.
- Prioritise by risk and traffic: audit your highest-traffic templates and key flows (home, sign-up, checkout) before the long tail.
- Build accessibility into development so audits become confirmation, not rescue — see how to run an audit.
- Document as you go (an accessibility statement) so you're not paying someone to reconstruct it later.
Where WCAGwise fits
WCAGwise is the inexpensive first pass: Scan your site free free to find the WCAG 2.2 AA issues and exactly where they are in your code, and Pro turns a whole-site scan into a branded, client-ready compliance report (with an accessibility statement) for a small one-time price — a fraction of a manual agency audit. It won't replace expert manual testing for high-stakes compliance, and we're honest about that: it's an audit aid, not a legal guarantee. But it's the cheapest way to find and fix most issues — and to decide whether you even need to pay for more.