Guide
Accessibility checker tools compared
Last updated: 29 June 2026
There are several good free accessibility checkers, and they overlap more than the marketing suggests. Here's an honest look at four common ones — what each is genuinely good at and where each falls short — so you can pick the right tool for the job. The most important thing to know up front applies to all of them: automated tools catch only a portion of WCAG. They're a fast first pass, not a compliance verdict.
The one caveat that applies to every tool here
All of these (including ours) are powered by, or similar to, rule-based engines that test what a machine can measure: missing alt attributes, contrast ratios, missing labels, missing page language, ARIA misuse. They can't judge whether alt text is meaningful, whether your focus order makes sense, or whether a flow is actually completable by keyboard. So whichever you choose, pair it with manual testing (see how to run an audit).
axe DevTools (Deque)
The industry-standard engine — axe-core powers a huge share of accessibility tooling (WCAGwise included). The browser extension is excellent for developers: accurate, low false positives, integrates into dev workflows and CI. Best for: developers who live in DevTools. Limits: the output is developer-oriented, and the deeper guided/automated-fix features sit behind a paid Pro subscription.
WAVE (WebAIM)
A long-standing, well-respected free tool that overlays icons directly on your page to show issues in context — great for seeing where problems are visually and for learning. Best for: visual, in-context review and education. Limits: the on-page overlay can be busy on complex layouts, and it's less oriented toward an exportable client deliverable.
Lighthouse (Google Chrome)
Built into Chrome DevTools; its accessibility category runs a subset of axe rules alongside performance and SEO. Best for: a quick health score you already have in the browser, and catching regressions in CI. Limits: it's a smaller rule subset and a score can give false comfort — a "good" number still leaves manual testing to do.
WCAGwise
Also built on axe-core, so the detection is comparable — the difference is the framing and output. The free scan sorts issues worst-first and, for each one, shows where it is in your code (selector + element) and how to fix it. The paid tier turns a scan into a client-ready, EAA-mapped compliance PDF — the deliverable agencies hand clients. Best for: freelancers/agencies/SMBs who need to act on issues and document them for the EAA/ADA. Limits: same as all automated tools — it's an audit aid, not a guarantee, and (for now) single-page in the free tier.
So which should you use?
- Pure dev workflow / CI: axe DevTools or Lighthouse.
- Learning + visual, in-context review: WAVE.
- Finding issues fast and producing a client/EAA report: WCAGwise.
Honestly, the best move is to run more than one — they overlap but each surfaces things slightly differently — and then do the manual checks none of them can. Want to try ours? Scan your site free with WCAGwise. It's an audit aid, not a legal guarantee.