Ways to go deeper with this site:
The automated rules are mapped to relevant WCAG 2.0 and 2.1 Level A and AA criteria, alongside selected accessibility best practices. The result is a partial automated review, not a WCAG conformance determination.
No. Automated checks can find structural and programmatic issues, but they cannot judge every keyboard flow, screen-reader experience, visual state, cognitive barrier, or content decision. Use the report to prioritize issues, then complete rendered and manual testing.
Yes. The Accessibility Checker is available on the free plan, which includes 5 scans per month.
Scan time varies with the number of pages, response speed, and site complexity. Findings appear as soon as the crawl and automated checks finish.
Not reliably. The default crawl does not treat color contrast as an automated pass or fail because accurate measurement requires rendered styles and visual states. WCAG AA generally requires 4.5:1 for normal text and 3:1 for large text, so verify contrast in a browser-based tool.
Accessibility and SEO often benefit from the same foundations, including descriptive alt text, clear headings, meaningful links, and well-structured HTML. Fixing these issues can improve usability and help search engines understand content, but it does not guarantee higher rankings.
Lighthouse Test
Run one desktop Lighthouse performance analysis through Google PageSpeed Insights
Mobile UX
Review crawl-captured text, markup cues, image records, links, headings, and fetch timing for mobile follow-up
Landing Page
Review crawl-visible headings, action wording, metadata, and media
Trust Checklist
Review crawl-visible HTTPS, policy, contact, identity, social-proof wording, and selected external-reference patterns
The Accessibility Checker combines site-wide structural checks with deeper automated rules on a sample of crawled pages. It reviews image alternatives, heading structure, page titles, link text, language attributes, form labels, accessible names, landmarks, and common ARIA errors. Findings are mapped to relevant WCAG criteria when possible. Color contrast, complete keyboard flows, screen-reader behavior, visual states, and cognitive accessibility still require rendered and manual testing.
Accessible websites help people with permanent, temporary, and situational disabilities understand content and complete important tasks. Many of the same practices also improve general usability: clear headings, meaningful controls, descriptive links, and usable forms. Accessibility requirements vary by jurisdiction and organization, so an automated report should support, not replace, a complete accessibility and legal review.
After the crawl, the checker groups detected issues by severity and shows the affected page or element when that evidence is available. Each finding explains the likely barrier, a recommended next step, and the related WCAG criterion or best-practice rule. Paid plans can generate code suggestions for supported issues, while the report identifies areas that still need a person to test them.