accessiBe vs AudioEye: A Closer Look at Their Accessibility Features

accessiBe Vs AudioEye: A closer look at their accessibility features

accessiBe and AudioEye are two vendors that sell website accessibility solutions. This article compares how to evaluate their features, evidence to request, and the buyer decisions that matter — without asserting unverifiable product claims. We do not claim any tool delivers full WCAG compliance; manual testing and remediation are still required.

Quick comparison snapshot: what to check

Criteria	What to verify from each vendor
Core approach	Does the vendor emphasise automated scanning, automated remediation, manual audits, or a blended service? Ask for documentation describing the workflow.
Standards and scope	Which WCAG version(s) and levels (A/AA/AAA) do they claim to address? Request any VPAT or conformance report and read it carefully.
Automated vs manual coverage	What percentage of WCAG checks are automated versus manual, and which specific success criteria remain manual-only? Ask for examples or sample reports.
Remediation approach	Are fixes applied via code changes, a hosted script/overlay, or through professional remediation services? Confirm implications for maintenance and performance.
Third-party validation	Do they publish independent audits, third-party lab reports, or VPATs? If so, request the dates and scope of those reports.
Reporting & governance	What reporting formats are provided (exportable reports, dashboards, issue tracking)? Can reports be used for procurement or legal defence?
Integrations & tech	Does the product integrate with CMSs, ticketing systems, CI/CD, or monitoring tools? Ask for a list of supported platforms.
Support & SLA	What support levels are offered (self-service, dedicated remediation teams, SLA response times)? Request written SLAs for enterprise deals.
Pricing model	Is pricing subscription, per-domain, page-based, or per-remediation? Check what is included and what triggers extra charges.

What is accessiBe?

accessiBe is a commercial accessibility vendor. When assessing accessiBe (or any vendor), request concrete evidence for marketing claims: the vendor’s accessibility documentation, a recent VPAT or conformance statement, sample audit reports, and independent reviews. Confirm whether remediation is delivered via code changes, a script or widget, professional services, or some combination.

What is AudioEye?

AudioEye is another commercial accessibility provider. Evaluate AudioEye by the same measures: ask for current conformance reports or VPATs, examples of remediation work, information about automated versus manual coverage, and third-party audit results. Clarify the delivery method for fixes and long-term maintenance commitments.

Feature comparison: focus areas and questions to ask

Below are the feature areas most buyers care about and the precise questions to pose to either vendor.

Testing scope and WCAG coverage

• Which WCAG version(s) (2.1, 2.2, 3.0 when applicable) and levels (A/AA/AAA) are claimed?
• Provide a list of WCAG success criteria that are fully automated, partially automated, and manual only.
• Share sample scan results that map findings to specific success criteria.

Automated scanning versus manual testing

• Ask how often automated scans run and how they detect issues (client-side script, server scan, crawler).
• Request details on the manual testing process: who performs it, what devices and assistive technologies are used, and how defects are prioritised.

Remediation method

• Clarify whether fixes are applied as code changes, CMS plugins, overlays/widgets, or a hybrid approach.
• If an overlay or script is used, ask which issues it addresses and which remain for code remediation.

Reporting, governance and audit trails

• Check whether reports are exportable and suitable for governance, procurement or external audits.
• Ask if the vendor retains historical reports and provides an audit trail of fixes and regressions.

Integrations and developer workflows

• Does the solution integrate with your CMS, ticketing or CI/CD systems? Request a list of supported integrations and example workflows.
• Ask for API documentation or developer guides if you plan to automate checks in build pipelines.

Support, SLAs and ongoing maintenance

• What support channels are offered (email, phone, portal) and what are the SLA response times for critical issues?
• If your site is updated frequently, confirm how the vendor handles regression testing and continuous monitoring.

Pricing comparison: how to approach quotes

Public pricing for accessibility services varies widely and often depends on site size, complexity, and the level of manual service required. When comparing quotes from accessiBe and AudioEye, request:

• A clear breakdown of what is included in each tier (scans, remediation, audits, monitoring, support).
• Any caps or thresholds (pages, domains, monthly scans) and overage charges.
• Contract length, cancellation terms and guarantees or credits tied to SLAs.

If pricing is not published, insist on a formal written proposal that lists deliverables, timelines and acceptance criteria.

Ratings and user reviews: where to check

To understand real-world experience, review independent sources such as G2, Capterra, TrustRadius and community forums. When reading reviews, note:

• The date of the review and whether the product version or offering has changed since.
• Common praise items (ease of use, responsiveness, automation) and common complaints (coverage gaps, false positives, need for manual fixes).
• Whether customers compare vendor claims to independent audit results.

Because review scores change, always check current ratings and sample written reviews before deciding.

Ease of use and support

Ease of use depends on your team’s technical capability and the vendor’s delivery model. For a fair test:

• Request a trial or demo tailored to your site and a sandbox report.
• Ask for onboarding materials, developer documentation and examples of remediation workflows.
• Confirm availability of professional services for areas where automated fixes are insufficient.

Which one is right for you?

Choose based on evidence, not marketing. Use this decision guide:

• Organisations with regulatory or legal risk: favour vendors that supply recent independent audits or VPATs, written SLAs and a mix of manual remediation.
• Teams with small, static sites and limited budgets: an automated-first service may be suitable, but verify coverage and plan for manual fixes.
• Large or dynamic sites and enterprises: prioritise vendor capability for continuous monitoring, developer integrations, and a dedicated remediation workflow.

Verdict

accessiBe and AudioEye each offer accessibility solutions; which is better depends on your organisation’s needs. Don’t rely solely on vendor marketing. Ask for VPATs or conformance reports, independent audits, sample remediation examples, and a clear pricing proposal. Prioritise the vendor that provides the most transparent evidence aligning to your risk tolerance, technical constraints and budget.

FAQs

1. Can an automated tool make my site fully WCAG compliant?

No. Automated tools detect only a portion of WCAG success criteria. Manual testing and code remediation remain necessary to reach conformance.

2. Should I accept an overlay or widget as my only remediation?

Overlays can address some issues but typically do not replace code-level fixes. If a vendor proposes a widget, ask which success criteria it covers and what still requires manual remediation.

3. What is a VPAT and why ask for it?

A VPAT (Voluntary Product Accessibility Template) describes how a product aligns to accessibility standards. Request the most recent VPAT or equivalent conformance report and verify its scope and date.

4. How often should I run accessibility scans?

Run scans after major releases and on a regular schedule (for example, weekly or monthly) depending on site update frequency. Also perform periodic manual audits.

5. What red flags should I watch for when evaluating vendors?

• Lack of independent audit reports or refusal to provide a VPAT.
• No clear distinction between automated fixes and manual remediation needs.
• Opaque pricing or vague SLAs on uptime and support response.

6. How can I validate vendor claims independently?

Request sample reports, perform an independent scan with an open-source tool, and commission a short third-party audit if your risk profile requires it.