AccessibilityChecker.org Alternative 2026: Same WCAG Scanning, 58% Less

1. What Is AccessibilityChecker.org?

AccessibilityChecker.org is a web accessibility scanning and remediation platform that helps organizations identify and fix WCAG 2.2 AA violations on their websites. Founded as a cloud-based SaaS tool, it offers automated crawling, issue detection, AI-assisted fix suggestions, and continuous monitoring.

The platform positions itself as an end-to-end compliance solution — from initial scanning through remediation to ongoing monitoring and certification. It's a member of IAAP (International Association of Accessibility Professionals) and serves businesses, agencies, and public sector organizations.

Unlike overlay-based tools like accessiBe or UserWay, AccessibilityChecker.org takes the right approach: it scans your actual code, identifies real violations, and provides guidance for fixing them at the source. This is fundamentally the same approach that RatedWithAI uses — the question is whether the price difference is justified.

Let's dig into the specifics.

2. AccessibilityChecker.org Pricing Breakdown

AccessibilityChecker.org uses a tiered pricing model based on the number of URLs you need to scan. Each subscription covers one domain. Here's the full breakdown as of February 2026:

At the entry level, you're paying $69/month (annual) for just 25 URLs. For a small business with a typical 20-50 page website, that's workable. But the moment you need to scan more than 25 pages — blog posts, product pages, landing pages — you jump to $119/month.

For comparison, RatedWithAI's monitoring plans start at $29/month. That's a 58% savings at the entry level — money that could go toward actually fixing the accessibility issues the scanner finds.

It's worth noting that AccessibilityChecker.org charges per domain. If you manage three websites, you're paying three separate subscriptions. At the Starter tier, that's $357/month for three domains.

3. Feature-by-Feature Comparison

Here's how AccessibilityChecker.org and RatedWithAI stack up across the features that matter most:

Both tools take the right approach — scanning code for real issues rather than slapping an overlay widget on top. The key differences come down to price, scanning engine transparency, and the free tools ecosystem.

4. Scanning Engine: Proprietary vs. axe-core

One of the most important differences between these tools is what's under the hood.

AccessibilityChecker.org uses a proprietary scanning engine. While their documentation doesn't detail the specific rules or detection methodology, the tool checks against WCAG 2.2 AA criteria and provides issue categorization and fix guidance. As a closed-source system, the scanning logic isn't independently auditable.

RatedWithAI uses axe-core, the open-source accessibility testing engine maintained by Deque Systems. axe-core is the industry standard — it powers:

• Google Lighthouse — the accessibility audit built into Chrome DevTools
• Microsoft Accessibility Insights — Microsoft's free accessibility testing suite
• GitHub — used in automated accessibility testing across thousands of repositories
• Deque — the world's leading accessibility consultancy, with clients including the U.S. Government, Bank of America, and Microsoft

axe-core is designed with a zero false-positive philosophy. Every issue it flags is a real WCAG violation. This matters because false positives waste developer time and erode trust in the tool. When axe-core tells you something is broken, it's broken.

That said, both proprietary and open-source engines face the same fundamental limitation: automated tools can only detect roughly 30-40% of WCAG criteria. Issues like logical reading order, meaningful link text in context, and keyboard navigation flows require manual testing regardless of which tool you use.

5. AI-Assisted Fixes vs. Code-Level Guidance

AccessibilityChecker.org's headline feature is AI-assisted fixes. Here's how their process works:

1. Their AI identifies which issues support automated fixes
2. AI generates WCAG-aligned fix suggestions
3. You review and approve each change — nothing is applied automatically
4. Issues requiring design or code changes get manual guidance instead

This is a responsible approach — they explicitly state that AI fixes require human approval. Credit where it's due.

RatedWithAI takes a different approach: code-level fix guidance for every issue. Rather than offering to apply changes for you, RatedWithAI shows you exactly what's wrong at the code level and explains how to fix it — with the specific HTML element, CSS selector, and the WCAG success criterion being violated.

Which approach is better depends on your team:

• Non-technical teams may prefer AccessibilityChecker.org's AI suggestions — review-and-approve is easier than implementing code changes
• Development teams often prefer RatedWithAI's code-level guidance — developers want to understand the issue, not just apply a black-box fix
• Agencies managing multiple client sites may value the transparency of code-level explanations for client reporting

6. Continuous Monitoring Compared

Both tools offer ongoing monitoring, but the frequency and depth differ:

AccessibilityChecker.org rescans weekly on a set schedule. RatedWithAI offers continuous monitoring that tracks your accessibility score over time, so you can see whether your site is trending toward or away from compliance.

The auto-updating accessibility statement is a nice feature from AccessibilityChecker.org — it reflects your latest scan data without you manually updating the page. RatedWithAI offers a free accessibility statement generator, but it's a one-time creation tool rather than an auto-updating live document.

7. Free Tools and Resources

One area where RatedWithAI significantly outperforms AccessibilityChecker.org is the free tools ecosystem:

AccessibilityChecker.org offers a free trial with limited features, but doesn't provide standalone free tools. RatedWithAI's free tools serve as both value-adds for existing users and entry points for new ones — you can check your color contrast, generate alt text, and scan your site without spending a dollar.

8. Where AccessibilityChecker.org Excels

We're not going to pretend AccessibilityChecker.org doesn't have real advantages. Here's where they genuinely shine:

• 🔐 Password-Protected Page Scanning — This is a significant differentiator. If you have login-gated content (dashboards, member portals, SaaS apps), AccessibilityChecker.org can scan behind authentication. RatedWithAI currently scans publicly accessible pages only.
• 📱 Multi-Device Testing — Their platform tests across mobile, tablet, and desktop viewport sizes. Since accessibility issues can appear differently across screen sizes (especially touch targets and responsive layouts), this is valuable for responsive sites.
• 🏆 Accessibility Certification — They provide a formal accessibility certificate confirming your WCAG compliance level, plus optional VPAT/ACR generation. For organizations needing to demonstrate compliance to procurement teams or regulators, this is useful documentation.
• 🧩 Chrome Extension — Their Chrome extension enables interactive testing directly in the browser. Developers can identify issues in context while browsing the actual site, rather than switching to a separate dashboard.
• 🤖 AI Fix Suggestions — For teams without dedicated accessibility expertise, having AI generate fix proposals (with human approval required) lowers the barrier to remediation.
• 📊 IAAP Membership — Being a member of the International Association of Accessibility Professionals signals legitimate commitment to the accessibility community. It's not just a badge — IAAP members adhere to professional standards.

If you need to scan behind login walls, need formal certification documents, or want AI to generate fix proposals for a non-technical team, AccessibilityChecker.org has genuine strengths in these areas.

9. Who Should Choose Which Tool?

10. How to Switch from AccessibilityChecker.org in 5 Minutes

If you're currently using AccessibilityChecker.org and want to try RatedWithAI, here's the process:

There's no data migration needed — both tools scan your live website independently. Your violation history from AccessibilityChecker.org stays in their system, and RatedWithAI starts fresh with a new baseline.

11. The Verdict

12. Frequently Asked Questions

Related Reading