Automated testing strengths
Automation is ideal for frequent checks, CI workflows, template defects, missing attributes, invalid ARIA, and regressions that can be detected from page code.
Run a free accessibility score
Accessibility guide
Automated vs Manual Accessibility Testing
Automated and manual accessibility testing solve different problems. The strongest programs use both.
Short Answer
Automated testing is fast, repeatable, and good at technical checks. Manual testing is slower but necessary for keyboard usability, screen reader meaning, task completion, and complete WCAG confidence.
Manual testing strengths
Manual testing evaluates whether people can understand, navigate, operate, and complete real tasks with assistive technologies.
How to combine both
Run automated scans early and often, then reserve expert manual testing for representative pages, high-value flows, releases, and compliance evidence.
Common Questions
What percentage of accessibility issues can automation find?
The percentage varies by site and tool. Automation catches many technical issues, but many meaningful barriers require human judgment.
Should developers run automated scans before a manual audit?
Yes. Fixing automated findings before manual review lets auditors focus on higher-value usability and conformance issues.