Automated vs. Manual Accessibility Audits: Which One to Choose for Your Website?

In the pursuit of creating a fully accessible website, a crucial step is conducting an audit. An audit identifies errors, shortcomings, and areas for improvement in the context of the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG). However, a question quickly arises: which audit method should you choose? A quick, automated scan, or an in-depth analysis conducted by an expert?

The truth is, it’s not an “either-or” choice. Automated and manual audits are two different tools that work best in synergy. Understanding their strengths and limitations will allow you to make the best decision for your project, budget, and goals.

The Automated Audit – The High-Speed Scan of Your Website

An automated audit is a process where specialized software (a scanner or crawler) analyzes your website’s source code, checking it against a list of predefined WCAG compliance rules.

How does it work? Think of it as a digital inspector that instantly runs through hundreds, or even thousands, of pages, checking for technical code correctness. This tool looks for specific, measurable errors, such as:

• Missing alternative text (alt text) for images (<img>).
• Low color contrast between text and background.
• Improperly defined heading structure (e.g., skipping from an <h1> to an <h3>).
• Missing labels (<label>) for form fields.
• Use of deprecated or incorrect attributes (e.g., aria-hidden="false" on a visible element).

Advantages of an automated audit:

• Speed: Results for an entire site can be obtained in minutes or hours, not days or weeks.
• Scalability: It’s the only effective way to scan very large websites with thousands of pages.
• Cost: It is significantly cheaper than a manual audit. Many basic tools are even free, and professional monitoring services are relatively inexpensive.
• Early Bug Detection: Ideal for integrating into the development process (CI/CD) to catch errors as they are made, before they go live.

Limitations and pitfalls of an automated audit:

The biggest myth is that a 100% pass on an automated audit means 100% accessibility. Automated tools can only detect about 30-40% of all potential accessibility barriers.

Why? Because they do not understand context or the user experience (UX).

• Quality, Not Just Presence: An automated tool will check if an image has an alt attribute, but it cannot assess if its content is meaningful and accurately describes the image. “Image123.jpg” will pass the technical test but is useless to a blind person.
• Logic and Navigation: An automaton cannot determine if the keyboard focus order is logical, if the checkout process is understandable, or if the content is written in plain language.
• Assistive Technologies: A scanner doesn’t know how the site will behave when used with a screen reader like JAWS or NVDA. Some technically correct elements may be announced in a confusing or annoying way.
• False Positives: Sometimes, tools flag issues that are not errors in a specific context, requiring human verification.

Who is it for?

• Development teams for quick code verification.
• Owners of large websites as a first, general scan.
• For regular monitoring to detect new errors.
• Companies with a limited budget as a starting point.

The Manual Audit – Empathy and Expertise in Service of Accessibility

A manual audit is an in-depth analysis of a website conducted by a certified accessibility expert. Manual testers simulate the experiences of users with various disabilities, using the same tools they do.

How does it work? An expert takes on the role of a user and performs key tasks on the site (e.g., finding information, filling out a form, making a purchase) using only:

• A keyboard: They check if every interactive element can be reached and activated without using a mouse.
• Screen readers (e.g., NVDA, JAWS, VoiceOver): They listen to how the content is read aloud, assessing its logic and comprehensibility.
• Screen magnification tools: They verify that the site remains readable and functional at high zoom levels.
• Code and logic analysis: They assess whether the site’s structure is semantic and if custom components (like sliders or modals) are correctly implemented using WAI-ARIA.

Advantages of a manual audit:

• Accuracy and Certainty: It detects up to 100% of accessibility barriers, including subtle logical and UX-related errors.
• Context and Empathy: It evaluates whether solutions are not only technically correct but, most importantly, usable and intuitive for people with disabilities.
• Real-World Scenarios: It tests key user journeys, ensuring that the most important processes on the site are fully accessible.
• Tailor-made Recommendations: A manual audit report includes not just a list of errors, but also detailed, practical advice on how to fix them, often with corrected code snippets.
• Legal Compliance: It is the only method that provides real assurance of meeting legal requirements (such as the EU Web Accessibility Directive).

Limitations of a manual audit:

• Time-Consuming: A thorough analysis of even a small site can take many days.
• Cost: The work of a highly qualified expert is much more expensive than a software license.
• Limited Scope: Typically, a representative sample of pages and key templates is tested, not the entire website.

Who is it crucial for?

• Public sector bodies legally required to be fully accessible.
• Companies for whom accessibility is a key part of their strategy (e.g., e-commerce, finance, healthcare).
• Before launching a major redesign or a new application.
• As the final verification after implementing fixes identified by an automated audit.

Synergy – The Best of Both Worlds with a Hybrid Approach

Instead of asking “which audit to choose?”, ask “in what order should I use them?”. The most effective and comprehensive strategy is a hybrid approach:

1. Step 1: Automated Audit. Use it as the first filter. Quickly and cheaply identify hundreds of “low-hanging fruit”—obvious technical errors across the entire site. Pass this list to developers for immediate fixing.
2. Step 2: Manual Audit. After fixing the basic errors, commission an expert for an in-depth analysis of key user paths and templates. They will find the complex issues, verify the quality of the implemented fixes, and assess the real user experience.
3. Step 3: Automated Monitoring. Once a high level of accessibility is achieved, enable continuous automated monitoring. It will act as a guard, notifying you of any new errors that may appear with future website updates.

An Analogy: An automated audit is like an X-ray—it shows obvious fractures. A manual audit is like a consultation with an experienced orthopedic surgeon who not only interprets the X-ray but also examines the patient, assesses their mobility, and plans a comprehensive rehabilitation to restore full function.

Summary

Don’t be fooled by promises of 100% accessibility with a single click. True digital accessibility requires both technology and human empathy. By starting with an automated audit and then investing in manual expertise, you will ensure your website is accessible to everyone, not just to bots.