accessiBe installs a widget on your site and applies automated fixes as pages load; BearScan scans your site and tells you what is wrong in your own code so you can fix it there. accessiBe's plans start at $59 a month and rise with traffic. In 2025 the FTC ordered accessiBe to pay $1 million over claims that its tool could make any website WCAG-compliant.
Summary
| Question | BearScan | accessiBe | Better fit |
|---|---|---|---|
| How it checks your site | Real-browser scan, then models read what text and images mean | Script in your page applies AI fixes as pages load | Depends |
| How much of the site it covers | 10 pages free; 100 with a free account; up to 1,000 in a report | Every page the script runs on; rescans every 24 hours | accessiBe |
| What you get back | Every issue with its page, element, fix and rule; a PDF; what it couldn't check | Report and documentation; VPAT and expert audits as services | Depends |
| Whether it changes your site | No: it only reads public pages | Yes: the script remediates pages in the visitor's browser | BearScan |
| What it costs | Free scan; $49 report per site; $29 a month for Monitoring | $59 to $479 a month by visits; $490 to $3,990 a year | Depends |
| How it fits your workflow | API, MCP server, GitHub pull-request checks, weekly rescans | Plugins for common platforms; accessFlow for CI/CD and MCP | accessiBe |
| What it promises about the law | Never claims compliance; no legal protection offered | Terms say the service assists rather than guarantees compliance | Depends |
Which should you choose?
| If you want | Choose |
|---|---|
| You want to fix the site's own code, which is what a demand letter or lawsuit examines. | BearScan |
| You want a scan that lists what it could not check, instead of a compliance badge. | BearScan |
| You want a fixed price that doesn't grow with your traffic. | BearScan |
| You want a visitor-facing toolbar for adjusting text size and contrast. | accessiBe |
| You want a vendor to handle ongoing fixes and are comfortable relying on automated repair. | accessiBe |
How we compared
We compared the two on seven questions a buyer asks: how each checks a site, how much of it they cover, what you get back, whether they change your pages, what they cost, how they fit a team’s workflow, and what they promise about the law. We make BearScan, so weigh our description of it accordingly. To keep the comparison honest we describe accessiBe from its own pages, attribute its marketing claims to it, cite every source, and say where accessiBe is the better choice. Prices and terms were read on and change often; check the vendor’s page before you buy.
accessiBe at a glance
accessiBe is a overlay and monitoring service. A script-based overlay widget with automated scanning and fixes, sold by monthly site traffic.
BearScan at a glance
BearScan is a website accessibility scanner. It checks a site against WCAG 2.2 Level A and AA in a real browser, reports each issue with the page, the element, how to fix it and the rule it breaks, and lists what it couldn’t check. Scanning is free; a full report is $49.
Feature by feature
How it checks your site
BearScan. BearScan loads pages in a real browser and measures what a visitor gets: computed names, contrast from computed styles, Tab order and visible focus, layout at 320 pixels wide, text spacing and content that moves. It then uses language and vision models to judge what text and images mean, such as whether a label or alt text fits. A rule it can't decide is reported as incomplete, never as a pass.
accessiBe. accessiBe's accessWidget is installed with a script before the closing body tag. accessiBe says it then uses AI to scan the site and fix issues automatically, with remediation taking up to 48 hours from installation and a rescan every 24 hours. Its own FAQ says some errors can't be fixed this way, including video captions and PDFs. Sources: accessibe.com (opens in a new tab), accessibe.com (opens in a new tab).
Why this matters. How a tool finds problems decides which problems it can find. Rules run on markup miss what only a rendered, operated page shows, such as focus order and whether a label means what it says. A tool that repairs pages as they load leaves your own code as it was, and your own code is what an accessibility claim examines.
Better fit: Depends. Automatic repair suits a team with no developer time; reading and fixing the source suits a team that owns its code.
How much of the site it covers
BearScan. A scan without an account covers 10 pages. A free account covers up to 100 pages of one site, and a report up to 1,000. BearScan picks pages by template, one of each distinct kind, rather than by what the address looks like, and the report says how many pages of each kind it evaluated. It reads public pages only and never signs in.
accessiBe. Because the widget runs on each page, coverage is the whole site where it is installed, and plans are priced by monthly visits rather than pages. accessiBe's free accessScan checks only the one URL you give it, runs eleven checks and says it has no legal authority. Its own pages name WCAG 2.2 AA in some places and WCAG 2.1 AA in others. Sources: accessibe.com (opens in a new tab), accessibe.com (opens in a new tab).
Why this matters. Accessibility problems live in page templates, so a tool that tests one page at a time can miss the template where the problem starts, and a tool that tests a handful of pages can miss most of the site. Check how pages are chosen and how many are included in the price.
Better fit: accessiBe. Continuous coverage of every page is a real strength if you want something running all the time.
What you get back
BearScan. The free scan lists every issue and the pages it appears on. The report ($49 per site) adds each issue's element, an explanation, the fix, a prompt you can hand to a coding agent and a PDF, with 48 hours of free reruns to verify your fixes. Every report lists what the scan could not check and never says a site is compliant.
accessiBe. The pricing page lists an accessibility report and documentation on every tier. accessFlow, its developer product, gives prioritized tasks with suggested code fixes. VPAT documentation and expert audits are sold as services, and the Scale tier includes yearly expert testing and custom fixes. Sources: accessibe.com (opens in a new tab), accessibe.com (opens in a new tab).
Why this matters. A list of failures is not a fix. What matters is whether each result names the page and the element, explains the rule it breaks, says how to fix it, and says what the tool could not check, so you know where the gaps are.
Better fit: Depends. accessiBe offers more services around the report; BearScan's report is more specific about each element and how to fix it.
Whether it changes your site
BearScan. BearScan visits public pages the way a visitor does and reports what it finds. Nothing is installed on your site. To check that forms explain their errors it may submit a simple email-only form once, to its own origin, with an obviously invalid value; it never signs in, signs up, pays or buys anything.
accessiBe. accessiBe's terms require the widget to be installed in your page's body tag, and the product page says it 'automatically remediates' issues it finds. Your own HTML stays as written. Sources: accessibe.com (opens in a new tab), accessibe.com (opens in a new tab).
Why this matters. Some products work by adding a script that alters your pages as they load. That can fix some problems for visitors, but it adds a third-party dependency to every page, and it doesn't change the source code your developers maintain.
Better fit: BearScan. If you want no third-party script on your pages, or want fixes in your source, a scanner is the fit.
What it costs
BearScan. Scanning is free. A full report is $49 per site, once. Monitoring is $29 a month ($228 a year) per site and adds the full report on every scan, weekly rescans with alerts and pull-request checks. The price doesn't change with your traffic.
accessiBe. Plans are priced by monthly visits as measured by Similarweb: Micro $59 a month ($490 a year) up to 5,000 visits, Growth $179 ($1,490) up to 30,000, Scale $479 ($3,990) up to 100,000, and custom pricing above that. The bill rises as your traffic does. Sources: accessibe.com (opens in a new tab).
Why this matters. Price models differ more than price. Some scale with your traffic, some with the pages monitored, some are quotes you only get after a call. Compare the cost for your site over a year, and what happens to the bill if your traffic doubles.
Better fit: Depends. A low-traffic site pays little for accessiBe; a one-off report is cheaper in year one, and the price doesn't track traffic.
How it fits your workflow
BearScan. BearScan has a REST API with an OpenAPI spec, an MCP server so coding agents can scan a site and read its findings, and a GitHub App that checks pull requests and scans the preview against the pull request's base commit, commenting only on lines the pull request added. Monitoring rescans weekly and emails you when something new fails. It has no browser extension and no library for unit-testing components.
accessiBe. accessiBe lists integrations for WordPress, Shopify, BigCommerce, WooCommerce, Wix, Webflow and Squarespace. accessFlow lists Jenkins, CircleCI and GitLab for CI/CD, Jira, Asana and ClickUp for tickets, an SDK for local and staging checks, and an MCP integration for IDEs. Sources: accessibe.com (opens in a new tab), accessibe.com (opens in a new tab).
Why this matters. A finding only helps if it reaches the person who fixes it. Look at whether results go where your team already works: pull requests, tickets, coding assistants, a CI job.
Better fit: accessiBe. One-click plugins for the common platforms are easier to install than anything BearScan ships.
What it promises about the law
BearScan. BearScan reports what a scan found and what it couldn't check. It isn't legal advice, doesn't certify compliance, and offers no litigation support, guarantee or indemnity. Each issue links to the standard or law it is based on, so you and your lawyer can review it.
accessiBe. accessiBe's terms of service say the services are intended to assist in, rather than guarantee, compliance, and that they are tools, not legal advice. Its Litigation Support, included from the Growth tier, is described as technical assistance only: it excludes affidavits, depositions and expert opinions, doesn't cover legal fees or payments to third parties, and must be requested within seven business days. accessiBe says a separate Litigation Pledge closed to new licenses on July 15, 2026. In April 2025 the FTC approved a final order requiring accessiBe to pay $1 million over claims that its tool could make any website WCAG-compliant. Sources: accessibe.com (opens in a new tab), accessibe.com (opens in a new tab), ftc.gov (opens in a new tab).
Why this matters. No tool can certify that a site is ADA compliant, because the ADA doesn't certify websites, and the Justice Department's guidance says a clean automated report doesn't necessarily mean everything is accessible. What differs is what a vendor claims and what it will stand behind in writing.
Better fit: Depends. accessiBe offers legal-support services BearScan doesn't; those services don't pay legal fees or settlements.
Pricing in detail
| Plan | Price | What sets the price or what it includes |
|---|---|---|
| Micro | $59 a month or $490 a year | Up to 5,000 visits a month |
| Growth | $179 a month or $1,490 a year | Up to 30,000 visits; adds litigation support |
| Scale | $479 a month or $3,990 a year | Up to 100,000 visits; adds attorney consultation, yearly expert testing |
| Enterprise | Custom | Above 100,000 visits |
Source: accessibe.com (opens in a new tab), read 2026-10-11.
| Plan | Price | What it includes |
|---|---|---|
| Free scan | $0 | 10 pages without an account; up to 100 pages of one site with a free account; every issue and the pages it’s on |
| Full report | $49 per site, once | Up to 1,000 pages; each issue’s element, explanation, fix and coding-agent prompt; a PDF; 48 hours of free reruns |
| Monitoring | $29 a month or $228 a year, per site | The full report on every scan, weekly rescans with alerts, pull-request checks |
Strengths and gaps
Where accessiBe is stronger than BearScan
- It runs continuously, rescanning and re-applying fixes every 24 hours with no developer work.
- It installs with a plugin on the common site builders and shops.
- VPATs, expert audits and a litigation support service are sold by the same vendor.
Where BearScan is stronger than accessiBe
- You want to fix the site's own code, which is what a demand letter or lawsuit examines.
- You want a scan that lists what it could not check, instead of a compliance badge.
- You want a fixed price that doesn't grow with your traffic.
Where BearScan falls short
- It has no manual expert audits, VPATs or accessibility training.
- It reads public pages only, so it can't test anything behind a login.
- It has no browser extension or in-test library for checking a component while you build it.
- It offers no litigation support, financial protection or guarantee.
- It scans websites, not mobile apps.
What independent sources say
- The FTC alleged that accessiBe's claims that accessWidget could make any website WCAG-compliant were false, misleading or unsubstantiated, and that it presented paid reviews as independent. The final order, approved April 22, 2025, requires a $1 million payment and bars those claims without evidence. (ftc.gov (opens in a new tab))
- The FTC announced the proposed order on January 3, 2025. (ftc.gov (opens in a new tab))
- In WebAIM's 2021 survey of accessibility practitioners, 67% rated overlays, plugins and widgets as not at all or not very effective. The finding covers the category, not accessiBe alone. (webaim.org (opens in a new tab))
Our verdict: BearScan or accessiBe
Choose accessiBe if you want something that runs on its own and are comfortable relying on a script to repair pages. Choose BearScan if you want to know what is wrong in your own code, fix it there, and keep a record of what you found. The two can sit side by side: a scan shows what is still failing under the widget.
Whichever you pick, no automated tool can certify that a site is ADA compliant. The Justice Department’s guidance (opens in a new tab) says a “clean” report doesn’t necessarily mean everything is accessible, and our WCAG criteria pages say which criteria need a person.
Check your own site
The quickest way to compare is to see your own results. The scan is free and takes about a minute.
Other comparisons
- BearScan vs UserWay
- BearScan vs AudioEye
- BearScan vs axe DevTools
- BearScan vs WAVE
- BearScan vs Lighthouse
- The best ADA and WCAG scanners
- All comparisons
Sources are listed beside each claim. accessiBe’s own site: accessibe.com (opens in a new tab).
Questions
Is BearScan an alternative to accessiBe?
For finding accessibility problems, yes. accessiBe is a overlay and monitoring service: A script-based overlay widget with automated scanning and fixes, sold by monthly site traffic. BearScan is a scanner that reports each issue with the page, the element, the fix and the rule it breaks, and never claims a site is compliant.
How much does BearScan cost compared with accessiBe?
Scanning is free: 10 pages without an account, up to 100 pages of one site with a free account. A full report is $49 per site and Monitoring is $29 a month per site. accessiBe: $59 to $479 a month by visits; $490 to $3,990 a year.
Does BearScan change my website like accessiBe can?
No. BearScan only reads your public pages and reports what it finds. accessiBe: Yes: the script remediates pages in the visitor's browser.
Does accessiBe make a website ADA compliant?
accessiBe's terms say its services are intended to assist in, rather than guarantee, compliance. The FTC's 2025 order bars it from claiming its automated products make any website WCAG-compliant, or keep it compliant, without evidence.
Will accessiBe protect me if I'm sued?
Its litigation support is described as technical assistance. It doesn't cover legal fees or payments to third parties, must be requested within seven business days, and its separate pledge closed to new licenses on July 15, 2026.
Why did the FTC order accessiBe to pay $1 million?
The FTC said accessiBe's claims that its AI tool could make any website WCAG-compliant were false, misleading or unsubstantiated, and that it presented paid reviews as independent. The final order was approved on April 22, 2025.
How much does accessiBe cost?
From $59 a month or $490 a year for sites up to 5,000 monthly visits, rising to $479 a month ($3,990 a year) up to 100,000 visits. Above that it is custom. Prices are by traffic.
Is accessiBe's free scan enough?
accessScan checks one URL against eleven checks, and accessiBe's own page says it has no legal authority and reflects the test date only. To see the whole site, scan more pages.