axe DevTools tests the page you have open, from your browser, editor or CI pipeline; BearScan crawls a whole site and reports every issue with the page it is on. Both build on the same kind of rule-based checking, and axe-core itself is free and open source. Choose axe for development workflows and BearScan for a site-wide report.
Summary
| Question | BearScan | axe DevTools | Better fit |
|---|---|---|---|
| How it checks your site | Real-browser scan, then models read what text and images mean | Open-source axe-core rules run on the page's rendered DOM | Depends |
| How much of the site it covers | 10 pages free; 100 with a free account; up to 1,000 in a report | One page state per run; free extension tests page by page | BearScan |
| What you get back | Every issue with its page, element, fix and rule; a PDF; what it couldn't check | Violations, passes and incomplete, with impact levels and fix links | Depends |
| Whether it changes your site | No: it only reads public pages | No: it inspects the rendered page | Depends |
| What it costs | Free scan; $49 report per site; $29 a month for Monitoring | axe-core free; extension has a free tier; paid plans by demo | axe DevTools |
| How it fits your workflow | API, MCP server, GitHub pull-request checks, weekly rescans | Cypress, Selenium, Jest, Appium, Linter, MCP server | axe DevTools |
| What it promises about the law | Never claims compliance; no legal protection offered | No guarantee claimed; says automation complements manual testing | Depends |
Which should you choose?
| If you want | Choose |
|---|---|
| You want a whole-site crawl that needs no installation. | BearScan |
| You want a report you can hand to a client, lawyer or manager. | BearScan |
| You want checks beyond static markup, such as keyboard, focus and reflow probes, in one pass. | BearScan |
| You test components while you build them, in the browser or an editor. | axe DevTools |
| You want accessibility tests in a CI pipeline. | axe DevTools |
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 axe DevTools from its own pages, attribute its marketing claims to it, cite every source, and say where axe DevTools is the better choice. Prices and terms were read on and change often; check the vendor’s page before you buy.
axe DevTools at a glance
axe DevTools is a developer tool. Deque's accessibility testing for developers: a browser extension, IDE linter and CI tooling built on the open-source axe-core engine.
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.
axe DevTools. axe-core is Deque's open-source accessibility testing engine (MPL-2.0). It analyses the page as rendered at the moment you run it, and it puts results it can't confirm into a separate 'incomplete' list for manual review. Deque says it takes a zero-false-positive approach and that its automated rules found 57.38% of issues in its own audit data, a vendor-authored study. Sources: github.com (opens in a new tab), deque.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. Both are rule-based; BearScan adds operated-page probes and model judgment, axe is the engine developers already embed in tests.
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.
axe DevTools. axe-core analyses one page state per run, and the free browser extension tests one page at a time. The paid extension adds a User Flow Analysis for recording a journey, and Deque's bundle adds organization-wide testing. axe-core's rules cover WCAG 2.0, 2.1 and 2.2 at A, AA and AAA, though its WCAG 2.2 rules are off by default. Sources: github.com (opens in a new tab), deque.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: BearScan. For the whole site in one pass, a crawler beats running a page-level tool by hand.
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.
axe DevTools. axe returns violations, passes, incomplete and inapplicable results, each with an impact level from minor to critical, the element and a help link. The extension adds deduplication, exports to JSON, CSV and JUnit XML, Jira sharing and a checklist of remaining manual tests. Sources: github.com (opens in a new tab), deque.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. Developers get structured data from axe; non-developers get a readable report from BearScan.
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.
axe DevTools. axe inspects the rendered page. Deque's documentation doesn't describe it altering the page, and its API notes it won't open hidden menus or dialogs for you. Sources: github.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: Depends. Both leave your site as it is.
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.
axe DevTools. axe-core and the Axe Linter are free. The browser extension has a free tier ('basic, automated testing on a page-by-page basis') and a 14-day trial of the paid version with every feature on. Deque's pricing page states no price for the paid extension, and the full web bundle is by sales. Sources: deque.com (opens in a new tab), deque.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: axe DevTools. If you're a developer who only needs page-level checks, axe is free.
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.
axe DevTools. Deque names Cypress, Selenium, Jest, Appium and XCUITest among the tools Axe DevTools works with, offers a free Axe Linter for VS Code, and sells an Axe MCP Server that works with GitHub Copilot, Cursor, Claude Code, Windsurf and VS Code. Sources: deque.com (opens in a new tab), deque.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: axe DevTools. axe is built into the places developers write and test code; BearScan isn't.
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.
axe DevTools. Deque says automated testing complements manual testing and that screen-reader testing is sometimes still needed. We didn't find a claim that its tools guarantee ADA or WCAG compliance. Sources: deque.com (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. Both are honest that a tool alone can't certify a site.
Pricing in detail
| Plan | Price | What sets the price or what it includes |
|---|---|---|
| axe-core | Free | Open source, MPL-2.0 |
| Extension (free) | Free | Automated testing, one page at a time |
| Extension (Pro) | Not published | 14-day trial; adds guided tests and reporting |
| Axe DevTools for Web | By demo | Adds CI/CD, API and MCP connections |
Source: deque.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 axe DevTools is stronger than BearScan
- axe-core is free, open source and embedded in many test suites.
- It plugs into Cypress, Selenium, Jest and IDEs, which BearScan does not.
- Guided manual tests in the paid extension help with what automation can't decide.
Where BearScan is stronger than axe DevTools
- You want a whole-site crawl that needs no installation.
- You want a report you can hand to a client, lawyer or manager.
- You want checks beyond static markup, such as keyboard, focus and reflow probes, in one pass.
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.
Our verdict: BearScan or axe DevTools
Choose axe if you build the site and want accessibility tests next to your code. Choose BearScan if you want the whole site checked and written up for someone who isn't going to open DevTools. They complement each other: axe while you build, a site scan after you ship.
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 accessiBe
- BearScan vs UserWay
- BearScan vs AudioEye
- BearScan vs WAVE
- BearScan vs Lighthouse
- The best ADA and WCAG scanners
- All comparisons
Sources are listed beside each claim. axe DevTools’s own site: deque.com (opens in a new tab).
Questions
Is BearScan an alternative to axe DevTools?
For finding accessibility problems, yes. axe DevTools is a developer tool: Deque's accessibility testing for developers: a browser extension, IDE linter and CI tooling built on the open-source axe-core engine. 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 axe DevTools?
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. axe DevTools: axe-core free; extension has a free tier; paid plans by demo.
Does BearScan change my website like axe DevTools can?
No. BearScan only reads your public pages and reports what it finds. axe DevTools: No: it inspects the rendered page.
Is axe DevTools free?
Partly. axe-core and the Axe Linter are free, and the browser extension has a free tier that tests one page at a time. The paid extension has a 14-day trial; Deque doesn't publish its price on the pricing page.
How much does axe find?
Deque's own study reports that its automated rules identified 57.38% of issues in its audit data. Deque also markets 'up to 80%' with its tools, without a method on that page. Both figures are Deque's.
Can axe test a whole website?
axe-core analyses one page state per run, and the free extension tests page by page. Whole-site testing needs a crawler or a paid Deque product.
Does axe guarantee ADA or WCAG compliance?
No. Deque says automated testing complements manual testing, and axe puts results it can't confirm into a separate 'incomplete' list for manual review.