Pa11y is a set of free open-source tools you run and host yourself, from a command line, a CI job or a dashboard; BearScan is hosted and needs nothing installed. Choose Pa11y if you want to own the tooling and are happy to maintain it.
Summary
| Question | BearScan | Pa11y | Better fit |
|---|---|---|---|
| How it checks your site | Real-browser scan, then models read what text and images mean | Open-source runner using HTML_CodeSniffer or axe-core in headless Chrome | Depends |
| How much of the site it covers | 10 pages free; 100 with a free account; up to 1,000 in a report | A URL you give it; Pa11y CI tests a list or a sitemap | Depends |
| What you get back | Every issue with its page, element, fix and rule; a PDF; what it couldn't check | CLI, JSON, CSV, HTML or TSV: code, message, type, selector | BearScan |
| Whether it changes your site | No: it only reads public pages | It loads pages; actions can click and fill fields | BearScan |
| What it costs | Free scan; $49 report per site; $29 a month for Monitoring | Free; you host and maintain it | Pa11y |
| How it fits your workflow | API, MCP server, GitHub pull-request checks, weekly rescans | Pa11y CI is built for CI; actions can log in | Pa11y |
| What it promises about the law | Never claims compliance; no legal protection offered | Makes no compliance claim | Depends |
Which should you choose?
| If you want | Choose |
|---|---|
| You don't want to host or maintain anything. | BearScan |
| You want the site's pages found for you, not listed by hand. | BearScan |
| You want explanations and fixes written for the people who will act on them. | BearScan |
| You want open-source tooling you control and can run inside your own pipeline. | Pa11y |
| You're comfortable keeping a list of URLs to test current. | Pa11y |
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 Pa11y from its own pages, attribute its marketing claims to it, cite every source, and say where Pa11y is the better choice. Prices and terms were read on and change often; check the vendor’s page before you buy.
Pa11y at a glance
Pa11y is a developer tool. Free, open-source command-line tools that test pages for accessibility, with a CI runner and a dashboard.
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.
Pa11y. Pa11y is a set of open-source tools that load pages in headless Chrome and test them with HTML_CodeSniffer (the default) or axe-core. It tests against WCAG 2 A, AA (the default) or AAA, though AAA works only with HTML_CodeSniffer, and it hides warnings and notices unless you turn them on. Sources: github.com (opens in a new tab), pa11y.org (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. Pa11y gives you a rule runner to own; BearScan is a hosted scan with models reading what text means.
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.
Pa11y. Pa11y tests one URL. Pa11y CI tests a list of URLs or, with the sitemap option, every URL in a sitemap. Pa11y Dashboard tests pages daily and graphs the changes, and needs Node and MongoDB to run. Sources: github.com (opens in a new tab), github.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: Depends. Pa11y CI on a sitemap is close to a site scan if you maintain the sitemap and the tooling.
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.
Pa11y. Pa11y reports each issue with a code, a message, a type (error, warning or notice), the selector and the surrounding HTML, in CLI, CSV, JSON, HTML or TSV formats. It reports no score, and the pages we read don't mention fix guidance. Sources: github.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: BearScan. BearScan adds the explanation and the fix; Pa11y gives you the raw findings.
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.
Pa11y. Pa11y loads pages in headless Chrome. Its optional actions can click and fill fields before testing, and it can send POST requests, so a careless configuration can change state on a live site. BearScan blocks every write request except one safe email form. 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: BearScan. Anything that clicks and types on your site should be pointed at a staging copy.
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.
Pa11y. Pa11y and Pa11y CI are free under LGPL-3.0, and Pa11y Dashboard and Webservice under GPL 3.0. Your costs are the machine that runs them and the time to keep them working. Sources: pa11y.org (opens in a new tab), github.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: Pa11y. Free software is free; the maintenance isn't.
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.
Pa11y. Pa11y CI is built to run in continuous integration with a configurable error threshold and per-URL options. Actions and request headers let it log in to test authenticated pages. We didn't find GitHub Actions or MCP details on its pages. Sources: github.com (opens in a new tab), github.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: Pa11y. Pa11y can test a logged-in page and run in your pipeline, which BearScan cannot.
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.
Pa11y. The Pa11y pages we read make no claim about legal compliance. The tool tests against WCAG 2 levels; whether a site meets them takes more than a passing run. Sources: pa11y.org (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. Neither promises compliance.
Pricing in detail
| Plan | Price | What sets the price or what it includes |
|---|---|---|
| Pa11y, Pa11y CI, Dashboard | Free | Open source; you host it |
Source: pa11y.org (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 Pa11y is stronger than BearScan
- It's free, open source and yours to configure.
- It can test pages behind a login through actions and headers.
- It drops into a CI pipeline with a failure threshold.
Where BearScan is stronger than Pa11y
- You don't want to host or maintain anything.
- You want the site's pages found for you, not listed by hand.
- You want explanations and fixes written for the people who will act on them.
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 Pa11y
Choose Pa11y if you want to own the tooling and are happy to maintain it. Choose BearScan if you'd rather not host anything, want pages found for you, and want results explained for people who won't read raw selectors. Teams that run Pa11y CI in their pipeline often still scan the live site to see everything it misses.
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 axe DevTools
- BearScan vs WAVE
- The best ADA and WCAG scanners
- All comparisons
Sources are listed beside each claim. Pa11y’s own site: pa11y.org (opens in a new tab).
Questions
Is BearScan an alternative to Pa11y?
For finding accessibility problems, yes. Pa11y is a developer tool: Free, open-source command-line tools that test pages for accessibility, with a CI runner and a dashboard. 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 Pa11y?
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. Pa11y: Free; you host and maintain it.
Does BearScan change my website like Pa11y can?
No. BearScan only reads your public pages and reports what it finds. Pa11y: It loads pages; actions can click and fill fields.
Is Pa11y free?
Yes. Pa11y and Pa11y CI are LGPL-3.0 and Pa11y Dashboard and Webservice are GPL 3.0. You pay for the machine that hosts them and the time to maintain them.
Which engine does Pa11y use?
HTML_CodeSniffer by default, or axe-core, set with the runner option. Standards are WCAG 2 A, AA (the default) and AAA, and AAA works only with HTML_CodeSniffer.
Can Pa11y test a whole site?
Pa11y tests one URL. Pa11y CI tests a list of URLs or a sitemap, and Pa11y Dashboard schedules tests for many URLs.
Can Pa11y test pages behind a login?
Yes, through actions that fill in a login form or request headers such as cookies. There is no dedicated authentication option.