axe vs Pa11y vs Lighthouse vs Certvo: An Honest Head-to-Head (2026)
There are a lot of accessibility scanning tools. axe-core, Pa11y, Lighthouse, and Certvo are the four I get asked about most often, so I ran them all against the same set of sites and put together an honest comparison. “Honest” means I work at Certvo and I am still going to tell you when the other tools do things better.
Feature Matrix
| Feature | axe-core | Pa11y | Lighthouse | Certvo |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| WCAG rules tested | ~120 | ~90 | ~45 | ~130 |
| Free tier | Open source | Open source | Free (Chrome) | Free scan |
| AI-generated code fixes | No | No | No | Yes |
| Multi-page crawl | Via plugins | Yes (CLI) | One page | Yes |
| CI/CD integration | Excellent | Good | Via lighthouse-ci | API / MCP |
| VPAT generation | No | No | No | Yes |
| Continuous monitoring | Self-hosted only | Self-hosted only | No | Yes |
| Accessibility statement | No | No | No | Generated |
Performance Benchmarks
These numbers are from running each tool against a 50-page e-commerce site (authenticated, so Lighthouse had to be run manually per page):
| Metric | axe-core | Pa11y | Lighthouse | Certvo |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pages/minute | ~40 (headless) | ~25 | ~6 (manual) | ~18 |
| Est. false positive rate | ~4% | ~8% | ~5% | ~3% |
| Issues found (same site) | 847 | 621 | 412 | 904 |
A word on issue counts: more issues does not automatically mean better. Some tools report one issue per violation (Certvo, axe-core); others group similar issues (Lighthouse). What matters is whether the reported issues are real and actionable.
Honest Verdicts: When to Use Which
Use axe-core when:
- You want to embed accessibility testing directly in your component tests (axe-core integrates with Jest, Cypress, Playwright, Storybook)
- You need CI/CD gates that block PRs on accessibility regressions
- You want the most battle-tested, widely-audited rule set — axe-core's rules have been refined by thousands of contributors over many years
- Your team is developer-first and comfortable with tooling
See our full axe-core comparison for more detail.
Use Pa11y when:
- You need to batch-scan hundreds of URLs from the command line
- You want a lightweight, scriptable tool that outputs JSON for custom reporting
- You are running scheduled scans on a server without a full CI pipeline
See our Pa11y comparison for specifics.
Use Lighthouse when:
- You want a quick, ad-hoc check on a single page without installing anything
- You need performance + accessibility + SEO in a single report for a client presentation
- You are doing initial due diligence on a site you have never audited before
Its accessibility score is useful as a rough health indicator, not as a compliance determination.
Use Certvo when:
- You want to scan AND get production-ready code fixes without writing them yourself
- You need to generate a VPAT for procurement conversations
- You need continuous monitoring with alerts when new deployments break accessibility
- You need to prove compliance posture to a client, auditor, or legal team with timestamped reports
- Your team wants accessibility to be an MCP-accessible service (agents can call the scan API directly)
The Bottom Line
These tools are not mutually exclusive. A mature accessibility practice uses axe-core in CI to prevent regressions, Certvo for full-site monitoring and fix generation, and Lighthouse for quick ad-hoc checks. The mistake is using only one tool and believing it gives you the full picture.
Start with a free Certvo scan to see where your site stands — then decide which ongoing tooling makes sense for your workflow.
Check Your Website's Accessibility
Run a free scan and get AI-powered fix suggestions in minutes.
Start Free Scan