An accessible website is one that people with different abilities can use: someone with low vision, someone who can't tell certain colours apart, someone who navigates by keyboard alone, someone using a screen reader, or someone who needs captions to follow a video. An accessibility audit is the examination that tells you where your site stands against that goal and what needs fixing.
The report that comes out of it can be intimidating in length. Knowing how it's produced and how to read it helps you turn it into a useful to-do list.
What it includes: automated and manual review
A serious audit combines two kinds of review. The automated one uses tools that crawl the pages and flag problems that can be checked with objective rules: insufficient contrast, an image without an alt attribute, a form field without a label. It's fast and covers many pages.
The manual one is done by an experienced person: they navigate by keyboard, test with a screen reader, judge whether alternative texts make sense, whether the reading order is logical and whether the important flows (buying, booking, getting in touch) can be completed without a mouse. A sample of representative pages is normally reviewed: the home page, a content page, the form, the cart or booking flow, and the components that repeat.
What they usually find
Although every site is different, the most common findings repeat:
- Contrast: light text on light backgrounds. At Level AA a ratio of at least 4.5 to 1 is required for normal text and 3 to 1 for large text.
- Alternative text: informative images with no description, or decorative ones that clutter the screen reader.
- Forms: fields without an associated label, unclear error messages, errors indicated only by colour.
- Keyboard: elements that can't be reached with the Tab key, an invisible focus outline or dropdown menus that only work with a mouse.
- Headings: skipped levels or headings used only for their look, which disorients anyone navigating by structure.
- Video and audio: missing captions or transcripts.
How to read and prioritise the report
Criteria are measured against the WCAG guidelines (Web Content Accessibility Guidelines), usually versions 2.1 or 2.2, with Level AA as the usual target. Each issue typically states the failed criterion, the affected page, a description and a recommendation.
To prioritise, sort by impact on the user rather than by number of occurrences. First what blocks a task (a form that can't be submitted by keyboard, a button with no accessible name), then what makes things harder (contrast, headings) and last the improvement details. A well-made report already classifies issues by severity; if yours doesn't, ask for it. And check whether the same fault comes from a template or component: fixing it once repairs many pages.
Why an automated scanner isn't enough
Automated tools are useful as a first filter, but they only detect part of the problems. They can check that an image has alt, but not whether the description makes sense. They can measure a contrast ratio, but can't know whether the tab order is logical or an error message is understandable. A site can "pass" the scanner and still be hard to use, which is why manual review is what gives you confidence.
Be wary of solutions that promise to make your site accessible just by installing a script or widget. They may help with details, but they don't replace fixing the underlying code and design.
Accessibility statement and legal context
After the audit and the fixes, it's worth publishing an accessibility statement: a text explaining which level is met, what limitations remain and how to get in touch to report a problem. It's honest when it says what's missing, and useful to those who need it.
As for the law, the European Accessibility Act (EAA, Directive (EU) 2019/882) has applied since June 2025 to certain products and services, including some in e-commerce. Each country has transposed it into national law, and some micro-enterprises providing services may be exempt. If you're not sure whether it affects you, check with a legal adviser; and whatever the answer, an accessible website is a better website for everyone.
Frequently asked questions
How often should an audit be repeated?
When there are major changes to the site (a redesign, a new shop, a big feature) and, at the very least, periodically to catch whatever has deteriorated with updates. In between, it helps to build simple checks into day-to-day work.
What's the difference between WCAG 2.1 and 2.2?
Version 2.2 includes everything in 2.1 and adds new criteria, for example on the size of touch targets or accessible authentication. If you are audited against 2.2 Level AA, in practice you also cover what 2.1 AA requires.
Do I have to fix everything before publishing the statement?
No. The statement exists precisely to be transparent about what is met and what isn't yet, with a plan to correct it. What matters is that it's truthful and that there's a real channel for receiving reports.