Inclusify vs UserWay
A scan you can check, on a schedule you can see
UserWay sells an overlay with a separate scanner, audit and VPAT practice. Inclusify publishes its rescan cadence, its retention window, and hands findings to your developers.
Published by Inclusify, one of the two products compared. How this comparison is built. Last checked August 2026.
Where Inclusify fits
Inclusify is one product with a published cadence and a record you can show. Here is what that fits, and the two cases where UserWay is the better call.
- 4 fit Inclusify
- 1 no tool settles on its own
- 2 we would point at UserWay
- Inclusify
You want a rescan cadence and a retention window in writing
Roughly every 20 hours, 30 days of day-by-day history on Pro, and a monthly record kept for 24 months.
- Inclusify
You want behaviour tested, not only rules counted
A real Tab walk and a screen-reader transcript taken from the live accessibility tree.
- Inclusify
Your developers want findings in Slack, Jira or their own AI tools
22 MCP tools over OAuth plus a Slack app, reading the account's own scan data.
- Inclusify
You want one product, one dashboard and one price
UserWay sells the widget, monitor, audit and VPAT separately. Ours is one plan priced by pages.
- Neither
You want one script to take care of accessibility on its own
Nothing here does that, ours included. Automated testing reaches part of WCAG 2.1 AA, not all of it.
- UserWay
You need certified manual audits, a VPAT, or procurement support
The Rapid and Validated VPATs and the Litigation Support Program are theirs. Inclusify employs no auditors.
- UserWay
The pages that matter sit behind a login
UserWay documents basic, form and multi-step scan authentication. We unlock only Shopify password gates.
| Your situation | Better fit |
|---|---|
| You want a rescan cadence and a retention window in writing | InclusifyRoughly every 20 hours, 30 days of day-by-day history on Pro, and a monthly record kept for 24 months. |
| You want behaviour tested, not only rules counted | InclusifyA real Tab walk and a screen-reader transcript taken from the live accessibility tree. |
| Your developers want findings in Slack, Jira or their own AI tools | Inclusify22 MCP tools over OAuth plus a Slack app, reading the account's own scan data. |
| You want one product, one dashboard and one price | InclusifyUserWay sells the widget, monitor, audit and VPAT separately. Ours is one plan priced by pages. |
| You want one script to take care of accessibility on its own | NeitherNothing here does that, ours included. Automated testing reaches part of WCAG 2.1 AA, not all of it. |
| You need certified manual audits, a VPAT, or procurement support | UserWayThe Rapid and Validated VPATs and the Litigation Support Program are theirs. Inclusify employs no auditors. |
| The pages that matter sit behind a login | UserWayUserWay documents basic, form and multi-step scan authentication. We unlock only Shopify password gates. |
Inclusify vs UserWay
- 3 Both document it
- 8 Only Inclusify
- 0 Only UserWay
- 0 Partial on one side
Compiled from publicly available product documentation reviewed August 2026. Features and pricing change. Check both vendors before deciding.
Accessibility widget with visual and reading adjustments
Contrast, font size, spacing, cursor, reading aids and text to speech for visitors.
- Inclusify
- Included
- UserWay
- Included
Preset profiles for common access needs
Inclusify ships six presets. UserWay's widget page shows profiles for motor, blind, color blind, dyslexia, vision, cognitive, seizure and ADHD needs.
- Inclusify
- Included
- UserWay
- Included
Automated WCAG 2.1 AA scanning
Issues detected and reported against the WCAG 2.1 AA success criteria.
- Inclusify
- Included
- UserWay
- Included
Named open-source rule engine
Inclusify runs the full axe-core ruleset in headless Chrome and says so. UserWay describes high-volume desktop and mobile scanning without naming a rule set.
- Inclusify
- Included
- UserWay
- Not documented publicly
Screen-reader transcript from the live accessibility tree
The ordered announcements a screen reader would make, with role, name and state, plus a rotor view of headings, landmarks and links.
- Inclusify
- Included
- UserWay
- Not documented publicly
Keyboard traversal with focus indicators measured from rendered pixels
A real Tab walk that reports focus traps, obscured focus naming the element on top, positive tabindex and tab order against DOM order.
- Inclusify
- Included
- UserWay
- Not documented publicly
Verdict on a proposed fix before it ships
Inclusify judges the markup you are about to deploy and returns resolved, not resolved, masked or not decidable, so a change that only hides an issue is caught. Level CI documents quality gates that block a merge on scan results.
- Inclusify
- Included
- UserWay
- Not documented publicly
Content clarity score for authored copy
An AI read of link text, button labels, heading context and alt-text quality, scored beside the axe result and deliberately kept out of it.
- Inclusify
- Included
- UserWay
- Not documented publicly
MCP server for AI assistants
Inclusify exposes 22 tools over OAuth, covering findings, history, live browser checks and a CI gate, so Claude and other clients can query the account's own scan data.
- Inclusify
- Included
- UserWay
- Not documented publicly
Published rescan cadence and history retention
Inclusify re-scans each monitored page roughly every 20 hours, flags a page as overdue after 48 so monitoring cannot quietly stop, and keeps a dated monthly record for 24 months on every monitored plan.
- Inclusify
- Included
- UserWay
- Not documented publicly
Shopify catalog alt-text written back to the product record
Drafted alt text applied to products in bulk through the Admin API, revertible, and refused if the field was hand-edited since.
- Inclusify
- Included
- UserWay
- Not documented publicly
What automated testing reaches, and what it does not
These shares are percentages of WCAG success criteria, not percentages of the issues on your page. The two get quoted as if they were the same number and they are not. Six evaluation tools benchmarked against WCAG 2.0 covered between 23% and 50% of the success criteria, and one criterion in two was not analysed by any tool at all.
A tool decides
23%
of WCAG success criteria
Criteria a scanner can pass or fail on its own, such as contrast ratios, missing alt attributes, unlabeled form controls and duplicate ids. 23% is the conservative end of the 23% to 50% range measured across the six tools.
A tool points, a person decides
27%
of WCAG success criteria
Criteria a tool reaches for some of the ways they can fail but not all, so it narrows the page down to candidates and a person makes the call. This is the rest of the covered half, up to the 50% ceiling the same benchmark measured.
Only a person can judge
50%
of WCAG success criteria
Criteria no tool analysed at all: whether alt text describes the image, whether focus order follows the visual order, whether an error message can be understood, whether a custom component behaves under a screen reader.
Including Inclusify
This is a limit of automated testing, not a gap in one vendor's product, and Inclusify sits inside it with everyone else. Our scanner runs axe-core in a real browser and it reaches the same kind of criteria the benchmark describes, which means the larger half of this chart is still work for a person and still needs changes in your code. We detect, report and track. Anything sold as covering the rest on its own is describing a product that does not exist yet.
Where these figures come from
- Vigo, Brown & Conway, Benchmarking web accessibility evaluation tools (W4A 2013): six tools covered 23% to 50% of WCAG 2.0 success criteria, and one criterion in two was not analysed at all Checked
- UK Government Digital Service, accessibility tools audit: 142 deliberately introduced barriers tested against automated tools, with results split between definite errors and findings a person has to verify Checked
- GDS accessibility blog, what we found when we tested tools on the world's least-accessible webpage: the best tool found 41% of the barriers and 29% were missed by every tool tested Checked
- Deque, automated testing identifies 57% of digital accessibility issues: a higher figure, measured as a share of issue volume across 13,000 pages rather than as a share of success criteria Checked
More than an overlay
Where Inclusify is the stronger choice.
Compared on this page
Widgets and overlays
- Acts on
- The visitor's browser, on top of the page your server already sent.
- Changes
- What that visitor sees and hears: text size and spacing, contrast, color filters, motion, reading aids and text to speech.
- Cannot do
- It cannot change the markup your developers ship, so the underlying page is unchanged for everyone who never opens it, and that is as true of Inclusify's widget as of any other.
Enterprise platforms
- Acts on
- Your roadmap, through audit hours, remediation help and an account team.
- Changes
- Which findings get prioritized and fixed, with people attached to the software rather than software alone.
- Cannot do
- The work is bounded by the hours in the contract, so coverage stops where the retainer stops.
Testing and monitoring platforms
- Acts on
- Your pages, crawled and tested on a schedule from outside the site.
- Changes
- Nothing on the site itself. It produces the list your developers work through.
- Cannot do
- It reports rather than repairs, so nothing improves for a visitor until someone ships the change.
Platform-native apps
- Acts on
- Your store, installed from the platform's own marketplace and billed through it.
- Changes
- Whatever the platform lets an app change, usually a theme embed and settings in the admin.
- Cannot do
- It is scoped to the one platform it is sold on, so it does not follow you to a site that marketplace does not cover.
A cadence you can hold us to
Re-scanned roughly every 20 hours, with what is new and what is fixed recorded each time, 30 days of daily history on Pro, and 24 months of monthly record.
A rule set you can read
The full axe-core ruleset in headless Chrome, against the DOM the browser actually built. It is open source, so what it tests is checkable.
Behaviour, not only rule counts
A real Tab walk that names focus traps and obscured focus, plus a screen-reader transcript taken from the live accessibility tree.
A verdict before you ship
Paste the markup you are about to deploy and get back resolved, not resolved, masked or not decidable. Masked is the one that earns its keep.
One plan, priced by pages
Widget, monitoring and the full-site crawl on the same plan, with the audited-page allowance as the only unit you are buying.
Being straight about it
What Inclusify does not do
Four things UserWay does that we do not. If one of them is what you came for, better to read it here than to find out after installing.
Fixes applied in the visitor's browser
UserWay's paid widget applies automated remediations at page load. Inclusify only detects and reports, so every fix is work on your side.
Services we do not offer
Certified manual audits, VPATs covering WCAG, Section 508 and EN 301 549, and the Litigation Support Program with attorney access. Inclusify has none of it.
Developer tooling we do not ship
Level CI blocks a merge on a quality score, UserWay scans pages behind a login, and Agency Mode white-labels partner sites. We do none of the three.
Volume we do not reach
Their published monitor tiers cover 100, 500 and 1,500 pages a month, backed by Level Access. Inclusify's largest plan audits 100 pages.
What price actually buys
This is the part we can say least about, and inventing the missing half would be worse than saying so.
- $0FreeWidget, 1,000 visitors
- $39Starter5 monitored pages
- $99Pro25 pages, crawl, AI review
- $279Enterprise100 monitored pages
Per website. Annual billing costs ten months. The free plan needs no card; paid plans start with a 7-day trial.
What UserWay publishes
UserWay's pricing table renders in the browser and could not be read when this was compiled, so no figure of theirs is asserted anywhere here. What is documented: the widget, monitor, audit and VPAT practice are separate purchases, and the monitor tiers cover 100, 500 and 1,500 pages a month.
Their pricing page, checkedHow to decide between Inclusify and UserWay.
Software, or a programme with people in it?
Level Access brings auditors, VPATs and procurement support. We do not match that, and it is a real advantage.
Who is going to make the fixes?
If nobody on your side has time to change code, a tool that only reports improves nothing.
Do the pages that matter need a login?
Ask this early. It decides the shortlist on its own, and it is not a question we win.
How many pages really need auditing?
Count templates, not URLs. Eight thousand products is usually a dozen templates.
Where does a finding have to land?
They have the stronger release gate. We have the account's findings queryable by an agent. Pick the one your team would use.
Switching questions.
Something here not answered? Talk to us.
Same table, other tools: Inclusify vs accessiBe, Inclusify vs AudioEye, Inclusify vs EqualWeb.
It depends on whether you are buying software or a programme. UserWay is the stronger pick if you need certified manual audits, a VPAT for Section 508 or EN 301 549, authenticated scanning of pages behind a login, a merge gate in CI, or agency white-labelling. Inclusify is the stronger pick if you want a published rescan cadence and retention window, the full axe-core ruleset run in a real browser, keyboard and screen-reader behaviour tested rather than only rules counted, and one plan instead of four purchases. On the visitor-facing widget the two are close, and ours is free on every plan.
We cannot responsibly claim that either way. UserWay's pricing table renders client-side and could not be read when this page was compiled, so there is no figure of theirs to compare against and we will not invent one. What we can say is what we charge: $0 for the widget on the free plan, then $39, $99 and $279 a month per website by audited pages, with the scanner, the crawl and the widget all on the same plan. Read their current price list and compare the page allowance behind each figure rather than the headline.
Inclusify ships a widget, so the visitor-facing part looks similar. The difference is what sits behind it. Inclusify does not rewrite your pages to make them pass a rule. It audits the rendered page with axe-core, reports what it found with the selector to change, and keeps a dated history so you can show the work.
You get a published cadence and a published retention window. Inclusify re-scans each monitored page roughly every twenty hours, emails you when a scan finds something new, keeps thirty days of day-by-day history on Pro and above, and keeps a monthly record for twenty-four months. If you keep UserWay's widget for the visitor toolbar, nothing stops you running Inclusify's scanning beside it.
No, and that is deliberate. Inclusify detects and reports. Automated fixes applied in the browser can mask a problem from a scanner while leaving it in place for someone using a screen reader, and they disappear the moment the script does. We would rather tell you exactly what to change.
It depends on what you are buying. If you want a large accessibility programme with manual audits, VPATs, and procurement support attached, the Level Access relationship is a genuine advantage and we do not match it. If you want automated scanning your developers can act on and a record you can point at, a smaller product with one dashboard is easier to run.
No. A VPAT is a manual conformance assessment written by a person, and Inclusify does not do manual audits. What Inclusify gives you is the automated evidence underneath one: the scan history, the per-page issue record, and the dated reports that whoever writes your VPAT will ask for.
When you need a person or a gate we do not have. Certified manual audits and VPATs, the Litigation Support Program with attorney access, scan authentication for pages behind a login, Level CI blocking a merge on a quality score, Agency Mode white-labelling, or page volumes in the hundreds and thousands. Their published monitor tiers cover 100, 500 and 1,500 pages a month; our largest plan audits 100.
Free is $0 and covers the widget on one language for up to 1,000 monthly visitors. Starter is $39 a month and adds widget customization, all 71 languages, daily monitoring of 5 pages and email alerts when a scan finds something new. Pro is $99 a month and adds 25 monitored pages, the on-demand full-site crawl, the AI content review, downloadable compliance reports and 30 days of day-by-day history. Enterprise is $279 a month with 100 monitored pages. Pricing is per website, annual billing costs ten months instead of twelve, and every paid plan starts with a 7-day trial.
Very little, and none of it is used for tracking. The widget stores a visitor's own preferences in their browser and sets no cookies. The only request it makes is a one-pixel beacon used to count monthly visits, and the visitor's IP address is hashed before it is stored, so the raw address is never written to our database. The widget does not read, copy or transmit the content of your pages.
Scans run on Inclusify's own infrastructure in a real Chrome browser, so the page is tested as a visitor's browser renders it rather than as static HTML. We store the findings, not copies of your site: rule identifiers, the selectors and short snippets needed to locate each issue, and the score. On Pro and above the AI review sends targeted material to an AI provider, specifically images that are missing alt text and short label or heading strings, never a dump of your page or your customer data. Inclusify holds no accessibility certification and is not SOC 2 audited, and nothing here should be read as implying otherwise.
Any site where you can add one script tag. There is a native Shopify app with a theme app embed, so Shopify stores install it with a toggle and no code, and documented install steps for WordPress, Magento, BigCommerce, Webflow, Wix and Squarespace. The scanner works against any URL it can reach, and password-protected Shopify stores are handled rather than failed.
Add the Inclusify snippet or install the Shopify app, confirm the widget appears, then remove the other vendor's script. There is no importer, so settings and any dismissed findings do not carry over, and the pages you want monitored are nominated once in the panel. The free plan has no time limit, so you can run both side by side for as long as you want before removing anything.
Make your website accessible today.
Accessibility opens your site to millions more customers - and protects your business while you do it.