A clear answer.
Then you can move on.

A scan covers up to 100 pages. For larger sites you pay extra; how much depends on your plan.

A scan measures what a rule engine can establish, such as contrast, missing labels and ARIA errors. A rule engine does not decide whether your content is understandable or whether your site works with assistive technology: that takes a judgement. The full overview is on About the scanner.

No. Automated scanning finds around 30 to 50 percent of real accessibility problems. An audit adds human judgement: keyboard flows, screen reader tests, meaningful alt text, a logical reading order. Every Wexlo report states which criteria were tested automatically and which need manual checking, so an auditor starts from our evidence instead of from scratch.

Not with the scan. Our scanner never logs in anywhere, so you do not give us a password. If a page sits behind a login, we measure the login screen and your report covers that. From Growth we also measure a test environment that can be reached without logging in. Having pages behind your login assessed is possible on request: a specialist logs in, assesses them by hand and checks them with axe-core. Ask about it and we will see what is possible.

The main findings by email, with criterion, element and one example fix. You do not need to create an account and nothing is required of you.

Since 28 June 2025.

That depends on what you offer to consumers. The law covers, among other things, online shops, consumer banking services, passenger transport, e-books, electronic communications and access to audiovisual media. If you only sell to businesses, your online shop is not covered. Small businesses are exempt if they meet both of these conditions: fewer than 10 employees, and an annual turnover or balance sheet total of no more than 2 million euros. The exemption applies only to services, not to products.

WCAG 2.2 level AA, the technical basis of EN 301 549.

At WCAG 2.2 level AA. That follows the standard: on 2 September 2026 ETSI published EN 301 549 V4.1.1, which refers to WCAG 2.2 instead of 2.1. The reference to the new version has not yet appeared in the Official Journal of the EU under the accessibility directive, so today no standard gives you a presumption of conformity with that directive. The legal weighing stays with you and your lawyer. You can see what changes with 2.2 on the criteria page.

WCAG 3 is still a W3C draft. It does not replace WCAG 2: the W3C itself says WCAG 2 will still be required by different countries for a long time to come. EN 301 549, the European standard we measure against, also refers to WCAG 2. So there is no point in waiting for WCAG 3. We follow the draft and will change how we measure only when the standard changes, not before.

If your service falls under the European Accessibility Act and does not meet the requirements, you report that immediately to the market surveillance authority of every country where you provide it. In that report, describe what is wrong and the measures you are taking. The rules do not apply to every provider in the same way, and the deadline differs per country: most countries do not state a figure at all.

WCAG is an international guideline that uses testable criteria to describe when web content is accessible. The EAA is a European law that has applied since 28 June 2025 and has been transposed into national law in every EU country. The EAA itself does not mention WCAG: the law sets out the accessibility requirements in an annex. WCAG 2.2 level AA is the technical yardstick we measure against.

Two are laws, two are technical standards. The ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act) is a US law; whether and how it applies to a website is decided by US courts case by case. The EAA is the European law for online shops, banking services and passenger transport, among others, and has applied since 28 June 2025. WCAG is the international guideline from the W3C, with test criteria at levels A, AA and AAA. EN 301 549 is a European standard for accessible ICT, which adopts WCAG level AA for websites. Wexlo measures against WCAG 2.2 level AA. We do not give an assessment under the ADA.

No. A widget puts a layer over your site, but does not change the code underneath. WCAG and EN 301 549 test exactly that code: headings, labels, alt text and keyboard operation. On its web accessibility page, the European Commission writes: "Overlays, or any other tools which do not ensure the website itself meets the detailed criteria of the standard, are not an appropriate solution." The sources are on our comparison page.

Yes, through the courts. In June 2026, in summary proceedings, the Caen court ordered Carrefour France to bring itself into line with the accessibility law, at the request of advocacy organisations. The penalty of 500 euros per day only starts six months after the ruling, so around 4 December 2026. What you are building now is an audit trail: when you measured, what you fixed and what is still open. That is not an indemnity, but it is a file.

An agency buys scale for client work, from € 15 per domain per month with a minimum invoice of € 150. A business buys Starter, Growth or Business for its own website or websites, from € 99 per month.

Yes. Every web address is its own domain, including a subdomain: blog.client.example counts separately from client.example. A subdomain has its own content and its own forms, so it gets its own scan history and its own statement. The exception: a test or acceptance environment of an address you have already registered does not count separately.

Yes, with every plan and at no extra cost. Image analysis lets AI assess the meaningful images on your site. It is off by default and you switch it on yourself in the customer portal, because images from your site are sent to an AI model, and that is a choice you should make yourself.

Yes. The one-off report costs € 79 and is deducted if you switch to a subscription within 90 days.

No. Agency is billed monthly; there is no annual plan. Starter, Growth and Business can be billed annually, at ten times the monthly price.

Yes, as a separate one-off service (€199). A specialist assesses up to 5 key pages on the points a rule engine does not decide for you: error handling in forms, contrast on images, whether alt texts are right in content, and the keyboard behaviour of the cookie banner and chat widget. It is a sample, not full coverage and not a certification. Usually within 2 working days, at most 5.

Yes. Business and government customers with a Peppol e-invoicing requirement can turn this on themselves: in the portal, under Billing details, enable the Peppol option and enter your own Peppol scheme and identifier. From your next invoice, we send it over the Peppol network instead of by email.

With a subscription, the customer portal holds your scan history per domain: every finding with the rule, the criterion and the selector, the difference from the previous scan, and the log recording when something was found, handed over and retested. The draft accessibility statement is there too, and the automated test results in it update whenever a new scan runs. With a one-off report you receive the files by email and your report stays in the customer portal for 90 days.

With the agency rate, yes, via a client board with a read-only function per client.

As a CSV, in one click. And with the GitHub integration, Wexlo puts your findings into your own repository as issues. Jira on request.

Wexlo turns a site's findings into issues in the GitHub repository you choose. There is one issue per rule, with the WCAG criterion and the places on the page where the problem is. After that, Wexlo keeps both sides in step. Close an issue in GitHub and the findings in Wexlo are marked resolved. Mark a finding resolved or accepted in Wexlo and the issue closes. A finding you accepted stays accepted, whatever happens in GitHub.

Wexlo updates the integration every fifteen minutes. A new scan or a change in Wexlo usually reaches GitHub within fifteen minutes, and a large sync sometimes takes half an hour. If you don't want to wait, click Sync now in the portal. The other way round, GitHub tells Wexlo itself when you close or reopen an issue. If you connect with a token that cannot create webhooks, you set up that notification once yourself.

Yes. You choose a repository per site. Each site can have its own repository, or several sites can share one; each site then gets its own issues, with a site code in the title. As an agency you connect your own GitHub organisation and, where a client manages their own code, that client's organisation too. Wexlo only works in the repositories you have given it access to.

Nothing extra at Wexlo. Nothing extra at GitHub either: it works on every GitHub plan, including the free one, with private and public repositories. Note that anyone can read the issues in a public repository. You need a repository on github.com with issues turned on that is not archived. To connect the GitHub App you need to be an owner of the GitHub organisation. If your organisation doesn't allow outside apps, you connect with your own token instead. GitHub Enterprise Server and GitHub Enterprise with its own address don't work yet.

90 days.

Go to wexlo.eu/verify and enter the report ID from the cover or footer (format WXL-YYYY-MM-DD-...). Choose the PDF file there: your browser calculates the SHA-256 itself and confirms whether the file is unchanged, without the file ever leaving your computer. If you have the hash but not the file to hand, you can also paste it on its own. No account or login is needed.

In your own language. English, Dutch, French and German are included with every subscription; you set your default in the portal. With Agency you choose the language per domain, so each client gets their own language. With a one-off report you choose them at checkout; the first language is included, each additional language is paid. The scan works on sites in any language.

No. A measurement on a test environment never appears in the statement, the report or the audit trail.

No, the PDF check is not a PDF/UA audit.

Every report carries a report ID that you can verify publicly. A hash shows that a file has not been altered unnoticed; it says nothing about whether the content is correct, and certainly not that a website complies with the law.