Accessibility Report Generator

You can export as PDF for a professional layout to hand to a client or stakeholder, Excel for detailed data across multiple sheets that a team can filter and assign, HTML for publishing on an intranet, or Markdown for a repository or docs site. Every format includes the summary statistics, the detailed violation listings, and the recommendations, so the choice is about who is reading it rather than what it contains.

Yes. The generator accepts violation data from JSON files, including the output formats produced by axe-core, WAVE, and other common testing tools. Importing means you do not retype findings, which is where transcription errors normally creep in. You can also build a report manually if your findings came from a manual audit rather than a scanner, which is usually the case for the more serious issues.

Organisation and scope details, summary statistics broken down by severity (critical, serious, moderate, and minor), the detailed violation listing with the WCAG success criterion each one maps to, recommendations, and suggested next steps. Every section is editable, so you can cut what does not apply and expand what matters to your audience.

Severity should reflect user impact, not how hard the fix is. A useful rule: critical means a user cannot complete the task at all (a keyboard trap, an unlabelled checkout button), serious means they can complete it but only with significant difficulty, moderate means real friction with a workaround available, and minor means a defect worth fixing that rarely blocks anyone. Ranking by impact rather than effort keeps the report honest and stops easy-but-cosmetic items crowding out blockers.

No. Automated testing reliably catches only a portion of WCAG failures and cannot judge whether alt text is meaningful, whether focus order preserves meaning, or whether an error message actually helps someone recover. A report built purely from scanner output should say so plainly in its methodology section. For a report that supports a conformance claim you need a manual pass with a keyboard and a screen reader on a representative sample of pages and flows.

No, though they are often confused. This produces an audit report: what is broken, how badly, and what to do about it, aimed at the team doing the work. A VPAT is a specific vendor-supplied template, and the completed document is called an Accessibility Conformance Report, which walks every applicable criterion and states supports, partially supports, or does not support. Procurement usually asks for the latter. An audit report like this is normally the evidence you draw on to fill one in accurately.

Decide before you export, because it changes what to include. Developers need the selector, the failing code, and the criterion. Designers need the pattern and the visual rule. Executives and clients need the severity counts, the risk, and the trend, not a list of CSS selectors. The Excel export suits triage and assignment; the PDF suits a summary for someone who will read it once. Producing two exports from the same data is usually better than one document that half-serves both audiences.

Yes, the accessibility report generator is completely free, with no registration or payment required.