To save this report as a PDF, use your browser's print feature (Ctrl/Cmd+P).

The ADA Title II web rule sets a 26 April 2027 deadline for public entities; WCAG 2.1 AA is the de facto standard for the private sector.

Executive Summary

These two indicators are independent: the measured score is calculated only from automatically detected findings — self-declared criteria never affect it.

21 violations were found across 5 pages.

4 real WCAG violation type(s) (21 occurrences) + 0 improvement suggestion type(s) (0 elements, not a WCAG requirement). The accessibility score is calculated only from real WCAG violations.

How the score is calculated: the score is a criterion conformance ratio — the number of criteria met, divided by the number of criteria we were able to evaluate. A criterion is either met or not met; how many findings sit under it, and how severe they are, does not change the score. This is because regulatory conformance is binary: there is no degree of conformance called "I only violated it a little". A criterion we did not measure is not counted as met; where we could not measure but could ask you, your answer is used, and an unanswered question does not count toward the score. Severity and finding counts are not lost — they drive a separate "Remaining Work" indicator and the fix ordering. The two numbers must be read together: a high conformance ratio does not mean there is little work behind it. No score other than 100 means conformance has been achieved — see the conformance explanation in the Executive Summary.

Your Next Points

1. 2.4.11 — Focus Not Obscured (Minimum) (WCAG 2.2): closing the findings under this criterion raises the score by 1.9 points (1 finding).
2. 1.3.1 — Info and Relationships: closing the findings under this criterion raises the score by 1.9 points (20 findings).

Elements Whose Contrast Needs Checking

On 3 elements the text/background contrast could not be measured automatically — a background image, a gradient or overlapping elements make the background colour impossible to determine reliably.

Visually confirm that the text on these elements is legible against its background. WCAG 1.4.3 requires a contrast ratio of at least 4.5:1 for normal text and 3:1 for large text.

• .max-w-4xl > .text-navy-600.text-sm — 2
• .max-w-4xl > .text-navy-600 — 1
• .max-w-4xl.sm\:justify-between.sm\:flex-row > .text-navy-600 — 1

Estimated Share of Affected Visitors

An estimated 6% of visitors may be affected by these issues.

This figure is a rough estimate based on the World Health Organization's estimate that roughly 16% of the global population lives with some form of disability, combined with the severity of the detected violations; it is not a precise measurement.

Fix These 5 First

The 5 highest-priority issue types by legal risk × fix type — see the full list in "Findings" below.

1 issue type(s) are CSS-level (single stylesheet), 3 are component-level (template change), 0 require new interaction logic (development). This is not a time estimate — we don't know the size of your team.

Legal Status

The ADA Title II web rule sets a 26 April 2027 deadline for public entities serving 50,000+ people. There is NO fixed statutory deadline for the private sector (Title III) — non-compliance is tested through litigation, with WCAG 2.1 AA treated as the de facto standard.

Of 4 distinct issue types, 1 criteria are Level A (minimum compliance), 1 are Level AA — Level A violations are the priority.

The amounts and dates in this section are based on the relevant legislation; consult your legal counsel for a definitive assessment.

Findings

Each card shows only the WCAG criterion code; official references (for TR, the questions from the Turkish Ministry of Family and Social Services' "Web and Mobile App Accessibility Checklist - Level A"; for the EU, EN 301 549; for the US, ADA/WCAG 2.1 AA) and automation-coverage labels (Automatic/Partial/Manual) are collected once in a single table in "Appendix: Scope and Method".

Findings Index

The table below lists every issue type found in this audit, first by impact level (Critical → Serious → Moderate → Minor), then by occurrence count descending within each level — nothing is truncated, this is the complete list. Click a row to jump to its detail card.

<a href="/legal#privacy-policy" class="hover:text-accent-600">Privacy and Data Processing Policy</a>

Define `scroll-padding-top`/`scroll-padding-bottom` on the root element so fixed-position (fixed/sticky) bars don't cover focused content — the browser's focus and anchor scrolling respect these values.

The table below summarizes Moderate and Minor issue types — full detail for each row (including every instance's own location, evidence, and fix suggestion) is in the attached CSV file.

Improvement Suggestions (Not a WCAG Requirement)

The following are axe-core's "best-practice" rules — they are not a definitive WCAG success criterion violation and are not included in the accessibility score. They can still improve the user experience, so they are listed separately here.

No improvement suggestions were detected.

Items Needing Review

Our automated tools could not reach a definitive verdict on the items below. For example, the contrast of text over a gradient or image background cannot be computed mathematically.

These items are not violations and are not included in your accessibility score. They need a visual review for a definitive result — the table shows where each item is and why no verdict was possible.

We also show what we could not measure — silently skipping a criterion would be more misleading than making it look measured.

Self-Declared Criteria

Certain WCAG 2.2 success criteria cannot be reliably verified by automated tools (e.g. "do captions include speaker changes") — these items are answered by you after the automated scan completes, not during it. The statuses below are kept separate from the automated findings, as your own declaration.

All 49 WCAG 2.2 A/AA criteria addressed — 47 automated, 0 customer declaration, 2 not applicable.

Appendix: Scope and Method

This section is the evidence for how the audit was performed — which pages were scanned, which tools were used, what could not be scanned, and why.

Criteria that could not be measured in this audit

• 2.3.1 — the automated check covering this criterion (flickerCheck) did not run in this audit (kademe bütçesi bu kontrolü kapatmış (runFlickerCheck=false)). The absence of findings does not mean the criterion is met.

Pages sampled in the focus-obscured check

On the pages below, the number of keyboard-reachable elements exceeded what can be tested one by one, so a sample was taken from the start, middle and end of the page. The absence of a finding on these pages does not mean there is no problem — the same issue may exist on the elements that were not tested.

• https://scoreba.com/ — 12 of 41 focusable elements checked

We detected 5 form(s) on your site. Every one of them was examined structurally (error prevention step, redundant entry, labels and instructions). The two checks that require actually submitting a form — whether error messages are descriptive, and whether errors are indicated by colour alone — run on the first safe form only; forms that could trigger an irreversible action (payment, order, registration) are deliberately left untouched. For those two checks the result is a sample, not a full measurement.

What We Detected on Your Site

The counts below show the scope of the audit — they are not proof of compliance (e.g. "3 forms found" does not mean those forms are accessible). Compliance findings are reported separately in the sections above.

• 158 paragraph(s)
• 69 heading(s)
• 65 interactive component(s)
• 32 internal link(s)
• 24 list(s)
• 15 labeled form component(s)
• 10 required field(s)
• 9 navigation section(s)
• 6 table(s)
• 6 data table(s)
• 5 form(s)
• 5 verified bypass mechanism (e.g. skip-to-content link)
• 3 field(s) expecting a specific format
• 2 non-text content item(s) (image/video/audio/icon)

Findings in Interactive States (13 triggers tested)

30 candidate triggers were found, 13 were confirmed as genuine triggers (a meaningful change was observed on the page after clicking), and 13 were fully tested.

Most automated scanners only check a page's initial static state. The findings below were detected after activating triggers on the page — modals, dropdown menus, tabs, accordions — and switching them to their open state; they are not visible in a static scan.

No additional findings were detected in the interactive states tested.

Display Mode Findings

The findings below were not detected in the page's default appearance — they were detected while a specific user preference mode was active (Windows high contrast, reduced motion, 200% zoom, or dark mode) — they apply to visitors using those modes.

No additional findings were detected in the display modes tested.

Keyboard Task Flow

Each page's primary task (product: select variant→add to cart; category: open filter→select→apply; form: fill fields→reach the submit button; other: reach a sub-page from the main navigation) was attempted with keyboard alone (Tab/Shift+Tab/Enter/Space/arrows). Unlike single-element testing, this shows whether the visitor can actually complete the task.

Screen Reader Transcript

Below is a transcript generated from selected pages' accessibility tree, in the order a screen reader user would hear it (each line: role + accessible name). This concretely shows what your site "sounds like" to a screen reader user.

Transcript for https://scoreba.com/ (first 71 lines):

1. banner
2. link: Scoreba
3. navigation
4. link: Pricing
5. link: Free Pre-Analysis
6. link: Contact
7. navigation: Account
8. link: Log In
9. link: Sign up
10. main
11. link: Run Free Pre-Analysis
12. link: See Pricing
13. figure: This is an illustrative sample — not a real scan result.
14. textbox: Site URL (required)
15. button: Analyze
16. list: Compliance Standards
17. region: Platform stats
18. paragraph
19. table: Your Challenge / How We Help
20. rowgroup
21. row: Your Challenge How We Help
22. columnheader: Your Challenge
23. columnheader: How We Help
24. rowgroup
25. row: Avoiding legal non-compliance risk and potential fines Automated scanning mapped to the official checklist surfaces risk areas up front
26. cell: Avoiding legal non-compliance risk and potential fines
27. cell: Automated scanning mapped to the official checklist surfaces risk areas up front
28. row: Manual audits are expensive and slow Free pre-analysis in 2 minutes, with a tier and price estimate in minutes
29. cell: Manual audits are expensive and slow
30. cell: Free pre-analysis in 2 minutes, with a tier and price estimate in minutes
31. row: No in-house accessibility expertise Every finding comes with a concrete fix suggestion and an official criterion reference
32. cell: No in-house accessibility expertise
33. cell: Every finding comes with a concrete fix suggestion and an official criterion reference
34. row: Your site keeps changing — a one-time audit isn't enough Monthly automatic monitoring rescans only what changed, reporting what improved or regressed
35. cell: Your site keeps changing — a one-time audit isn't enough
36. cell: Monthly automatic monitoring rescans only what changed, reporting what improved or regressed
37. row: You're losing visitors who can't access your site About 16% of the world's population (1.3 billion people) lives with some form of disability (World Health Organization estimate) — an accessible site reaches that audience too
38. cell: You're losing visitors who can't access your site
39. cell: About 16% of the world's population (1.3 billion people) lives with some form of disability (World Health Organization estimate) — an accessible site reaches that audience too
40. row: You want better search engine visibility Semantic HTML, image alt text, and heading structure improve both accessibility and SEO
41. cell: You want better search engine visibility
42. cell: Semantic HTML, image alt text, and heading structure improve both accessibility and SEO
43. region: Why we do this
44. region: Why You Can Trust Our Approach
45. link: View the Current Self-Audit Report →
46. link: See the Scope and Limits Page →
47. region: Frequently Asked Questions
48. textbox: Site URL (required)
49. button: Analyze
50. textbox: Full name
51. textbox: Email (required)
52. textbox: Site URL (optional)
53. textbox: Your message (required)
54. button: Send Message
55. contentinfo
56. navigation: Product → 5 links
57. navigation: Resources
58. link: Official WCAG 2.2 Guidelines (W3C)
59. link: Scope and Limits
60. navigation: Compliance Standards
61. navigation: Contact
62. link: [email protected]
63. navigation: Legal
64. link: Terms of Service
65. link: Privacy and Data Processing Policy
66. alert
67. region: Cookie Policy
68. paragraph
69. link: Cookie Policy
70. button: Essential Only
71. button: Accept All

Transcript for https://scoreba.com/giris (first 12 lines):

1. main
2. textbox: Email (required)
3. textbox: Password (required)
4. button: Log In
5. paragraph
6. link: Sign up
7. alert
8. region: Cookie Policy
9. paragraph
10. link: Cookie Policy
11. button: Essential Only
12. button: Accept All

Transcript for https://scoreba.com/kayit (first 17 lines):

1. main
2. textbox: Email (required)
3. textbox: Password (at least 8 characters) (required)
4. textbox: The site you want to audit (required)
5. combobox: Your country (required) → 153 options
6. checkbox: Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.
7. link: Terms of Service
8. link: Privacy Policy
9. button: Create Account
10. paragraph
11. link: Log in
12. alert
13. region: Cookie Policy
14. paragraph
15. link: Cookie Policy
16. button: Essential Only
17. button: Accept All

Coverage Table Summary

Of 55 WCAG 2.2 criteria, 8 are fully automatic, 45 are partial, and 2 are manual. Full coverage table: scoreba.com/coverage

Criterion → Official Reference Mapping

The official checklist equivalents for the 2 criteria with findings in this audit are in the attached table file. Each finding card also carries its own reference.