TestParty

Blog

Accessibility Overlay Tools: Complete Comparison of Top 10 Solutions

TestParty
TestParty
April 7, 2025

Accessibility overlays—JavaScript widgets promising automated accessibility—have proliferated in the accessibility market. Organizations considering overlays deserve clear information about how these tools work, what they can and cannot do, and why the accessibility community has raised significant concerns.

This analysis compares leading overlay tools while providing essential context about the overlay approach itself.

What Are Accessibility Overlays?

Accessibility overlays are JavaScript widgets that:

  1. Load on website pages
  2. Display a user-facing accessibility menu
  3. Attempt to apply automated "fixes" to accessibility issues

Common features:

  • Font size adjustment
  • Contrast modification
  • Cursor size changes
  • Reading guides
  • AI-generated alt text
  • ARIA label injection

The promise: Add one line of JavaScript and achieve accessibility compliance.

The reality: Overlays cannot achieve WCAG compliance and have been widely criticized by accessibility professionals and disability advocacy organizations.

Why Overlays Are Problematic

Before comparing individual tools, understanding fundamental overlay limitations is essential.

Technical Limitations

Overlays cannot fix:

  • Keyboard navigation requiring structural changes
  • Meaningful alt text requiring content understanding
  • Proper heading hierarchy requiring document restructuring
  • Form label associations requiring HTML modification
  • Focus management requiring JavaScript architecture changes
  • Reading order determined by DOM structure

Overlays can modify:

  • Visual styling (colors, fonts, cursors)
  • Some ARIA attributes (often incorrectly)
  • CSS properties

Legal Reality

Organizations using overlays have faced lawsuits. Courts have not accepted overlay presence as compliance evidence. Overlay-equipped sites remain subject to litigation.

User Experience

Disability advocacy organizations report overlays often make sites harder to use:

  • Widgets interfere with assistive technology operation
  • AI-generated labels are often wrong or confusing
  • Overlay controls add navigation burden
  • "Fixes" can break existing functionality

Industry Opposition

Major disability organizations oppose overlays:

  • National Federation of the Blind
  • American Council of the Blind
  • Disability advocacy groups worldwide
  • Accessibility professionals

The Overlay False Claims Act, signed by hundreds of accessibility professionals, documents concerns with overlay marketing claims.

Overlay Tool Comparison

Despite concerns, organizations encounter overlay marketing. Understanding individual tools helps evaluate claims.

accessiBe

Market position: Largest overlay vendor

Features:

  • AI-powered remediation
  • User accessibility menu
  • "Compliance" claims
  • Screen reader mode

Pricing: ~$490-$1,490/year based on page count

Criticisms:

  • Multiple lawsuits naming accessiBe sites
  • NFB statement opposing the product
  • AI-generated content quality issues
  • Aggressive marketing criticized

UserWay

Market position: Popular Shopify/WordPress option

Features:

  • Widget with user controls
  • AI-based remediation
  • White-label options
  • Free tier available

Pricing: Free to ~$99/month

Criticisms:

  • Same fundamental limitations
  • Free tier drives adoption without understanding
  • Compliance claims questioned

AudioEye

Market position: Hybrid (overlay + services)

Features:

  • Automated remediation
  • Monitoring dashboard
  • Managed services option
  • More comprehensive than pure overlays

Pricing: $3,000-$50,000+/year

Positioning: Markets as more than overlay, but automated remediation shares limitations.

Equally AI

Market position: AI-first platform

Features:

  • AI assistant (Flowy)
  • Automated remediation
  • Monitoring
  • Enterprise focus

Pricing: Enterprise pricing

Criticisms:

  • AI limitations for accessibility
  • Automated remediation constraints

EqualWeb

Market position: Enterprise focus

Features:

  • AI remediation
  • Monitoring
  • Multiple language support

Pricing: Enterprise

MaxAccess

Market position: Mid-market

Features:

  • Standard overlay functionality
  • User controls

Pricing: Subscription based

True Accessibility

Market position: Smaller player

Features:

  • Standard overlay functionality

allyBot

Market position: Niche

Recite Me

Market position: Language + accessibility

Features:

  • Translation features
  • Reading tools
  • Accessibility adjustments

Differentiation: Focuses on reading assistance more than compliance claims.

Ada by Accessiway

Market position: European market

Comparison Matrix

| Tool       | AI Claims | User Widget | Monitoring | Services | Lawsuits Named |
|------------|-----------|-------------|------------|----------|----------------|
| accessiBe  | High      | Yes         | Limited    | No       | Multiple       |
| UserWay    | Moderate  | Yes         | Limited    | No       | Some           |
| AudioEye   | Moderate  | Yes         | Yes        | Yes      | Some           |
| Equally AI | High      | Yes         | Yes        | Limited  | Fewer (newer)  |
| EqualWeb   | Moderate  | Yes         | Yes        | Limited  | Some           |
| Others     | Varies    | Yes         | Varies     | Varies   | Various        |

What Overlays Actually Do

Visual Adjustments (Legitimate Use)

Overlays can legitimately help users adjust:

  • Text size (though browser controls do this)
  • Color contrast (though OS settings do this)
  • Cursor appearance
  • Reading guides

These are user preference tools, not accessibility compliance.

ARIA Injection (Problematic)

Overlays inject ARIA attributes into pages. Problems:

  • AI may not understand element purpose
  • Incorrect ARIA is worse than no ARIA
  • Conflicts with existing ARIA
  • No understanding of application state

AI-Generated Content (Very Problematic)

AI generates alt text and labels:

  • Cannot understand image context
  • Cannot understand business meaning
  • Produces generic descriptions
  • Often wrong or misleading

Cost Comparison

| Approach           | Annual Cost   | Compliance | Legal Protection |
|--------------------|---------------|------------|------------------|
| accessiBe          | $490-1,490    | No         | No               |
| UserWay Pro        | ~$600-1,200   | No         | No               |
| AudioEye           | $3,000-50,000 | Partial    | Partial          |
| Source remediation | Varies        | Yes        | Yes              |

The real cost: Organizations often spend on overlays, then spend again on actual remediation after overlay limitations become apparent.

What Organizations Should Do Instead

Source Code Remediation

Benefits:

  • Achieves actual compliance
  • Provides legal protection
  • Creates permanent improvements
  • Serves users genuinely

Approach:

  1. Deploy accessibility monitoring (TestParty Spotlight)
  2. Integrate into development (TestParty Bouncer)
  3. Prioritize and remediate issues
  4. Monitor for regressions

If Currently Using an Overlay

Transition approach:

  1. Don't remove overlay immediately (some visual features may help some users)
  2. Deploy monitoring to understand actual accessibility state
  3. Begin source code remediation
  4. As site becomes genuinely accessible, evaluate overlay necessity
  5. Remove overlay once underlying accessibility is solid

Addressing Common Overlay Arguments

"Something is better than nothing"

Reality: Incorrect fixes can be worse than no fixes. Overlays may break existing accessibility, confuse screen readers, or create false confidence that delays actual remediation.

"We don't have developers"

Reality: Organizations with web presences have development resources (internal or contracted). Those resources can implement actual fixes. Overlays don't eliminate the need for fixes—they mask it.

"It's faster"

Reality: Overlays deploy quickly but don't achieve compliance. The time spent on overlays is time not spent on actual remediation. Net effect may be delay.

"It's cheaper"

Reality: Overlay subscriptions are ongoing. Source code fixes are permanent. Multi-year cost of overlays often exceeds remediation investment, with no compliance achieved.

Industry Trajectory

The overlay market is changing:

Legal pressure:

  • Continued lawsuits against overlay-equipped sites
  • Class actions targeting overlay vendors
  • Regulatory skepticism

Market pressure:

  • Disability community opposition
  • Corporate buyer education
  • Procurement teams asking better questions

Vendor evolution:

  • Some vendors pivoting toward actual solutions
  • Hybrid models emerging
  • Marketing claims moderating

Organizations considering overlays should recognize this trajectory and invest in sustainable approaches.

Taking Action

Overlays promise easy accessibility compliance. The promise is false. WCAG compliance requires addressing accessibility at the source code level, not adding browser-layer patches.

For organizations serious about accessibility—whether for legal protection, user experience, or ethical commitment—source code remediation is the only approach that works.

Schedule a TestParty demo and get a 14-day compliance implementation plan.

Stay informed

Accessibility insights delivered
straight to your inbox.

Contact Us

Automate the software work for accessibility compliance, end-to-end.

Empowering businesses with seamless digital accessibility solutions—simple, inclusive, effective.

Book a Demo