Side by side
Acceris vs Horn
Both stand on accessibility testing software. Which one you can start free with, which one lets you read the code, and what each costs once you pay.
Free plan Web
Acceris combines recurring accessibility monitoring with developer workflow integrations and historical tracking. Teams still need manual review for subjective accessibility requirements.
Visit Acceris Free plan LinuxMacSelf-hosted+2
Horn offers broad PDF/UA checking through free open-source tooling and several deployment formats. It combines automated scans with explicit manual-review reporting and CI/CD outputs for accessibility workflows.
Visit HornThe facts
| Acceris | Horn | |
|---|---|---|
| Free plan | Yes | Yes |
| Open source | Not published | Not published |
| Runs on | Web | Linux, Mac, Self-hosted, Web, Windows |
| Lowest paid plan | Basic: $39 a month | Free or on request |
| Plans published | 4 | 1 |
| Maker | Not published | Not published |
| Website | acceris.eu | horn.report |
| On accessibility testing software | #70 of 169 | #66 of 169 |
Acceris: what it does well
- Covers RGAA 4.1 and WCAG 2.1 AA
- Tracks results across environments
- CI/CD and pull-request integrations
- Exportable accessibility statement
- Free plan for one site
What to know first
- Manual audits remain necessary
- Free plan covers one site
- Paid plans limit projects and scans
Horn: what it does well
- Automates 87 Matterhorn conditions
- Validates PDF/UA-2 with 37 rules
- Runs on major desktop platforms
- Provides SARIF, JSON, JUnit, and text reports
- Supports GitHub Code Scanning uploads
What to know first
- 48 conditions still require human review
- Two conditions have no defined test
- Source installation requires Rust 1.85 or later
- No defined test exists for two conditions