What AudioEye does well
- Real human audit on top of the overlay
Where AudioEye falls short
Every accessibility vendor has a target customer and a target solution. AudioEye's shape works for some teams and badly for others. The points below come up most often when buyers move off AudioEye and what they wish they had asked sooner.
- Same overlay legal exposure
- Cost grows with site size
- Fixes happen in their pipeline, not yours
Why teams pick Certvo instead
- Fixes returned as code patches applied in your repo — no offshore pipeline
- No per-page pricing creep as your site grows
- Transparent audit methodology — same axe-core engine, visible results
Try a free public scan on the same URL you would test with AudioEye. Compare what each tool says is wrong and how each proposes to fix it.
When you should still pick the other tool
Bluntly: if the only thing you need is a visible widget on your site (e.g. as part of a settlement consent decree that names a specific overlay product), an overlay vendor is the path of least resistance. Certvo does not ship a widget. We give you patches; the widget is only a UI for the audit.
If you have an enterprise procurement process that already has a long-running contract with a competitor and the buying motion would take six months to switch, you can use Certvo alongside as the audit-and-fix tool while the widget keeps sitting on the page.
Frequently asked questions
What does AudioEye's managed plan include?
AudioEye's managed plans start around $490/month and include the overlay widget plus periodic human-reviewed fixes delivered by their remediation team. The fixes are applied in their pipeline and injected at runtime — meaning they are not in your source code repository. Your codebase remains unchanged, which creates a dependency on AudioEye's ongoing service to maintain compliance.
Has AudioEye's overlay been challenged in court?
AudioEye has faced the same legal exposure as other overlay vendors — the widget's presence does not automatically produce ADA compliance. Several ADA complaints have named sites using AudioEye. AudioEye has also engaged in litigation itself as a plaintiff in patent disputes. The legal environment around overlays remains unsettled, but the dominant trend in US federal courts is to reject the proposition that an overlay satisfies the ADA.