AI QA DirectoryReport a change

Comparisons

AudioEye vs Deque axe

AudioEye (Accessibility testing with AI) and Deque axe (Accessibility testing with AI) differ on 5 documented facts below. Each cell shows its evidence level, source and verification date. This page does not rank or rate either tool.

Oldest fact on this page:

Facts side by side

AudioEye and Deque axe, fact by fact, with evidence per cell
FactAudioEyeDeque axe
Category
Accessibility testing with AI (also MCP servers for testing)
DocumentedSource
Accessibility testing with AI (also MCP servers for testing)
DocumentedSource
Status
Active
Vendor-statedSource
Active
DocumentedSource
Test creation
Not documented
Not documented
Not documented
Not documented
Test output
Not documented
Not documented
Not documented
Not documented
Surfaces
Web
DocumentedSource
Web, Mobile native
DocumentedSource
Hosting
Cloud
DocumentedSource
Cloud, Self-hosted
DocumentedSource
Pricing model
Enterprise quote
DocumentedSource
Free tier, Enterprise quote
DocumentedSource
Published prices
Not documented
Not documented
No prices published
DocumentedSource
Free tier
Not documented
Not documented
Yes
DocumentedSource
CI integrations
Not documented
Not documented
GitHub Actions, GitLab, Jenkins, Other
DocumentedSource
Self-healing
Not documented
Not documented
Not documented
Not documented
Agent integration
AudioEye MCP server (@audioeye/testing-sdk-mcp) for Claude Code, Cursor, VS Code, Codex, Gemini CLI, Windsurf, Zed and Claude Desktop
DocumentedSource
Axe MCP Server (analyze and remediate tools) for MCP clients such as Claude Desktop, VS Code with Copilot and Cursor
DocumentedSource
Open source
Not documented
Not documented
Yes, licence MPL-2.0
DocumentedSource

Documented differences

Listed only where both tools document the fact, or where one documents it and the other's documentation does not mention it. Vendor-stated values appear in the table but do not create a difference here.

  • Surfaces: web for AudioEye; web and native mobile for Deque axe. [1][2]
  • Hosting: cloud for AudioEye; cloud and self-hosted for Deque axe. [1][2]
  • Free tier: not documented for AudioEye; available for Deque axe. [1]
  • CI integrations: not documented for AudioEye; GitHub Actions, GitLab, Jenkins and other CI systems for Deque axe. [1]
  • Open source: not documented for AudioEye; MPL-2.0 licence for Deque axe. [1]

When each fits

AudioEye

Fits a team that needs web testing; cloud deployment. Documented for AudioEye.

Sources: [1]

Deque axe

Fits a team that needs native mobile testing; self-hosted deployment. Documented for Deque axe.

Sources: [1] [2]

Drawn from documented scope only. Neither text compares the two tools on quality.

Sources

  1. developer.audioeye.com (AudioEye: Category)
  2. docs.deque.com (Deque axe: Category; Deque axe: Agent integration)
  3. audioeye.com (AudioEye: Status)
  4. deque.com (Deque axe: Status; Deque axe: Pricing model; Deque axe: Published prices; Deque axe: Free tier)
  5. help.audioeye.com (AudioEye: Surfaces; AudioEye: Hosting)
  6. docs.deque.com (Deque axe: Surfaces)
  7. docs.deque.com (Deque axe: Hosting)
  8. audioeye.com (AudioEye: Pricing model)
  9. docs.deque.com (Deque axe: CI integrations)
  10. developer.audioeye.com (AudioEye: Agent integration)
  11. github.com (Deque axe: Open source)

Spotted an outdated or wrong fact about AudioEye vs Deque axe? Send the source and we apply it at the next monthly update.

Report a change