AI QA DirectoryReport a change

Comparisons

Deque axe vs Evinced

Deque axe (Accessibility testing with AI) and Evinced (Accessibility testing with AI) differ on 4 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

Deque axe and Evinced, fact by fact, with evidence per cell
FactDeque axeEvinced
Category
Accessibility testing with AI (also MCP servers for testing)
DocumentedSource
Accessibility testing with AI (also MCP servers for testing)
DocumentedSource
Status
Active
DocumentedSource
Active
DocumentedSource
Test creation
Not documented
Not documented
Not documented
Not documented
Test output
Not documented
Not documented
Not documented
Not documented
Surfaces
Web, Mobile native
DocumentedSource
Web, Mobile native
DocumentedSource
Hosting
Cloud, Self-hosted
DocumentedSource
Not documented
Not documented
Pricing model
Free tier, Enterprise quote
DocumentedSource
Enterprise quote
Vendor-statedSource
Published prices
No prices published
DocumentedSource
Not documented
Not documented
Free tier
Yes
DocumentedSource
Not documented
Not documented
CI integrations
GitHub Actions, GitLab, Jenkins, Other
DocumentedSource
Not documented
Not documented
Self-healing
Not documented
Not documented
Not documented
Not documented
Agent integration
Axe MCP Server (analyze and remediate tools) for MCP clients such as Claude Desktop, VS Code with Copilot and Cursor
DocumentedSource
Evinced Web MCP Server and Mobile MCP Server (Android/iOS) for AI coding agents: detect, prioritise and remediate accessibility issues and re-scan to validate fixes
DocumentedSource
Open source
Yes, licence MPL-2.0
DocumentedSource
Not documented
Not documented

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.

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

When each fits

Deque axe

Fits a team that needs cloud and self-hosted deployment. Documented for Deque axe.

Sources: [1]

Evinced

Fits a team that needs web and native mobile testing. Documented for Evinced.

Sources: [1]

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

Sources

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

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

Report a change