tldr: Testsigma includes built-in visual regression testing and WCAG 2.2 accessibility testing (Level A, AA, and AAA). Both run codeless alongside functional tests in the same suite. No separate Percy subscription. No separate Axe setup. The trade-off: dedicated tools like Percy and Applitools offer deeper visual AI, and automated accessibility testing only catches 30-40% of issues.
Introduction
Two types of bugs slip through most test automation setups: visual regressions and accessibility violations.
Visual regressions are the "something looks wrong" bugs. A CSS change shifts a button off-screen. A font doesn't load. A layout breaks on mobile. Functional tests won't catch these because the page technically works. The button just isn't where it should be.
Accessibility violations are harder to spot and increasingly expensive to ignore. The European Accessibility Act takes effect in 2025. ADA lawsuits continue to rise. If your app doesn't meet WCAG 2.2 standards, you're carrying legal risk.
Testsigma builds both visual and accessibility testing into its codeless platform. If you're currently using Percy by BrowserStack for visual testing or Axe for accessibility auditing, Testsigma's approach lets you consolidate. This guide covers both capabilities as of 2026.
Visual regression testing
How it works
Testsigma captures screenshots during test execution and compares them against baseline images.
First run: screenshots become the baseline. Every run after that: pixel-by-pixel comparison against the baseline. Differences get highlighted. You review them and either approve (if the change was intentional) or fail the test (if it wasn't).
What makes it useful
The real value isn't the screenshot comparison itself. It's that visual checks run as part of your functional test execution. You don't maintain a separate visual test suite. You don't configure a separate CI pipeline for Percy. You add visual checkpoints to existing tests and they run in the same suite.
Cross-browser visual validation catches the "looks fine in Chrome, broken in Safari" issues. Cross-device testing catches responsive layout problems across screen sizes. After a CSS or branding change, visual regression tells you what actually changed vs. what you intended to change.
Where it's limited
Dedicated tools like Percy and Applitools use AI-powered visual comparison and DOM-based diffing. Testsigma's approach is more basic: pixel-level comparison. This works for catching obvious regressions but may generate more false positives from anti-aliasing differences or minor rendering variations.
If visual testing is a primary concern (design-heavy apps, pixel-perfect requirements), Percy or Applitools will serve you better. If you want basic visual regression without adding another tool, Testsigma covers it.
Accessibility testing
WCAG 2.2 compliance checking
Testsigma scans pages during test execution against WCAG 2.2, the latest standard (published 2023):
- Level A: Basic requirements. Alt text, form labels, keyboard navigation.
- Level AA: The standard most companies target. Color contrast, text resizing, consistent navigation. This is what most legal compliance frameworks require.
- Level AAA: The highest bar. Sign language interpretation, extended audio descriptions, simplified language. Few sites target this fully.
What it checks
Color contrast ratios, alt text on images, form labels for screen readers, keyboard focus order, ARIA attributes, heading hierarchy, link text clarity, and zoom/reflow behavior. The checks run codeless. Add accessibility steps through the NLP interface, and Testsigma handles the scanning.
The 30-40% reality
Here's the honest part: automated accessibility testing catches about 30-40% of real accessibility issues. The rest requires manual testing. Screen reader behavior, cognitive load assessment, real-world keyboard navigation patterns. No tool catches everything.
Testsigma's automated checks are a solid first layer. They catch the low-hanging fruit: missing alt text, broken form labels, bad contrast ratios. But don't treat passing automated checks as "we're WCAG compliant." You'll still need accessibility experts for full compliance.
Why it still matters
Even at 30-40% coverage, automated accessibility testing in CI catches regressions before they ship. A developer removes an alt tag. A designer picks a low-contrast color. An engineer skips a form label. These get flagged automatically on every build, every PR.
The alternative is finding these in production, in a lawsuit, or in a user complaint. Catching them in CI is cheaper.
Visual & accessibility testing comparison
| Capability | Testsigma | BrowserStack (Percy) | Applitools | Axe (Deque) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Visual regression | Built-in | Dedicated tool (Percy) | AI-powered visual AI | No |
| Accessibility testing | Built-in (WCAG 2.2) | Separate product | No | Dedicated tool |
| Codeless | Yes | No (code integration) | No (code integration) | Browser extension / CLI |
| Runs with functional tests | Yes | Separate test runs | Separate test runs | Standalone scans |
| WCAG levels | A, AA, AAA | N/A | N/A | A, AA, AAA |
| Cost | Included in platform | Additional Percy cost | Separate license | Free (basic), paid (enterprise) |
Who should use Testsigma for this
Teams that want "good enough" visual and accessibility coverage without extra tools. If you're not running any visual or accessibility testing today, Testsigma gets you from zero to something useful with no additional cost or configuration.
Teams consolidating their testing stack. If you're already evaluating Testsigma for functional testing, visual and accessibility checks come free. That's two fewer vendor contracts.
Teams in regulated industries. The WCAG 2.2 compliance checking provides automated audit evidence. Combined with Testsigma's CI/CD integrations, you get continuous compliance monitoring.
Who should use dedicated tools
Design-heavy applications where pixel-perfect rendering matters. Percy and Applitools have better visual AI.
Organizations pursuing full WCAG compliance should pair Testsigma's automated checks with manual accessibility audits and tools like Axe for deeper remediation guidance.
FAQs
Can Testsigma replace Percy? For basic visual regression in a codeless environment, yes. For advanced visual AI with DOM-based comparison, Percy or Applitools is still stronger.
Does accessibility testing need extra setup? No. Add accessibility check steps through the NLP interface. Testsigma handles scanning and reporting.
Which WCAG version is supported? WCAG 2.2 (latest), across Level A, AA, and AAA.
Can I run these in CI/CD? Yes. Visual and accessibility checks are part of standard test execution. They trigger through any CI/CD integration.
Will automated accessibility testing make my app compliant? No. Automated tests catch 30-40% of issues. Full compliance requires manual testing by accessibility experts. But automated checks in CI prevent regressions and catch common violations early.
Conclusion
Testsigma's built-in visual and accessibility testing won't replace dedicated tools for teams with advanced needs. But for most teams, it provides useful coverage at zero additional cost. The fact that visual and accessibility checks run inside existing functional test suites, with no extra tools or configuration, is the real value. Start here. If you outgrow it, add Percy or Applitools later. See our guides on Testsigma features and Testsigma reviews.