AI-Augmented FinTech. Intelligence that compounds.
Oxvelo Scoring Methodology · Rubric v1How every oxvelo compliance score is calculated
The same published standard sits behind the free scanner, the compliance badge, and every study we release. Here it is in full — so you never have to take a score on faith.
How a scan works
The scanner loads a site's homepage and evaluates eleven characteristics of its HTML — each one a concrete, checkable property that maps to a recognized accessibility requirement. Points are awarded per check and sum to a score out of 100. Coverage checks (images, form fields, links, buttons) award points proportionally: if 8 of 10 images carry alt text, the check earns 80% of its weight.
Two scanning modes exist. Published studies use a full browser (rendered DOM, after JavaScript). The automated hourly watcher reads served HTML before JavaScript runs, which can score JavaScript-heavy sites differently — every oxvelo publication states which mode produced its numbers.
The rubric: 11 checks, 100 points
| Check | Weight | WCAG | Why it matters |
|---|---|---|---|
| Image alt text | 20 | 1.1.1 | The most-cited failure in accessibility demand letters. Without alt text, images simply vanish for blind users. |
| Form field labels | 15 | 3.3.2 · 4.1.2 | Unlabeled fields make checkout, search, and contact forms unusable with a screen reader — and appear constantly in lawsuits. |
| Page language declared | 10 | 3.1.1 | Screen readers choose their voice from this attribute; without it, every word can be mispronounced. |
| Mobile viewport | 10 | 1.4.4 · 1.4.10 | Without it, zooming and reflow break on phones — where most traffic lives. |
| Single H1 heading | 10 | 1.3.1 · 2.4.6 | Heading navigation is the primary way screen-reader users skim a page. One clear H1 anchors the whole structure. |
| Link names | 10 | 2.4.4 | "Click here" without context strands users who navigate by link list. |
| Page title | 5 | 2.4.2 | The first thing announced on page load; identifies the tab and the site. |
| Button names | 5 | 4.1.2 | Icon-only buttons announce as just "button" — purpose unknown. |
| Main landmark | 5 | 1.3.1 · 2.4.1 | Lets assistive technology jump straight to the content, skipping repeated navigation. |
| Character encoding | 5 | — | Prevents garbled text in names, prices, and non-English content. Robustness best practice. |
| Meta description | 5 | — | Context in search results and link previews. Not a WCAG criterion — disclosed as a best-practice check. |
Weights follow user impact and legal exposure: alt text and form labels carry the most points because they dominate both real screen-reader breakage and the defects cited in demand letters. Scoring specifics: the H1 check awards 10 for exactly one H1, 5 for multiple, 0 for none; a page with no form fields earns full label points.
Tiers
Sites scoring 85 or better ("Gold and above") qualify for the verifiable oxvelo Compliance Badge. Below 55 is reported as Needs Work. Tier thresholds are part of the versioned rubric and change only with a version bump.
What automated checks cannot see
Only a minority of WCAG success criteria are automatically testable. This rubric measures the checkable foundations — it cannot judge color contrast in images, caption quality, keyboard focus order, or whether alt text is accurate rather than merely present. A high score is necessary but not sufficient for full accessibility, and no score is a legal determination of compliance with any statute.
Versioning
This is Rubric v1, in effect since July 2026 and used by every oxvelo score published since. Any future change to checks, weights, or thresholds will be published here as a new version with a change log — scores are only ever compared within the same rubric version.
Read the July 2026 Compliance Report → · Open data package (CC BY 4.0)