As the June 28 compliance deadline for the European Accessibility Act (EAA) is merely days away, financial organisations and other businesses across the EU are intensifying their focus on digital accessibility.
The EAA, which requires digital products and services in the EU to be accessible to people with disabilities, is pushing accessibility up the corporate agenda, thereby increasing the need to test and monitor software systems for strict accessibility criteria.
A new report highlights these key trends and explains how companies are preparing, and where they continue to fall short.
U.S.-based testing firm Applause sent QA Financial its latest State of Digital Quality in Accessibility report, based on a survey of more than 1,500 professionals.
Referring to how companies are progressing toward the EAA deadline, New Hampshire-based Paul Hoffman, senior manager at Applause, stressed that many challenges remain.
In fact, two thirds say they lack enough internal expertise and resources to test for accessibility on an ongoing basis without external help, he shared.
While reported compliance with the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines is improving, 54.3%, up from 41.7% last year and 30.4% three years ago, Hoffman pointed to significant variation in implementation and capability.
“There is a disconnect between prioritisation and delivery,” he said, highlighting that although accessibility is often cited as a high priority, many companies remain underprepared.
In fact, only 10% said they have plenty of in-house expertise/resources.
“There is a disconnect between prioritisation and delivery.”
– Paul Hoffman
The report also pointed to positive shifts in developer behaviour. In response to how often engineers write code with accessibility in mind, the data shows that in 2025, 30% said ‘often”; and… 29% said “always”, up significantly from 2022 figures.
Yet when it comes to testing approaches, Hoffman said the data suggests organisations are leaning too heavily on automation.
“Tool finds too many false positives,” he noted, quoting the most common complaint among those dissatisfied with automated accessibility tools.
Other frequently cited issues include: “Tool finds too many low severity issues,” and “Tool isn’t finding blockers.”
Despite the surge in AI-based testing tools, manual testing remains crucial. 70% of organisations continue to use manual methods to identify accessibility issues.
But testing isn’t enough if the right voices aren’t included, the Applause manager warned.
“Nearly a fifth of those who state that their organization practices inclusive design report that they do not directly engage with people with disabilities.,” Hoffman said.
This gap is echoed in AI development practices: “Do you specifically seek input from underrepresented viewpoints like people with disabilities to test your AI/Gen AI products?” Yes said 27.6%.”
Accessibility, Hoffman emphasised, must be part of the full development lifecycle.
“Developing any digital experience, particularly new AI-based features, requires the same level of input from persons with disabilities,” he said.
“Organisations must invest in ensuring that diverse input is integrated across the entire product development lifecycle,” Hoffman concluded.
Why not become a QA Financial subscriber?
It’s entirely FREE
* Receive our weekly newsletter every Wednesday * Get priority invitations to our Forum events *
REGULATION & COMPLIANCE
Looking for more news on regulations and compliance requirements driving developments in software quality engineering at financial firms? Visit our dedicated Regulation & Compliance page here.
READ MORE
- Leapwork engineering head: Why test automation so often fails to deliver
- World Economic Forum warns financial sector must strengthen AI risk controls
- How Banca Progetto is hard-wiring quality into Italy’s digital banking space
- How Wealthsimple builds quality into the product, not around it
- Digital revamp puts spotlight on internal controls at China Construction Bank
WATCH NOW
