asqav vs AudioEye
Side-by-side comparison of features, pricing, and ratings
asqav or AudioEye: which should you choose?
| Dimension | asqav | AudioEye |
|---|---|---|
| What it does | Signed, SHA-256-chained audit receipts for AI agent actions | Managed WCAG 2.2 A/AA monitoring, fixes and legal coverage for websites |
| Pricing model | Freemium with a 1,000-signature daily cap on Free; Pro overage rates to confirm | Paid, quote-based managed service with Assurance legal coverage |
| Core technology | ML-DSA-65 (FIPS 204) post-quantum signing, out-of-process trust boundary | Automated fixes plus certified experts writing into page code |
| Verification / detection | Offline and air-gapped verification via public key snapshot (SDK 0.6.0), no Asqav account needed | Claims detection of up to 253% more issues than other automated scanners |
| Integrations | LangChain, LlamaIndex, CrewAI, Claude Code, OpenAI Agents, Vercel AI SDK and more | WordPress, Drupal, Joomla, Shopify, AEM, Sitecore, Jira |
| Standard/regime alignment | EU AI Act Art. 12, DORA, SEC 17a-4, HIPAA, NYDFS 500 receipt fields | WCAG 2.2 A/AA with VPAT/ACR output |
These aren't alternatives — they occupy different budget lines entirely. Buy Asqav if you need cryptographically signed, independently verifiable records of what AI agents did, especially where regulators or counterparties must check those records without trusting you. Buy AudioEye if your website has accessibility exposure and you want an outside party to monitor, fix and defend it. If you somehow have both problems, you'd purchase both and never compare them side by side.
Asqav gives AI agents signed audit-trail receipts with ML-DSA-65 signing and verification that needs no Asqav account
Visit Website
Managed ADA and WCAG 2.2 remediation with automated fixes, expert corrections, and legal coverage
Visit WebsiteHow do asqav and AudioEye compare feature by feature?
Asqav is an evidence layer: it instruments agent actions and emits three-phase receipts (intent, policy decision, outcome fingerprint), each signed with ML-DSA-65 and chained by SHA-256 so tampering with earlier entries breaks verification. Signing happens out of process in a trust boundary, which is the vendor's answer to a compromised agent forging its own history. Verification is decentralized by design — a public verification page and SDK check work without an Asqav account, and SDK 0.6.0 snapshots the public key directory for offline/air-gapped checks. It also ships guardrails with an approvals queue and quarantine mode. AudioEye is a website remediation service: a snippet or CMS plugin drives 24/7 monitoring, automated fixes on up to 50% of detected issues within minutes, and certified experts writing corrections directly into page code, backed by an agentic audit layer, an accessibility testing SDK, and VPAT/ACR documentation. The feature sets share zero overlap — one produces signed machine-action records, the other produces accessible web pages. The only conceptual adjacency is compliance evidence: Asqav's receipts map to EU AI Act, DORA and SEC recordkeeping, while AudioEye's audits and ACRs serve procurement and ADA claims.
Which is cheaper, asqav or AudioEye?
Asqav is freemium with a Free tier capped at 1,000 signatures per day — fine for evaluation or low-volume instrumentation, but multi-step workflows will hit the cap, and buyers should confirm Pro overage rates before committing. Entry is trivial via pip install asqav or npm install @asqav/sdk, so cost of trying is effectively zero. AudioEye is a paid, quote-based managed service; nothing in the data gives a list price. What you're buying is labor plus exposure transfer: continuous monitoring, expert-deployed fixes, and AudioEye Assurance, which pays coverage on certified pages when a valid legal claim lands, alongside claim validation, custom legal responses and expert testimony. That structuring means AudioEye pricing scales with site size, change frequency and the risk appetite you're underwriting — the opposite of a per-signature meter. Budgets don't compete: Asqav sits in a security/audit tooling line item, AudioEye in a marketing/compliance-services line item. Neither product's cost informs the other's negotiation.
Who should pick asqav, and who should pick AudioEye?
- AI platform team facing EU AI Act or DORA recordkeeping reviewsPick: asqav
Receipt fields map to those regimes, and out-of-process ML-DSA-65 signing plus offline verification lets regulators check chains without an Asqav account.
- Security team running agent guardrails and approvalsPick: asqav
The approvals queue and quarantine mode come with signed evidence behind each policy decision, so gating actions produces a verifiable trail.
- Large e-commerce site with fast-changing content and ADA exposurePick: AudioEye
24/7 monitoring plus expert-deployed fixes and Assurance coverage on certified pages fits teams without in-house accessibility staff.
- Enterprise responding to procurement accessibility requirementsPick: AudioEye
Expert audits against WCAG 2.2 A/AA with VPAT/ACR output is exactly the documentation government and enterprise bids demand.
- Engineering team wanting accessibility checks in CIPick: AudioEye
The Accessibility Testing SDK and MCP at-source fix suggestions are the relevant pieces — though code-native teams like axe are explicitly outside AudioEye's fit.
Frequently Asked Questions
asqav vs AudioEye: which should you choose?
These aren't alternatives — they occupy different budget lines entirely. Buy Asqav if you need cryptographically signed, independently verifiable records of what AI agents did, especially where regulators or counterparties must check those records without trusting you. Buy AudioEye if your website has accessibility exposure and you want an outside party to monitor, fix and defend it. If you somehow have both problems, you'd purchase both and never compare them side by side.
Can Asqav receipts make my agents legally compliant?
No — Asqav states a receipt does not establish legal compliance. Receipts are tamper-evident evidence; the compliance determination stays with you.
Does verifying an Asqav receipt require paying Asqav?
No. The public verification page and SDK check work without an Asqav account, and SDK 0.6.0 supports offline verification from a public key directory snapshot.
Who actually fixes accessibility problems under AudioEye?
Automation handles up to 50% of detected issues within minutes; certified experts write and deploy the remaining custom fixes directly into page code.
Does AudioEye remove my legal risk entirely?
AudioEye Assurance pays coverage on pages the vendor certifies when a valid legal claim lands, and bundles claim validation and expert testimony — but coverage is tied to certified pages.
Why doesn't Asqav do tracing dashboards?
It's scoped as an evidence layer; the vendor points teams wanting traces, spans and latency dashboards to Langfuse or LangSmith instead.
Which CMS platforms does AudioEye support?
WordPress, Drupal, Joomla, Shopify, Magento, Salesforce, Sitecore and Adobe Experience Manager, plus Jira for workflow.
Does Asqav cover AI coding agents?
Yes — code-authorship receipts give AI coding agents a signed, chained record of authorship, and Claude Code and Codex are listed integrations.
Is AudioEye suitable for a small site?
The vendor's own guidance says small sites where the free scanner plus a one-off audit satisfies the requirement don't need the managed service.
What else are asqav and AudioEye compared with?
These are not competitors — buying one says nothing about the other. Sentry is for the engineering team that needs to see why production broke; AudioEye is for the compliance/legal/marketing function
These two don't compete — buying one tells you nothing about whether to buy the other, and no realistic buyer shortlists them together. Vercel is infrastructure for shipping and running web apps and A
These are not competitors — do not shortlist them against each other. Buy AudioEye if your problem is legal accessibility risk: ADA/WCAG/Section 508 exposure, VPAT/ACR deliverables, or an overlay you
These aren't competitors — you don't pick Netlify over AudioEye or vice versa. Netlify is where you build and ship a web app; AudioEye is one thing you might bolt onto an already-running site if acces
These aren't competitors. AudioEye is a compliance tool you buy to reduce ADA/WCAG legal exposure on an existing website; Firebase is the backend platform you build an app on. Firebase ships free tier
These aren't competitors — they solve different problems for different buyers, so don't shortlist them against each other. Pick Datalab (lift) if you're engineering a document pipeline: convert PDFs/s
Where can you read more about asqav and AudioEye?
Browse these categories
One email a week — new tools, honest comparisons, no spam.
Analysis generated by our model pipeline from live data: