With the European Accessibility Act (EAA) in force since June 28 2025, QualiBooth analyzed 500 of Europe’s largest eCommerce sites to see how prepared they really are. The findings are as surprising as they are revealing - highlighting wide disparities between countries, sectors, and even the world's most recognized brands.

About the Accessibility Audit

QualiBooth’s team of accessibility experts conducted a comprehensive assessment using both automated scans and manual reviews. The testing followed WCAG 2.2 standards, covering:

  • Home pages
  • Product listing pages
  • Product detail pages
  • Cart and checkout flows

Each site received an accessibility score from 0 to 100, evaluating real-world usability for people with disabilities.

Please note that inclusion in this list does not imply endorsement or affiliation with QualiBooth. Full dataset and methodology to be made available soon.

The Top 5 Most Accessible Brands in Europe

These retailers are setting the gold standard:

  1. On (Switzerland) – 100
  2. Ikea (Sweden) – 99
  3. ‍Mango (Spain) – 98
  4. ‍Sports Direct (UK) – 97
  5. Bonprix (Germany) – 97

These brands demonstrate how inclusive design and accessibility go hand-in-hand with modern UX best practices.

Accessibility Performance by Country

🇬🇧 United Kingdom: The Accessibility Leader

With 10 out of the top 20 retailers, the UK is a clear leader. High-performing brands like John Lewis & Partners, ASOS, and Marks & Spencer benefit from early investment in accessibility and regulations like the UK Equality Act 2010.

🇩🇪 Germany: A Mixed Bag

Germany has both high and low performers. While Bonprix and Baur scored above 95, giants like adidas (68) and MediaMarkt Deutschland (70) reveal inconsistent implementation across major retailers.

🇫🇷 France: Strong Mid-Tier, Some Gaps

Leroy Merlin leads France’s charge with a 95, but well-known names such as Darty (72) and Decathlon (71) fall short of the top tier.

🇪🇸 Spain: Standout Brand, Lagging Peers

Mango's near-perfect 98 contrasts with Zara and Phone House, both scoring 74 - highlighting inconsistencies in the country.

Some Global Brands Fall Short on Accessibility

Surprisingly, some of the world’s biggest tech and retail brands performed below expectations:

  1. Nike (United States) – 74
  2. Amazon (United States) – 72
  3. ‍Samsung (South Korea) – 68
  4. ‍Tesco (UK) – 65

Despite their resources, these companies lack sufficient inclusive design across their platforms.

What Top Scoring Retailers Get Right

The best-performing sites consistently:

  • Use mobile-first, responsive layouts
  • Follow clear content hierarchies with semantic HTML
  • Support full keyboard navigation with logical tab order
  • Offer complete screen reader compatibility and use of ARIA labels
  • Ensure checkout and third-party flows remain accessible

Common Accessibility Failures Among Low Scorers

Lower-performing eCommerce sites frequently exhibit:

  • Inaccessible navigation menus and sliders
  • Missing alt text and poor color contrast
  • Overreliance on JavaScript-based interactions that break assistive technologies

These issues directly impact users who rely on screen readers, keyboard navigation, or custom input devices.

Why Accessibility Matters More Than Ever

The European Accessibility Act (EAA) is not just a legal requirement. It’s a competitive advantage. Inclusive digital design benefits all users and directly influences:

  • Conversion rates
  • Customer loyalty
  • SEO rankings
  • Legal compliance

Failing to meet accessibility standards could lead to:

  • Regulatory fines
  • Lost revenue opportunities
  • Reputational damage

How to Improve Your Accessibility Today

Whether you're ahead or behind, now is the time to act. We make accessibility easy for development, UX and compliance teams:

  1. Get a free site audit on qualibooth.com
  2. Use our toolkit to address issues
  3. Generate and publish an accessibility statement
  4. Monitor progress
  5. Follow QualiBooth for more updates

Note: Our software-based testing relied on a mix of manual and automated assessment against WCAG 2.2 criteria. A score of 100 does not imply full accessibility. Full evaluation requires software testing in addition to a manual audit by trained accessibility professionals.

Get a Free Accessibility Scan

Want to know how your site scores?

👉 Use our free accessibility scanner