Patterns

Patterns across the analyses

78 findings from 9 analyses, as of . Each figure shows what it is out of. A list is ranked only where there is enough to rank; below that it is in a fixed order and says so. Drafts are not counted.

Dataset version 2.0.1, revised . What changed

The headline figures

n = 78 findings in 9 analyses

Analyses published
9
In Retail, Technology, Banks and insurers and Telecom and health, assessed up to .
Pages examined
85
From 4 to 15 per analysis, at up to three screen sizes each.
Findings
78
78 findings across 9 analyses; none high, 45 medium.
Analyses with a measured axe rule count
7
7 of 9 analyses; the rest were read by hand, with no machine output to count rules from.
Findings per analysis
8
The median of 9 analyses, which found from 6 to 11 each.
Share of findings at each level
HighMediumLowBest practice
Share0%58%33%9%
Findings045267

Most are medium: 45 of 78. The levels are explained on the method page.

The heuristics that fail most

n = 78 findings in 9 analyses

Findings by heuristic, most first, each bar split by level.

  • High
  • Medium
  • Low
  • Best practice
Findings by heuristic, split by level14 heuristics named by 78 findings in 9 analyses. Sorted by findings, most first.AccessibilityAccessibility: 32 mediumAccessibility: 2 low34Mobile and touchMobile and touch: 4 mediumMobile and touch: 4 lowMobile and touch: 1 best practice9User control and freedomUser control and freedom: 4 lowUser control and freedom: 3 best practice7Visibility of system statusVisibility of system status: 3 mediumVisibility of system status: 1 lowVisibility of system status: 1 best practice5Content and toneContent and tone: 3 mediumContent and tone: 1 low4Consistency and standardsConsistency and standards: 2 mediumConsistency and standards: 1 low3Help and documentationHelp and documentation: 1 mediumHelp and documentation: 2 low3Navigation and wayfindingNavigation and wayfinding: 3 low3Recognition rather than recallRecognition rather than recall: 3 low3Recovering from errorsRecovering from errors: 2 low2Trust and credibilityTrust and credibility: 1 lowTrust and credibility: 1 best practice2Aesthetic and minimalist designAesthetic and minimalist design: 1 low1ConversionConversion: 1 best practice1Visual hierarchyVisual hierarchy: 1 low1

With this rubric high is rare by design, so the ranking is led by WCAG A and AA failures on primary task paths: these analyses are an accessibility-led benchmark with UX commentary. The levels are judged against the rubric on the method page.

Findings by heuristic and level
HeuristicHighMediumLowBest practiceAll
Accessibility0322034
Mobile and touch04419
User control and freedom00437
Visibility of system status03115
Content and tone03104
Consistency and standards02103
Help and documentation01203
Navigation and wayfinding00303
Recognition rather than recall00303
Recovering from errors00202
Trust and credibility00112
Aesthetic and minimalist design00101
Conversion00011
Visual hierarchy00101
  1. Accessibility

    34 findings in 9 of 9 analyses. The latest:

  2. Mobile and touch

    9 findings in 7 of 9 analyses. The latest:

  3. User control and freedom

    7 findings in 5 of 9 analyses. The latest:

  4. Visibility of system status

    5 findings in 5 of 9 analyses. The latest:

  5. Content and tone

    4 findings in 4 of 9 analyses. The latest:

  6. Consistency and standards

    3 findings in 3 of 9 analyses. The latest:

  7. Help and documentation

    3 findings in 3 of 9 analyses. The latest:

  8. Navigation and wayfinding

    3 findings in 2 of 9 analyses. The latest:

  9. Recognition rather than recall

    3 findings in 3 of 9 analyses. The latest:

  10. Recovering from errors

    2 findings in 2 of 9 analyses. The latest:

  11. Trust and credibility

    2 findings in 2 of 9 analyses. The latest:

  12. Aesthetic and minimalist design

    1 finding in 1 of 9 analyses. The latest:

  13. Conversion

    1 finding in 1 of 9 analyses. The latest:

  14. Visual hierarchy

    1 finding in 1 of 9 analyses. The latest:

Where on a site the problems are

n = 78 findings in 9 analyses

Each examined page is filed by the role it plays (home, search, product), so product pages are compared with product pages. A cell counts the findings about that kind of page under that heuristic; an empty cell found none. Most are about product: 17 of 78.

Findings by page role and heuristic78 findings in 9 analyses, by the role of the page each is about (columns) and its heuristic (rows). Only roles some analysis examined are shown.ThroughoutHomeSearchCategoryProductStore locatorSign-inHelpDealsReturnsData and privacy controlsOther pagesAccessibilityAccessibility, Throughout: 22Accessibility, Home: 77Accessibility, Search: 11Accessibility, Category: 99Accessibility, Product: 99Accessibility, Store locator: 11Accessibility, Sign-in: 33Accessibility, Returns: 11Accessibility, Data and privacy controls: 11Mobile and touchMobile and touch, Throughout: 22Mobile and touch, Home: 22Mobile and touch, Search: 22Mobile and touch, Category: 11Mobile and touch, Product: 11Mobile and touch, Help: 11User control and freedomUser control and freedom, Throughout: 44User control and freedom, Search: 22User control and freedom, Product: 11Visibility of system statusVisibility of system status, Throughout: 33Visibility of system status, Home: 11Visibility of system status, Product: 11Content and toneContent and tone, Search: 22Content and tone, Category: 22Consistency and standardsConsistency and standards, Throughout: 11Consistency and standards, Product: 11Consistency and standards, Data and privacy controls: 11Help and documentationHelp and documentation, Search: 11Help and documentation, Help: 22Navigation and wayfindingNavigation and wayfinding, Throughout: 11Navigation and wayfinding, Category: 11Navigation and wayfinding, Store locator: 11Recognition rather than recallRecognition rather than recall, Home: 11Recognition rather than recall, Product: 22Recovering from errorsRecovering from errors, Store locator: 22Trust and credibilityTrust and credibility, Search: 11Trust and credibility, Sign-in: 11Aesthetic and minimalist designAesthetic and minimalist design, Throughout: 11ConversionConversion, Product: 11Visual hierarchyVisual hierarchy, Product: 11
Findings by heuristic and page role
HeuristicThroughoutHomeSearchCategoryProductStore locatorSign-inHelpDealsReturnsData and privacy controlsOther pages
Accessibility271991311
Mobile and touch222111
User control and freedom421
Visibility of system status311
Content and tone22
Consistency and standards111
Help and documentation12
Navigation and wayfinding111
Recognition rather than recall12
Recovering from errors2
Trust and credibility11
Aesthetic and minimalist design1
Conversion1
Visual hierarchy1

Phone or desktop

n = 78 findings in 9 analyses

The screen size each finding was seen at: 50 at desktop, 4 at tablet and 24 at phone. A finding is filed at the size it shows most clearly; not every analysis read a tablet size.

  • Desktop
  • Tablet
  • Phone
Findings by heuristic and screen size78 findings in 9 analyses, by heuristic, one bar per screen size.AccessibilityAccessibility, desktop: 2222Accessibility, tablet: 44Accessibility, phone: 88Mobile and touchMobile and touch, phone: 99User control and freedomUser control and freedom, desktop: 66User control and freedom, phone: 11Visibility of system statusVisibility of system status, desktop: 44Visibility of system status, phone: 11Content and toneContent and tone, desktop: 22Content and tone, phone: 22Consistency and standardsConsistency and standards, desktop: 33Help and documentationHelp and documentation, desktop: 33Navigation and wayfindingNavigation and wayfinding, desktop: 33Recognition rather than recallRecognition rather than recall, desktop: 22Recognition rather than recall, phone: 11Recovering from errorsRecovering from errors, desktop: 22Trust and credibilityTrust and credibility, desktop: 22Aesthetic and minimalist designAesthetic and minimalist design, desktop: 11ConversionConversion, phone: 11Visual hierarchyVisual hierarchy, phone: 11
Findings by heuristic and screen size
HeuristicDesktopTabletPhone
Accessibility2248
Mobile and touch009
User control and freedom601
Visibility of system status401
Content and tone202
Consistency and standards300
Help and documentation300
Navigation and wayfinding300
Recognition rather than recall201
Recovering from errors200
Trust and credibility200
Aesthetic and minimalist design100
Conversion001
Visual hierarchy001

WCAG 2.2 criteria cited

n = 36 findings citing WCAG 2.2, of 78

The success criteria the findings cite, most cited first. A finding may cite more than one.

  1. 4.1.2 Name, Role, Value (level A)

    14 findings

  2. 2.5.8 Target Size (Minimum) (level AA)

    5 findings

  3. 2.5.3 Label in Name (level A)

    4 findings

  4. 1.4.3 Contrast (Minimum) (level AA)

    3 findings

  5. 2.4.7 Focus Visible (level AA)

    3 findings

  6. 1.1.1 Non-text Content (level A)

    2 findings

  7. 1.3.1 Info and Relationships (level A)

    2 findings

  8. 1.4.4 Resize Text (level AA)

    2 findings

  9. 1.4.10 Reflow (level AA)

    2 findings

  10. 1.4.1 Use of Color (level A)

    1 finding

  11. 2.1.1 Keyboard (level A)

    1 finding

  12. 2.4.2 Page Titled (level A)

    1 finding

  13. 3.3.2 Labels or Instructions (level A)

    1 finding

What the engine counts

n = per check, in the table’s last column

What a browser counts on every page examined. The first strip is axe, the accessibility engine, as distinct rules failed rather than elements, drawn only for the 7 of 9 analyses whose axe output was saved; each analysis lists its rules by impact. Each dot is one analysis and links to it; the accent mark is the median. A count an analysis does not stand behind is left out, and its page says why; some were counted by hand where a site refused the crawl.

The automated checks across the analysesAccessibility rules failed (axe): median 7, from 2 to 10, 7 analyses. Tap targets under 24 pixels: median 66, from 2 to 138, 9 analyses. Links that open a new tab: median 40, from 0 to 97, 9 analyses. Console errors on load: median 2, from 0 to 70, 9 analyses.Accessibility rules failed (axe)010Median 7median 7Chase.com: 2Costco.com: 2UHC.com: 3Apple.com: 7TD.com: 8Google.com: 10Verizon.com: 10Tap targets under 24 pixels0200Median 66median 66Chase.com: 2UHC.com: 3Google.com: 13Verizon.com: 55Amazon.com: 66Apple.com: 68Walmart.com: 89TD.com: 101Costco.com: 138Links that open a new tab0100Median 40median 40UHC.com: 0Amazon.com: 2Walmart.com: 11Apple.com: 16Google.com: 40Verizon.com: 63Chase.com: 80Costco.com: 83TD.com: 97Console errors on load0100Median 2median 2Apple.com: 0Google.com: 0Walmart.com: 0Amazon.com: 2UHC.com: 2Costco.com: 4TD.com: 8Chase.com: 25Verizon.com: 70
The automated checks: median and range across the analyses
CheckMedianRangen
Accessibility rules failed (axe)72–107 analyses
Tap targets under 24 pixels662–1389 analyses
Links that open a new tab400–979 analyses
Console errors on load20–709 analyses
Each analysis’s counts
CheckAnalysisCount
Accessibility rules failed (axe)TD.com8
Accessibility rules failed (axe)Chase.com2
Accessibility rules failed (axe)UHC.com3
Accessibility rules failed (axe)Verizon.com10
Accessibility rules failed (axe)Apple.com7
Accessibility rules failed (axe)Costco.com2
Accessibility rules failed (axe)Google.com10
Tap targets under 24 pixelsTD.com101
Tap targets under 24 pixelsChase.com2
Tap targets under 24 pixelsUHC.com3
Tap targets under 24 pixelsVerizon.com55
Tap targets under 24 pixelsAmazon.com66
Tap targets under 24 pixelsApple.com68
Tap targets under 24 pixelsCostco.com138
Tap targets under 24 pixelsGoogle.com13
Tap targets under 24 pixelsWalmart.com89
Links that open a new tabTD.com97
Links that open a new tabChase.com80
Links that open a new tabUHC.com0
Links that open a new tabVerizon.com63
Links that open a new tabAmazon.com2
Links that open a new tabApple.com16
Links that open a new tabCostco.com83
Links that open a new tabGoogle.com40
Links that open a new tabWalmart.com11
Console errors on loadTD.com8
Console errors on loadChase.com25
Console errors on loadUHC.com2
Console errors on loadVerizon.com70
Console errors on loadAmazon.com2
Console errors on loadApple.com0
Console errors on loadCostco.com4
Console errors on loadGoogle.com0
Console errors on loadWalmart.com0

By sector

n = 78 findings in 9 analyses

  • Retail

    n = 23 findings in 3 analyses

    17 pages examined; a median of 8 findings per analysis; none high, 10 medium, 11 low and 2 best practice.

  • Technology

    n = 21 findings in 2 analyses

    25 pages examined; a median of 10.5 findings per analysis; none high, 14 medium, 6 low and 1 best practice.

  • Banks and insurers

    n = 20 findings in 2 analyses

    22 pages examined; a median of 10 findings per analysis; none high, 12 medium, 6 low and 2 best practice.

  • Telecom and health

    n = 14 findings in 2 analyses

    21 pages examined; a median of 7 findings per analysis; none high, 9 medium, 3 low and 2 best practice.

By platform

n = 1 of 9 analyses carry a platform reading

The technology the engine detected on each site from what its pages send: headers, the generator tag, script hosts. A site can run several. A technology is ranked by its median findings per analysis once 5 analyses carry it; until then it is listed by name with its n.

Fewer than 5 analyses each, so not ranked

  • Adobe Experience Manager (cms): 11 findings per analysis, the median of 1 analysis
  • Angular (frontend): 11 findings per analysis, the median of 1 analysis

The data

n = 78 findings in 9 analyses

Every finding counted here, one row each, as JSON and CSV: 78 rows. The columns are report, assessedOn, sector, platform, area, viewport, heuristic, level, wcag; area is the page role, not the site’s own page. patterns.json also carries each analysis’s axe rules by impact and the dataset’s version; every change to a published finding is listed on the revisions page. Rebuilt with every analysis published. Free to use under CC BY 4.0, with attribution to 4th Culture.