Lighthouse vs Complience.app
Lighthouse is already in Chrome. Its accessibility panel is a useful snapshot. It is not a monitoring product, and it does not capture marketing cookies on a clean first load.
Lighthouse vs Complience.app at a glance
| Criterion | Lighthouse | Complience.app |
|---|---|---|
| Job | DevTools snapshot next to performance | Stored axe-core history plus cookies and a PDF |
| Engine | axe-core inside Chrome Lighthouse | axe-core on a clean Playwright first load |
| Recrawl | CI or you click again | Weekly or monthly queue |
| Cookies | Not a cookie scanner | Pre-consent cookies and third-party requests |
| Best for | Pull requests and performance budgets | Production URLs you do not open every week |
What is the difference between Lighthouse and Complience.app?
Lighthouse accessibility is axe-core scored beside Largest Contentful Paint. Complience.app stores that class of accessibility findings with cookie and header evidence, then recrawls. Google’s Lighthouse docs are clear that the accessibility category uses axe-core. You get a number in a tool you already open. You do not get a client PDF or a first-load cookie log.
Where Lighthouse is stronger
Zero install for developers, performance and SEO in the same run, CI recipes that many teams already have.
Where Complience.app is stronger
A score history per domain, cookie pre-consent, header checks in the same evidence pack, and a PDF an agency can send without a DevTools screenshot.
Other comparisons
Questions
Check a public URL
Homepage teaser. Sign in for PDF, history, and a schedule. The 7-day trial does not require a credit card.
