CodeFrog vs Ahrefs
CodeFrog and Ahrefs serve different sides of web development. CodeFrog is a native desktop app (macOS and Windows) focused on website quality engineering — accessibility, security, HTML validation, and code analysis. Ahrefs is a SaaS platform focused on SEO marketing intelligence — keyword research, backlink analysis, rank tracking, and competitive analysis.
Their overlap is primarily in basic on-page SEO checks. Where CodeFrog provides deep technical quality testing that Ahrefs doesn't touch, Ahrefs provides SEO intelligence data that CodeFrog doesn't cover. One key difference: CodeFrog can test localhost and development domains before deployment, while Ahrefs requires publicly accessible URLs.
Note on WCAG compliance: Full WCAG A, AA, or AAA conformance cannot be achieved with automation alone — neither CodeFrog nor any other automated tool can fully validate conformance. Many WCAG criteria require human judgment and manual testing with assistive technologies (screen readers, keyboard navigation, voice control, etc.). Automated tools are a valuable part of your accessibility toolkit, but manual testing is required for full conformance at any level. See CodeFrog's WCAG page for details.
| Feature | CodeFrog | Ahrefs |
|---|---|---|
| Accessibility | ||
| Automated WCAG AA checks (axe-core) | Yes | No |
| Automated WCAG AAA checks | Yes | No |
| Color contrast checks | Yes | No |
| ARIA attribute validation | Yes | No |
| Heading hierarchy validation | Yes | No |
| Security | ||
| OWASP-based security scanning | Yes (comprehensive) | No |
| Security headers (CSP, HSTS, X-Frame-Options) | Yes | No |
| CORS misconfiguration detection | Yes | No |
| Sensitive file detection (.env, .git, backups) | Yes | No |
| TLS/SSL configuration analysis | Yes | Basic HTTPS check |
| Directory listing detection | Yes | No |
| Server/framework fingerprinting | Yes | No |
| Secrets detection (Gitleaks) | Yes | No |
| Supply chain vulnerabilities (OSV) | Yes | No |
| Static analysis (Semgrep/OpenGrep) | Yes | No |
| SEO | ||
| Title tag validation | Yes | Yes |
| Meta description check | Yes | Yes |
| Robots.txt validation | Yes | Yes |
| Sitemap.xml validation | Yes | Yes |
| Heading hierarchy (H1-H6 structure) | Yes | H1 checks only |
| Structured data validation | Yes | Yes (190+ rules) |
| Content quality (word count, readability) | Yes | Low word count detection |
| Content-to-HTML ratio | Yes | No |
| Keyword analysis (on-page) | Yes | Yes |
| Canonical URL validation | Yes | Yes |
| Mobile-friendliness checks | Yes | Yes |
| Keyword research (28.7B keywords as of early 2026) | No | Yes |
| Backlink analysis (35T links as of early 2026) | No | Yes |
| Rank tracking | No | Yes |
| Competitive keyword gap analysis | No | Yes |
| Content Explorer | No | Yes |
| Domain Rating / URL Rating | No | Yes |
| Organic traffic estimation | No | Yes |
| hreflang validation | No | Yes |
| Broken link detection | No | Yes (internal + external) |
| Duplicate content detection | No | Yes |
| Redirect chain analysis | No | Yes |
| Meta Tags & Social Sharing | ||
| Open Graph tags validation | Yes (full) | Basic detection only |
| Twitter Card tags validation | Yes | No |
| OG image dimension/aspect validation | Yes | No |
| Favicon detection | Yes | No |
| HTML Validation | ||
| W3C/Nu HTML Checker compliance | Yes (strict mode) | No |
| Heuristic-based fast validation | Yes | No |
| Performance | ||
| Page size / resource inventory by type | Yes | No |
| DNS/TCP/TLS/TTFB timing breakdown | Yes | No |
| Multi-URL timing comparison | Yes | No |
| Core Web Vitals (CrUX data) | No | Yes |
| Page load time tracking | No | Yes |
| Code Analysis | ||
| Source code secrets scanning (Gitleaks) | Yes | N/A |
| Dependency vulnerability scanning (OSV) | Yes | N/A |
| Static code pattern analysis (Semgrep/OpenGrep) | Yes | N/A |
| Line counting by language | Yes | N/A |
| Reporting & Platform | ||
| Unified report (all tests combined) | Yes (Mega Report) | Separate tools |
| Sitemap-based multi-URL testing | Yes | Yes (site crawl) |
| Localhost / dev domain testing | Yes | No (requires public URL) |
| Health score / letter grade | Yes (A-F grade) | Yes (health %) |
| Report history and trending | Yes | Yes |
| Desktop app | Yes (native macOS and Windows) | No |
| API access | No | Yes (Enterprise/$) |
| Pricing | Free / one-time purchase | $29-$449/month (as of early 2026) |
Where CodeFrog excels
- WCAG AA/AAA accessibility testing (axe-core) — Ahrefs has none
- OWASP-based security scanning with severity classification
- Secrets detection, supply chain vulnerabilities, and static code analysis
- W3C/Nu HTML validation (strict and fast modes)
- Open Graph and Twitter Card validation with image dimension checks
- Localhost and development domain testing before deployment
- Unified Mega Report combining web testing and code analysis
- Free native desktop app (macOS and Windows) — no subscription required
Where Ahrefs excels
- Keyword research with 28.7 billion keywords across 200+ countries (as of early 2026)
- Backlink analysis with 35 trillion live links (as of early 2026)
- Rank tracking with city-level granularity
- Competitive analysis — keyword gaps, content gaps, domain comparison
- Content Explorer for topic research and outreach prospecting
- Organic traffic estimation and Domain Rating metrics
- Structured data validation with 190+ Google/Schema.org rules
- 170+ automated SEO checks in Site Audit
Better together: CodeFrog and Ahrefs serve different parts of the web development lifecycle. Use CodeFrog for quality engineering — accessibility compliance, security scanning, HTML validation, and code analysis, including pre-deployment testing on localhost. Use Ahrefs for SEO marketing intelligence — keyword research, backlink building, rank tracking, and competitive analysis on live sites. Together, they cover both the technical quality and marketing visibility of your website.