Dashboard Charts and Metrics Guide

This guide explains how to read and interpret the analyzer’s dashboard cards, charts, panels, and drilldown behaviors.

The layout is optimized to help your team quickly answer four critical questions:

1. Volume: How much total issue volume exists across the estate?
2. Concentration: Where are these issues physically concentrated?
3. Systemicity: How much of the problem is systemic or tied to reusable code?
4. Action: Which specific fixes will remove the most repeated errors first?

🔄 Recent Dashboard Updates: Features an all-new WCAG Support Coverage panel, strict WCAG-only charting limits, friendlier human rule labels, optimized component layout tracking, and full text-search, sizing, and pagination on drilldowns.

Suggested Reading Order (How to Triage)

#

If you aren’t sure where to start looking, follow this recommended sequence to process the dashboard data efficiently:

1. Verify the Data: Look at the Page Inventory Check first to ensure all your scanner files loaded correctly.
2. Identify the Shape: Scan the Top Problem Types and Component Heatmap to locate where the issues sit[cite: 6].
3. Check Compliance: Review the WCAG Rule Breakdown to gather numbers for standards-focused reporting[cite: 6].
4. Evaluate Tools: Look at the Tool Agreement Profile to see where your different scanners match or disagree[cite: 6].
5. Build Your Queue: Open the Fix Once, Benefit Many panel to grab your highest-value development tasks[cite: 6].
6. Inspect Closely: Click any chart bar or row to use the Drilldown Search and inspect the exact code errors[cite: 6].

Top Metric Cards (The Snapshot)

#

The top of the dashboard displays summary cards[cite: 6]. They are organized into four functional categories to prevent data overwhelm:

📊 Volume Metrics

#

• Violations: Total count of all processed findings across the entire scan dataset[cite: 6].
• Pages Affected: Total number of unique, normalized pages containing at least one finding[cite: 6].
• WCAG Criteria Affected: Total count of distinct WCAG success criteria triggered[cite: 6].
• Top 5 Page Concentration: The exact percentage of total issue volume found on your five most broken pages[cite: 6].

⚙️ Systemic & Architectural Metrics

#

• Shared Pattern Impact: The percentage of overall issue volume directly tied to shared patterns or reusable code sources[cite: 6].
• Shared Source Rate: The percentage of findings explicitly linked to global components, templates, or design styles[cite: 6].
• Opportunity Score: An estimated percentage showing how many bugs can be cleared by focusing only on top-ranked opportunities[cite: 6].
• Accessibility Debt Index: A weighted burden score calculated from overall repetition, page spread, and systemicity[cite: 6].

🛡️ Trust & Tool Metrics

#

• Cross-Tool Overlap: High-level counts splitting issues into verified (multiple tools matched), likely, and single categories[cite: 6].
• Evidence Confidence: A summary scale rating the raw strength of your automated test evidence[cite: 6].

🧩 Compliance & Heritage Markers

#

• WCAG Levels: Total issue breakdowns categorized by strict compliance tiers: A, AA, and AAA[cite: 6].
• Legacy Frames: Total counts of frame/iframe-related items and the specific pages they affect[cite: 6].

Main Chart and Table Panels

#

🚦 Data Validation Panels

#

🔍 Critical Trust Check: Page Inventory Check This panel validates your cross-tool page coverage[cite: 6]. Always check this sheet before interpreting the wider dashboard to guarantee that your raw scanner outputs aren’t missing key pages[cite: 6].

• Tool Agreement Profile (Chart): Displays how often your accessibility tools agree on issues, overlap within the same family, or remain entirely unique[cite: 6]. This is an organization tool, not an absolute truth meter[cite: 6].
• WCAG Support Coverage (Table): Explains the high-level WCAG testing capabilities of your active tool frameworks[cite: 6]. It shows capability, not a guarantee that every rule was actively triggered on a run[cite: 6].

🛠️ Action & Remediation Panels

#

• Fix Once, Benefit Many (Table): A ranked shortlist highlighting the repeated code patterns most worth fixing first[cite: 6]. This is the most actionable panel on the dashboard[cite: 6].
• Top Problem Types (Chart): Groups individual component failures into massive functional buckets (e.g., Forms, Interactive, Navigation, Structure, ARIA)[cite: 6].
• Component Heatmap (Chart): Pinpoints exactly which user interface components are throwing the most errors[cite: 6]. Display labels are humanized, but lookups run on raw component keys underneath[cite: 6].
• WCAG Rule Breakdown (Chart): Displays a refined view containing only valid WCAG criteria[cite: 6]. Messy technical rule IDs and engine debug text are stripped out[cite: 6].
• Issues per Page (Chart): Lists your most heavily broken URLs so you can separate severe localized failures from global template noise[cite: 6].

Drilldown Behavior

#

Clicking any interactive chart bar or fix row automatically launches the drilldown panel for that specific data subset[cite: 6].

To make exploring dense rows easier, the drilldown interface includes:

• 🔍 Targeted Search: Instantly filters text across the current drilldown result subset[cite: 6].
• 📄 Page Sizing: Lets you adjust your workspace view to show 10, 25, 50, or 100 rows per screen[cite: 6].
• 🔀 Pagination: Provides clean page numbers to navigate long development sets without crashing your browser[cite: 6].

Fields rendered in this view include: rule label, page URL, component key, issue scope, pattern type, code source, DOM selector path, unique fingerprint, and engine message[cite: 6].

⚠️ Interpretation Guidance & Limits

#

• Overlap Value: Higher overlap across completely different tool families indicates incredibly high confidence and strong issue corroboration[cite: 6].
• Same-Family Overlap: Intrafamily overlap can be highly sensitive to your deduplication settings, DOM selector formats, and fingerprint strictness[cite: 6].

Warning: Dashboard charts and overlap summaries are designed for evidence organization[cite: 6]. They are an optimization map for developers, not a replacement for manual accessibility audits or human evaluation[cite: 6].