---
name: Conformance level
slug: conformance-level
category: accessibility
status: published
created: 2026-08-21T00:00:00.000Z
modified: 2026-08-21T00:00:00.000Z
definition: The A, AA, or AAA tier a WCAG success criterion sits in, and the
  tier a product claims, which is what people mean when they say a design is AA.
aliases:
  - name: level A
    source: wcag
  - name: level AA
    source: wcag
  - name: double-A
    source: community
tags:
  - wcag
relations:
  contrastWith:
    - pour
    - apca
    - accessibility-overlay
  variantOf: []
  partOf: []
  seeAlso: []
implementations: []
sources:
  - title: "WCAG 2.2: Conformance"
    url: https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG22/#conformance
  - title: W3C Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 3.0, Working Draft
    url: https://www.w3.org/TR/wcag-3.0/
demo: inline
exhibit: false
useWhen: someone says the target is AA and you need the tiers
---

Every success criterion in WCAG 2.2 carries one of three levels, and the level is a
property of the criterion rather than a score anybody earns. Contrast (Minimum), 1.4.3, is
AA. Contrast (Enhanced), 1.4.6, is AAA. Non-text Content, 1.1.1, is A. Claiming a
conformance level means claiming that the page satisfies every criterion at that level and
at every level below it, so an AA claim covers all the A criteria too. There is no partial
credit in the standard: a page that misses one AA criterion does not conform at AA, however
many others it passes.

The tiers are not a quality ladder, which is the misreading that causes the most trouble in
practice. AAA is a different set of criteria, gathered because they could not be required of
all content, and WCAG says plainly that AAA conformance is not recommended as a general
policy for a whole site, because some content cannot satisfy every AAA criterion. Sign
language interpretation for every prerecorded video, 1.2.6, is AAA for exactly that reason.
So a team that meets a few AAA criteria has not reached a higher grade, it has done more
than AA asked for in those places, which is worth doing and is not the same claim.

AA is the practical target because that is where regulation points. The tier you are being
asked for is almost always AA on a specific version of WCAG, and the version matters:
2.2 added criteria that 2.1 does not have, including Target Size (Minimum), 2.5.8, at AA.
The design consequences show up early. Body text at 4.5 to 1 and large text at 3 to 1 is
1.4.3 at AA, interface components and graphics at 3 to 1 is
[non-text contrast](/non-text-contrast) 1.4.11 at AA,
[reflow](/reflow) at 1.4.10 and [text spacing](/text-spacing) at 1.4.12 are both AA, and a
visible [focus ring](/focus-ring) is Focus Visible 2.4.7 at AA. Note that
[APCA](/apca), the contrast model being explored for the next generation of the guidelines,
is not a WCAG 2.2 conformance method: a design tuned to it still has to pass 1.4.3 to make
an AA claim.

WCAG 3 will change the shape of all this, but not yet. It is still a Working Draft, its
conformance model is one of the open questions its editors are asking reviewers about, and
the bronze, silver, and gold ratings floated in an earlier draft are not in the current one.
Anyone writing a target into a contract today is writing a WCAG 2.2 level. The other half of
the standard's vocabulary worth knowing when reading a claim is the accessibility supported
requirement and the full pages rule: conformance is claimed for whole pages, so a component
library cannot conform on its own, which is why a design system's own claim is always about
what it makes possible rather than what a product has achieved.