My stack

    Stark

    Figma plugin for accessibility and color contrast testing. Verifies WCAG contrast ratios, simulates color blindness, manages focus order, and checks touch targets.

    Visit website
    ToolTrim verdict3.9/ 5Great

    Stark wins for embedding accessibility into Figma design. For full post-launch audits, pair with user testing.

    Stark, preview 1
    About

    In practice. What you can do with Stark.

    Figma plugin for accessibility and color contrast testing. Verifies WCAG contrast ratios, simulates color blindness, manages focus order, and checks touch targets.

    Key strengths: Robust free plan to check contrast ratios.; Color blindness simulator very useful.; Automated WCAG reports (Pro).; Complete a11y checklist.; Direct Figma integration..

    Stark wins for embedding accessibility into Figma design. For full post-launch audits, pair with user testing.

    Practical uses

    • Quickly check contrast ratios during design.
    • Simulate perception for colorblind users.
    • Generate WCAG reports before development.
    • Train teams on accessibility standards.

    Features & use cases

    Accessibilite
    Design visuel
    UI design
    Design system

    Pros and cons

    What Stark does especially well and the limits to anticipate.

    Pros

    • Robust free plan to check contrast ratios.
    • Color blindness simulator very useful.
    • Automated WCAG reports (Pro).
    • Complete a11y checklist.
    • Direct Figma integration.

    Cons

    • Advanced features (focus, alt text) are paid.
    • Pro pricing can be steep for solo designers.
    • Not a substitute for real user testing.

    Stark: when it makes sense.

    Stark wins for embedding accessibility into Figma design. For full post-launch audits, pair with user testing.

    Keep if

    You design interfaces and must meet WCAG standards.. You work in Figma.

    Stark becomes worthwhile when
    • You use it at least once a week
    • The monthly cost ($6.06) is small next to the time it saves you

    Challenge if

    You have no legal accessibility requirements.. You're looking for a full accessibility audit post-project.

    Stark becomes too expensive when
    • You use it less than once a month
    • A simple free version or a tool already in your stack would do

    Pricing. What does Stark cost?

    Free$0

    Free plan available.

    Entry paid plan$6.06/mo

    Paid plans available. See the official pricing source for details.

    Official pricing sourceverified on

    Tools in Stark

    This suite bundles 1 tools, included in the subscription.

    Alternatives. What could replace Stark?

    No established substitute

    No tool in the catalogue covers the same need as Stark. Rather than suggest an approximate match, here is the neighbourhood view.

    Explore around Stark

    Stark Summary

    Category
    productivity tool.
    Price from
    $6.06/mo (Entry paid plan).
    Best for
    professionals.
    Avoid if
    You have no legal accessibility requirements.; You're looking for a full accessibility audit post-project..
    ToolTrim verdict
    Stark wins for embedding accessibility into Figma design.

    Our verdict. What to know about Stark.

    Why this verdict

    Great

    Stark is hard to replace short-term, a free tier to test before paying, clearly documented use cases.

    Frequently asked questions.

    What to know before choosing Stark.

    What is Stark used for?

    Figma plugin for accessibility and color contrast testing. Verifies WCAG contrast ratios, simulates color blindness, manages focus order, and checks touch targets.

    How much does Stark cost?

    Stark costs €6.06/month (Entry paid plan plan). Price verified on 2026-07-24.

    Is Stark suitable for beginners?

    Stark suits most professionals. See the "Who is it for" section for details.

    Is Stark worth the price?

    Stark wins for embedding accessibility into Figma design. For full post-launch audits, pair with user testing.

    What are the best alternatives to Stark?

    No direct alternative listed.

    What’s next?