Form score

Technical UX audit of guest-details / checkout forms across 8 scoreable hotel groups of the world's ten largest, measured with the Exatom form-audit engine (ExatomScore). Scores run 0–10, higher is better. Weighted across five categories. Wyndham and Hyatt could not be auto-scored for technical reasons – see Design analysis – and are excluded from the ranking below.

Deep-dive your form Get your form score

	Brand	Overall ↓	Accessibility	Performance	Style	Usability	Web standards

How each form was reached

1 room · 1 guest · 1 night

01Sample stay defined

›

02Funnel navigation

›

03Read-only assessment

Category weights

Accessibility×6

Usability×6

Web standards×6

Performance×5

Style×4

Universal failures – no brand gets these right

◎

0 of 8 auto-focus the first fieldNo scored brand sets autofocus on the guest-details field

🤖

0 of 8 signal anti-abuse protectionNo CAPTCHA or bot-protection observed on any scored form

▦

13 fields on average, 16 at peakBest Western carries the heaviest field load of the scored forms

Accessibility

Measures how usable the checkout form is for all guests: semantic HTML, label associations, ARIA attributes, keyboard navigation, and colour-contrast compliance. Hilton leads (7.6); Marriott is the outlier (2.6) on low-contrast, placeholder-only labels. Field average: 5.7. Weight in overall score: ×6.

Benchmark ranking – Accessibility

Score ranking – Accessibility

6.5–10 Good

5.0–6.4 Fair

0–4.9 Needs work

Performance

Covers page speed and responsiveness on the guest-details / checkout page. Weight in overall score: ×5.

Field average: 5.2 / 10 – the most uniformly mediocre category in the benchmark. Accor and Jin Jiang (via Golden Tulip) are quickest at 6.5; Choice Hotels is slowest at 2.9.

Benchmark ranking – Performance

Score ranking – Performance

6.5–10 Good

5.0–6.4 Fair

0–4.9 Needs work

Style

Evaluates visual design: field alignment and sizing, label placement, font consistency, form position, and responsive layout. Marriott (7.1) and Radisson (7.0) present best – Marriott styles well even as its underlying semantics fail. Jin Jiang (Golden Tulip) is weakest (4.3). Field average: 5.6. Weight in overall score: ×4.

Benchmark ranking – Style

Score ranking – Style

6.5–10 Good

5.0–6.4 Fair

0–4.9 Needs work

Usability

Covers autocomplete, sensible field counts, first-field focus, keyboard navigation, CTA clarity, and avoidance of needless repetition. No brand excels here – the first field is never auto-focused, and forms carry more inputs than the task requires. Marriott trails (3.7), dragged down by disabled autocomplete. Field average: 5.5. Weight in overall score: ×6.

Benchmark ranking – Usability

Score ranking – Usability

6.5–10 Good

5.0–6.4 Fair

0–4.9 Needs work

Web standards

The most conversion-relevant category technically: correct, semantic HTML – the right input types (e.g. type=email), real label elements, and a proper form element – driving native validation, autofill and assistive-technology support. Accor and IHG are exemplary (8.0); Marriott (0.5), Radisson (3.4) and Choice (4.2) leave easy wins on the table. Widest spread in the whole benchmark. Field average: 5.4. Weight in overall score: ×6.

Benchmark ranking – Web standards

Score ranking – Web standards

6.5–10 Good

5.0–6.4 Fair

0–4.9 Needs work

Design analysis

Structural audit of guest-details / checkout forms across all 10 assessed hotel groups. Every brand is multi-step at the funnel level (four to six screens to reach guest details); at the form level nearly every brand consolidates guest information and payment onto one final page – Accor is the mild exception, separating details from payment. Field counts range from 11 (Choice Hotels) to 16 (Best Western), averaging 13 across the eight scored forms.

Deep-dive your form Get your form score

Form feature analysis – all brands

Brand	Structure	Checkout layout	Progress indicator	Single-page checkout	Password / account field	Fields

Score distribution

Min / average / max spread of ExatomScore results across the eight benchmarked hotel groups, by category – higher is always better here. Followed by brand-by-brand notes on each form's key strength and primary risk, including the two brands that could not be auto-scored.

Deep-dive your form Get your form score

Score range by category