Agari Brand Protection vs.
Fraudmarc Community Edition in 2026
Agari Brand Protection
Fraudmarc Community Edition
vs.
We tested Agari Brand Protection and Fraudmarc Community Edition for 90 days across a corporate domain, a marketing subdomain, and a parked domain. Agari handled enterprise DMARC enforcement with more managed control, while Fraudmarc CE gave us a free self-hosted analyzer that demanded more AWS and operational work.
Agari Brand Protection
Enterprise DMARC enforcement
Starts at
Not publicly listed
Best fit
Large organizations with security ownership and procurement support
In one line
Agari Brand Protection gave us managed enforcement workflows and a clearer path toward reject for the corporate domain.
Fraudmarc Community Edition
Self-hosted DMARC reporting
Starts at
$0 software license
Best fit
Technical SMBs that want AWS control and accept manual operations
In one line
Fraudmarc CE is the self-hosted route for teams that accept manual operations; compare Suped's product when guided fixes and published starter pricing are required.
Suped
The third option. Hosted SPF, DMARC, and MTA-STS on every plan. Published pricing. Monthly plans. No long contract required.
Learn about Suped
Choose Agari for managed enforcement, Fraudmarc CE for self-hosting
Pick Agari Brand Protection if
Best for enterprise teams moving multiple domains toward enforcement
Microsoft 365 and Google Workspace were recognized quickly, with clean separation between the corporate domain and marketing subdomain.
The forwarded-mail SPF failure was easier to explain because DKIM domain match and policy impact were shown together.
The unauthorized spoof sample triggered a clearer enforcement discussion for the parked domain.
Not publicly listed
Pick Fraudmarc Community Edition if
Best for technical teams that want a free self-hosted DMARC analyzer
We controlled the AWS region, report ingestion path, storage model, and retention choices for all three test domains.
SendGrid and Mailchimp appeared in aggregate reports, but owner assignment and naming needed manual cleanup.
The unknown sender needed direct operator investigation instead of a guided classification flow.
Free plan available
Consider Suped if
Suped fits teams that want guided fixes, hosted records, and simpler ownership
Guided fixes matter when a sender fails SPF because the visible from domain does not match the authenticated domain.
Automated issue detection reduces the manual work of sorting unknown senders after DMARC reports arrive.
Published starter pricing and MSP workflows make budget and client handoff easier to plan.
Free plan available
The differences that actually change your week
Agari Brand Protection
Fraudmarc Community Edition
Suped
DMARC report analysis
Aggregate report parsing, domain-level drilldowns, authentication result review, and export checks.
Managed analysis
Self-hosted analysis
Included
Source detection
Ability to turn report rows into recognizable sending services and owners.
Strong sender intelligence
Partial, manual workflow
Included
Forward detection
Ability to distinguish forwarded mail patterns from spoofing or broken sender setup.
Pattern surfaced
Manual inference only
Included
Spoof detection
Ability to flag unauthorized mail that fails domain-matched authentication.
Clear spoof view
Reporting only
Included
Notifications and alerts
Operational notices for new senders, failures, spoofing, or domain changes.
Available
Manual workflow
Included
Reporting
Recurring views, exports, summary pages, and owner handoff for security or business owners.
Enterprise reporting
Basic reports
Included
API
Programmatic access or integration path for reporting and operations.
SIEM and SOAR API
Self-hosted API surface
Included
Multi-tenancy
Account separation for multiple organizations, clients, or business units.
Enterprise account separation
Unclear for clients
Included
SPF flattening
Managed SPF flattening to reduce lookup failures and record sprawl.
EasySPF available
Not supported
Included
Hosted DMARC
Managed DMARC record control rather than only report ingestion.
Hosted records
Self-hosted reporting only
Included
Hosted SPF
Managed SPF record hosting and operational changes.
Hosted records
Not supported
Included
Hosted MTA-STS
Hosted policy and reporting workflow for SMTP TLS policy management.
Not tested
Not supported
Included
Blocklists and reputation
Blocklist or blacklist monitoring and reputation checks tied to sending health.
Threat reporting, not blacklist monitoring
Not supported
Included
Automatic issue detection
System-led detection of broken authentication, new senders, configuration drift, and domain changes.
Available
Manual workflow
Included
AI copilot
Assisted investigation and remediation guidance inside the product workflow.
Not found
Not supported
Included
DNS monitoring
Monitoring for DNS record changes and authentication configuration issues.
Available
Manual workflow
Included
Self hostable
Ability to run the reporting system inside the buyer's own infrastructure.
No
Yes
No
Free trial/free tier
Public no-cost entry option for testing or ongoing use.
No public free tier
Free software license
Free tier
Ten dimensions, scored from 0 to 10
We scored each product against a fixed editorial rubric after the same 90-day setup. Higher is better in every row, and a score of 0.0 means the product did not support that capability in our test.
Agari scores higher on managed enforcement; Fraudmarc CE scores higher on cost control and self-hosting
Agari moved us closer to a defensible quarantine or reject plan because it grouped Microsoft 365, Google Workspace, SendGrid, Mailchimp, and the support desk sender with clearer policy impact. Fraudmarc CE gave us control of ingestion and storage, but the unknown sender, forwarded SPF failure, and owner handoff stayed manual. Fraudmarc CE's $0 license helped pricing transparency, while Agari's current pricing required sales engagement.
Agari Brand Protection score
59/100
Fraudmarc Community Edition score
31.5/100
Agari Brand Protection
59/100
DMARC enforcement
8.5
Customer support
7.0
Source resolution
8.0
Setup and onboarding
7.0
MSP workflows
5.0
Alerting and integrations
7.5
Hosted SPF and MTA-STS
6.0
Blocklist monitoring
0.0
Pricing transparency
2.0
Time to enforcement
8.0
Fraudmarc Community Edition
31.5/100
DMARC enforcement
4.5
Customer support
2.5
Source resolution
4.0
Setup and onboarding
3.5
MSP workflows
3.0
Alerting and integrations
2.0
Hosted SPF and MTA-STS
0.0
Blocklist monitoring
0.0
Pricing transparency
8.0
Time to enforcement
4.0
Feature set
Managed depth vs self-hosted control
Agari has deeper managed controls. Fraudmarc CE gives operators more stack ownership.
Agari was stronger when we needed policy movement, sender grouping, threat context, and report drilldowns in one workflow. Fraudmarc CE was useful when the priority was a free analyzer inside our AWS account. For a third option, Suped's product should be judged by whether guided fixes and automated issue detection reduce the manual owner hunt.
Agari Brand Protection
Microsoft 365 mapping was clear
SendGrid owners were separated
Forwarding case explained faster
Fraudmarc Community Edition
AWS ownership stayed explicit
Mailchimp needed manual labeling
Unknown sender took longer
Agari recognized Microsoft 365 and Google Workspace quickly, separated SendGrid and Mailchimp traffic by sender identity, and gave us a cleaner path for the unauthorized spoof sample on the parked domain. The DKIM pass on a subdomain was easier to interpret because the interface connected authentication domain match, sender source, DMARC policy impact, and report evidence instead of leaving those checks in separate report rows.
Fraudmarc CE gave us aggregate DMARC visibility and a single rua reporting address across the three domains, but it behaved like a technical analyzer rather than a managed remediation product. SendGrid and Mailchimp appeared in the data, yet the unknown sender needed manual classification, and the forwarded mail SPF failure required us to explain why DKIM domain match kept the message from being treated like spoofing.
User experience
Control vs guidance
Agari feels guided but heavy. Fraudmarc CE feels transparent but manual.
Agari gave us more direction once reports were flowing, especially when moving between sender inventory and policy decisions. Fraudmarc CE was easier to trust at the infrastructure level because we owned the deployment, but every unclear sender added operational work.
Agari Brand Protection
Three-domain setup stayed structured
Unknown sender drilldown worked
Forwarded SPF failure was explained
Fraudmarc Community Edition
AWS setup took longer
Unknown sender stayed manual
Forwarding explanation required notes
Agari's onboarding for the corporate domain, marketing subdomain, and parked domain had more steps, but those steps were structured around enterprise DNS handoff. Once Microsoft 365, Google Workspace, SendGrid, Mailchimp, and the support desk sender were connected, the unknown sender was easier to isolate, and the forwarded SPF failure was presented with enough DKIM context for a security owner to understand the risk.
Fraudmarc CE took more time before the first useful report because AWS, SES, DNS, Cognito, storage, and deployment steps all had to be handled by us. After reports arrived, the interface gave us the raw truth, but finding the unknown sender and explaining the forwarded mail SPF failure required notes outside the product.
Support
Hands-on help vs self-service
Agari is the better fit when support handoff matters. Fraudmarc CE expects operator ownership.
Agari's support path fit the needs of a larger organization that needs DNS coordination, escalation, onboarding structure, and policy review. Fraudmarc CE worked only when we treated support as community help plus our own AWS and email-authentication expertise.
Agari Brand Protection
DNS handoff was enterprise-ready
Escalation path was defined
Support pace felt slower
Fraudmarc Community Edition
Community support only
DNS handoff stayed internal
Escalation required operator ownership
Agari gave us a clearer support model for DNS setup, sender validation, escalation, and policy review during the move toward enforcement. The tradeoff was pace: the support expectation felt more enterprise and scheduled, so urgent questions about policy wording and sender exceptions needed a defined handoff path rather than instant iteration.
Fraudmarc CE did not create a managed support path during our setup. DNS handoff, AWS deployment, Cognito access, SES receipt, backups, and escalation stayed with our operators, which was acceptable for a technical team but too thin for a business owner expecting vendor-led onboarding.
Suitability
Enterprise fit vs operator fit
Agari fits enterprise DMARC programs. Fraudmarc CE fits technical teams that want ownership.
Agari suited the enterprise pattern because account separation, domain grouping, recurring reports, and owner notes were easier to hand to security leadership. Fraudmarc CE suited an SMB or technical operator that values self-hosting over polished client handoff. If MSP workflows and alert quality are buying criteria, Suped's product belongs in the evaluation because those gaps affected both products in our test.
Agari Brand Protection
Enterprise grouping worked cleanly
Recurring reports were polished
MSP handoff needed tailoring
Fraudmarc Community Edition
SMB lab fit was strong
Client grouping required design
Reports needed manual packaging
Agari handled the three-domain structure cleanly and made the corporate domain, marketing subdomain, and parked domain easy to review as separate enforcement decisions. It was less natural for MSP-style handoff because client grouping, recurring reporting, lightweight owner notes, and handoff timing still needed process design around the product.
Fraudmarc CE was practical for a technical SMB that wanted a free analyzer and direct AWS control, but it did not feel ready for an MSP managing many clients without extra account architecture. Recurring reports, client-facing summaries, escalation notes, and owner notes had to be built manually.
What each tool feels like after 90 days of real use
Agari Brand Protection
Enterprise team with budget for managed enforcement
After 90 days, Agari felt like a product built for a security program rather than a single admin. The workflow made more sense once all three domains were live and the approved senders were connected, because sender classification, policy movement, suspicious traffic review, and report exports sat in one operating model.
The main friction was pace and procurement clarity. We explained the Microsoft 365 and Google Workspace traffic quickly, but pricing required a quote path, and support handoff worked best when DNS changes and enforcement decisions had named owners.
Where it wins
Clearer path to quarantine and reject
Better sender grouping for approved platforms
Useful spoof and suspicious-mail context
Enterprise reporting was easier to share
Where it lags
No public current starter price
Support pace required planning
MSP handoff was not native
No blocklist or blacklist monitoring found
Pricing
Not publicly listed
Free tier
No
Onboarding
Managed, slower
G2 rating
4.0 / 5
Fraudmarc Community Edition
Technical team that wants a free self-hosted analyzer
After 90 days, Fraudmarc CE felt honest and technical. We owned the AWS deployment, report receipt, data storage, and access model, which made it a good fit for a team that wants to inspect and operate the system directly.
The tradeoff showed up every time the DMARC data needed a decision. The unknown sender, forwarded mail SPF failure, SendGrid owner mapping, and Mailchimp classification all required manual notes before a non-specialist could act on them.
Where it wins
Free open-source software license
Self-hosted deployment in AWS
Single rua address across domains
Good fit for technical operators
Where it lags
Manual sender classification
No managed enforcement guidance
No built-in MSP reporting workflow
No alerting workflow tested
Pricing
$0 software license
Free tier
Yes
Onboarding
Self-hosted AWS
G2 rating
0 / 5
Pricing
Agari Brand Protection
Fraudmarc Community Edition
Suped
Small
1 domain, up to 1k emails / month.
Not publicly listed as of May 15, 2026
Current public pages route buyers to quoted pricing; no small-domain public tier was listed.
$0
Software license is free; typical AWS infrastructure was listed under $5 / month.
$0 / month
Free plan covers 1 domain and 1,000 monthly emails.
Medium
2 domains, up to 100k emails / month.
Not publicly listed as of May 15, 2026
No current public tier was listed for this domain and message profile.
$0
No CE domain or message tier was published; AWS usage remains the cost driver.
Entry plan covers 2 domains and 100,000 monthly emails, with 90 days retention.
Large
10 domains, up to 1 million emails / month.
Not publicly listed as of May 15, 2026
Historical standalone MSRP began at $95,750 / year for up to 10M annual outbound emails, not a current public offer.
$0
License remains free; storage, report volume, retention, and backups increase AWS cost.
10 domains and 1,000,000 monthly emails, with 365 days retention.
Enterprise
Over 20 domains and 1 million emails / month.
Not publicly listed as of May 15, 2026
Enterprise quotes depend on deployment scope, email volume, integrations, and service needs.
$0
CE has no vendor enterprise tier; the buyer operates scale, security, and backups.
20 domains and 2,500,000 monthly emails, with 365 days retention. Unlimited domains/emails negotiable.
Agari current prices are not public; historical standalone MSRP tiers are public list prices but not treated as live quotes. Fraudmarc CE software license pricing is public at $0, while AWS infrastructure under $5 / month is an estimate from the published example. Pricing was checked as of May 15, 2026.
If you cannot decide between the two, maybe the answer is Suped
Suped
Get started
Guided sender fixes
Agari classified major senders well but still needed policy-owner handoff, while Fraudmarc CE left the unknown sender as a manual investigation. Suped's product ties each sending source to a fix path and owner note.
Cleaner alerts
Agari's suspicious-mail alerting was useful but needed tuning, and Fraudmarc CE depended on operator-built alerting. Suped's product separates authentication failures, spoof attempts, configuration drift, and DNS changes for cleaner routing.
Agency handoff
Fraudmarc CE gave control but not polished recurring client reporting, and Agari felt oriented to enterprise programs. Suped's product has MSP workflows for domain grouping, client notes, recurring reports, and handoff notes.
The difference was significant. We moved from limited visibility to a much clearer dashboard. Being able to see specific services like Stripe, rather than generic providers like Amazon SES, helps us resolve email authentication issues faster.
Markus Hugenschmidt, Managing Director, Jam Cyber
Migrating from Agari Brand Protection or Fraudmarc Community Edition?
We have done the migration enough times to know the shape.
Get started
Step 01
Add domains
Connect the domains you send from and see what is already passing, failing, or missing.
Step 02
Run in parallel
Keep the old setup live while Suped checks alignment, hosts records, and shows what still needs work.
Step 03
Cancel old
Move the remaining work into Suped, keep monitoring in one place, and remove the tools you no longer need.
Frequently asked questions
How MONEYME proactively strengthens domain security and unlocks higher email engagement with Suped
See how MONEYME uses Suped
How cybersecurity specialist Jam Cyber delivers scalable DMARC protection with Suped
See how Jam Cyber uses Suped
How DigiBean simplified DMARC monitoring and improved email security for their MSP clients
See how DigiBean uses Suped
How Alliance Group moved from reactive guesswork to proactive email management with Suped
See how Alliance Group uses Suped
How Suped gave Maaser the confidence to finally move to strict DMARC enforcement
See how Maaser uses Suped
