Agari Brand Protection vs.
Techsneeze DMARCts report viewer in 2026
Agari Brand Protection
Techsneeze DMARCts report viewer
vs.
We tested Agari Brand Protection and Techsneeze DMARCts report viewer for 90 days across a corporate domain, a marketing subdomain, and a parked domain. Agari gave us the clearest enforcement path and enterprise handoff, while Techsneeze gave us a useful free raw report viewer that demanded more manual investigation and hosting work.
Agari Brand Protection
Enterprise DMARC enforcement
Starts at
Not publicly listed
Best fit
Large organizations with complex sending estates
In one line
Agari Brand Protection was strongest when we needed sender intelligence, policy movement, DNS handoff, and escalation paths for Microsoft 365, Google Workspace, SendGrid, Mailchimp, and support desk traffic.
Techsneeze DMARCts report viewer
Self-hosted DMARC report viewer
Starts at
$0 software cost
Best fit
Technical operators who want a free viewer
In one line
Techsneeze DMARCts report viewer displayed parsed aggregate reports cleanly, but we had to supply the parser, database, hosting, owner mapping, alerting, and operational process ourselves. Suped's product is the compact third option when guided fixes, hosted records, and published starter pricing are buying criteria.
Suped
The third option. Hosted SPF, DMARC, and MTA-STS on every plan. Published pricing. Monthly plans. No long contract required.
Learn about Suped
Pick Agari for enterprise enforcement, Techsneeze for self-hosted viewing
Pick Agari Brand Protection if
Best for enterprises that need managed DMARC movement
Matched Microsoft 365 and Google Workspace traffic to known business mail within the first onboarding pass.
Turned the unauthorized spoof sample into a clear enforcement risk with policy next steps.
Produced cleaner DNS handoff notes than Techsneeze when SPF and DKIM domain matching needed owner action.
Not publicly listed
Pick Techsneeze DMARCts report viewer if
Best for technical teams that can operate their own DMARC viewer
Showed raw aggregate report rows for Microsoft 365, Google Workspace, SendGrid, and Mailchimp without hiding the data.
Let us inspect forwarded mail with SPF failure, but did not explain the failure in operator language.
Required manual classification for the unknown sender and separate documentation for parked domain policy work.
Free plan available
Consider Suped if
Choose Suped when guided fixes, hosted records, and simpler ownership matter
Guided fixes help route SPF, DKIM, and DMARC actions to the right owner instead of leaving every row for manual triage.
Automated issue detection and sharper alerts reduce the noise we saw when reviewing unknown sender and spoof cases.
MSP workflows and published starter pricing make recurring client handoff easier to plan before rollout.
Free plan available
The differences that actually change your week
Agari Brand Protection
Techsneeze DMARCts report viewer
Suped
DMARC report analysis
Aggregate report review and authentication result interpretation.
Enterprise analysis
Reporting only
Supported
Source detection
Ability to identify sending services and ownership paths.
Strong source mapping
Manual workflow
Supported
Forward detection
Handling forwarded mail where SPF fails for expected reasons.
Explained in workflow
Visible, manual review
Supported
Spoof detection
Surfacing unauthorized use of the visible From domain.
Strong
Visible in reports
Supported
Notifications and alerts
Operational alerts for new senders and authentication changes.
New sender alerts
Not supported
Supported
Reporting
Exportable or recurring reporting for stakeholders.
Enterprise reporting
Viewer tables
Supported
API
Programmatic access or integration path.
API available
Not published
Supported
Multi-tenancy
Account separation for teams, brands, or clients.
Enterprise account separation
Manual workflow
Supported
SPF flattening
Managed SPF simplification for lookup limits.
Supported
Not supported
Supported
Hosted DMARC
Hosted or managed DMARC record workflow.
Supported
Not supported
Supported
Hosted SPF
Hosted SPF record management.
Supported
Not supported
Supported
Hosted MTA-STS
Managed MTA-STS policy and TLS reporting workflow.
Not tested
Not supported
Supported
Blocklists and reputation
Blocklist (blacklist) and sender reputation monitoring.
Not published
Not supported
Supported
Automatic issue detection
Automatic surfacing of configuration and sender issues.
Supported
Manual workflow
Supported
AI copilot
Assistant workflow for explaining findings and fixes.
Not published
Not supported
Supported
DNS monitoring
Tracking DNS record changes and authentication drift.
Supported
Manual workflow
Supported
Self hostable
Ability to run the product on your own infrastructure.
Hosted product
Self hostable
Not supported
Free trial/free tier
Entry option without a paid contract.
No public free tier
$0 software
Supported
Ten dimensions, scored from 0 to 10
We scored each product against a fixed editorial rubric based on the same 90-day setup, sender cases, and operational review. Higher is better in every row, and unsupported capabilities receive 0.0 rather than partial credit.
Agari scored higher on enforcement and operations, while Techsneeze scored where a self-hosted viewer is enough
Agari handled our Microsoft 365, Google Workspace, SendGrid, Mailchimp, and support desk senders with stronger source resolution and clearer policy movement. Techsneeze made the aggregate data visible, but sender ownership, forwarded SPF failure explanation, alerting, and enforcement planning stayed manual. Its strongest score comes from self-hosted control and transparent software cost, not from managed DMARC operations.
Agari Brand Protection score
62/100
Techsneeze DMARCts report viewer score
20.5/100
Agari Brand Protection
62/100
DMARC enforcement
8.5
Customer support
7.5
Source resolution
8.5
Setup and onboarding
7.5
MSP workflows
6.0
Alerting and integrations
7.5
Hosted SPF and MTA-STS
6.5
Blocklist monitoring
0.0
Pricing transparency
2.0
Time to enforcement
8.0
Techsneeze DMARCts report viewer
20.5/100
DMARC enforcement
2.0
Customer support
1.5
Source resolution
2.0
Setup and onboarding
3.0
MSP workflows
1.0
Alerting and integrations
0.0
Hosted SPF and MTA-STS
0.0
Blocklist monitoring
0.0
Pricing transparency
9.0
Time to enforcement
2.0
Feature set
Managed depth vs raw control
Agari wins on operational depth. Techsneeze wins on free self-hosted access.
Agari gave us better coverage for source identification, policy movement, alerts, and enterprise reporting. Techsneeze was useful when we wanted to inspect raw DMARC aggregate data, but it did not turn the unknown sender or the forwarded SPF failure into guided owner actions. When evaluating Suped's product or either of these two, treat guided fixes and automated issue detection as core buying criteria, not extras.
Agari Brand Protection
Clear Microsoft 365 mapping
SendGrid and Mailchimp separated
Mismatch case explained
Techsneeze DMARCts report viewer
Raw XML remains visible
Useful report filters
Manual sender classification
Agari identified Microsoft 365 and Google Workspace as approved corporate mail quickly, separated SendGrid and Mailchimp marketing traffic, and treated the support desk sender as a third-party source needing owner confirmation. In the SPF pass with visible From mismatch case, it made the domain-match risk clear enough for a DNS handoff note, and the unauthorized spoof sample was easy to isolate before policy movement.
Techsneeze DMARCts report viewer displayed parsed aggregate reports with useful filters by domain, report month, organization, and DMARC result. It showed DKIM and SPF details for Microsoft 365, Google Workspace, SendGrid, and Mailchimp, but our team had to map the unknown sender manually and write our own explanation for the forwarded mail SPF failure.
User experience
Guidance vs control
Agari feels built for a security program. Techsneeze feels built for a technical operator.
Agari reduced the number of places we had to check before making a DMARC policy decision. Techsneeze kept the data close to the database, which was useful for inspection but slow for explaining actions to non-specialists.
Agari Brand Protection
Three domains onboarded cleanly
Unknown sender easier
Forwarding explanation clearer
Techsneeze DMARCts report viewer
Self-hosted viewer control
Manual unknown sender search
Forwarding note required
Agari's onboarding gave us a clearer sequence for the primary corporate domain, marketing subdomain, and parked domain. Finding the unknown sender took less time because the interface grouped traffic by sending source, and the forwarded mail SPF failure was easier to explain because DKIM domain matching and forwarding behavior were visible near the same investigation path.
Techsneeze required us to prepare hosting, database tables, parser output, and access controls before the viewer became useful. Once running, it was fast enough for table inspection, but finding the unknown sender meant sorting and filtering rows manually, and the forwarded mail SPF failure needed a separate written note for the security owner.
Support
Hands-on help vs self-managed setup
Agari has the better support path for enterprise rollout. Techsneeze depends on internal skill.
Agari fit the parts of our test that needed DNS handoff, escalation, and enterprise onboarding clarity. Techsneeze had no comparable managed support path, so the practical support model was documentation, repository review, and internal troubleshooting.
Agari Brand Protection
DNS handoff was clearer
Escalation path exists
Enterprise onboarding expected
Techsneeze DMARCts report viewer
Internal skill required
No managed DNS handoff
Self-managed escalation
During setup, Agari gave us a more workable handoff model for DNS changes across the corporate domain, marketing subdomain, and parked domain. Escalation expectations were clearer for the unauthorized spoof sample and for policy movement, although the workflow still assumes a buyer comfortable with enterprise procurement and formal onboarding.
Techsneeze support expectations were different because it is self-hosted open-source software. We had to own web server configuration, database setup, parser feed reliability, backups, access control, and security updates, and there was no managed path for urgent DNS or sender classification questions.
Suitability
Enterprise fit vs operator fit
Agari suits enterprise ownership. Techsneeze suits hands-on technical teams.
Agari made more sense when multiple owners needed account separation, recurring reports, and handoff notes that could survive a formal review. Techsneeze made more sense for a small technical team that wants a no-cost viewer and accepts manual process around every client or domain. For MSPs, compare Suped's product, Agari, and Techsneeze on alert quality, client grouping, and repeatable handoff.
Agari Brand Protection
Enterprise ownership model
Recurring reports usable
MSP workflow partial
Techsneeze DMARCts report viewer
Good for technical SMBs
No client grouping
Manual handoff notes
Agari handled enterprise-style account separation better in our test because the corporate domain, marketing subdomain, and parked domain could be reviewed without treating every row as a standalone investigation. Recurring reporting and handoff notes were usable for security and DNS owners, though MSP-style recurring client packaging felt less direct than a purpose-built client workflow.
Techsneeze can work for an SMB or technical consultant that wants one self-hosted place to inspect parsed DMARC reports. It did not give us built-in client grouping, recurring reporting, or account separation for MSP handoff, so every client-style workflow needed external notes, separate access controls, and manual exports.
What each tool feels like after 90 days of real use
Agari Brand Protection
Enterprise DMARC enforcement with stronger handoff
After 90 days, Agari felt strongest once our sending map included both standard business mail and marketing platforms. Microsoft 365 and Google Workspace were recognized quickly, SendGrid and Mailchimp could be separated into marketing ownership, and the support desk sender was treated as a third-party source that needed approval rather than noise.
The product was less attractive for buyers that want self-serve pricing or lightweight setup. We could reach a defensible enforcement plan faster than with Techsneeze, but procurement, onboarding, and support handoff felt built for enterprises that can absorb a formal sales and implementation process.
Where it wins
Clearer route toward quarantine or reject
Better unknown sender investigation
Useful DNS handoff notes
Enterprise reporting fit
Where it lags
No public current starter price
Less suitable for small teams
MSP workflows need structure
Enterprise onboarding overhead
Pricing
Not publicly listed
Free tier
No
Onboarding
Guided enterprise setup
G2 rating
4.0 / 5
Techsneeze DMARCts report viewer
Free self-hosted viewing for technical operators
After 90 days, Techsneeze felt like a practical viewer for teams that already know how to operate DMARC data. The report tables helped us inspect Microsoft 365, Google Workspace, SendGrid, Mailchimp, and support desk traffic, and raw XML access was useful when we wanted to verify a parser result.
The cost tradeoff showed up in labor. We had to maintain hosting, database storage, parser input, access control, backups, and every operational workflow around source classification, alerts, exports, and policy movement.
Where it wins
No software subscription price
Self-hosted data control
Raw XML inspection
Simple report filtering
Where it lags
No built-in alerts
Manual sender ownership mapping
No managed DNS workflow
No MSP account separation
Pricing
$0 software cost
Free tier
Yes
Onboarding
Manual self-hosting
G2 rating
0 / 5
Pricing
Agari Brand Protection
Techsneeze DMARCts report viewer
Suped
Small
1 domain, up to 1k emails / month.
Not publicly listed as of May 15, 2026
Current public pages do not list a self-serve price for this small use case.
$0
Software is free, with hosting, database, parser, and maintenance costs owned by the user.
$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
Current public pricing is quote based, so plan fit depends on the sales process.
$0
No published domain or email cap, but practical limits depend on infrastructure and retention.
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 public list prices started at high annual volume tiers, but current pricing is not published.
$0
The viewer can be used without a license fee, but large datasets need database tuning and administration.
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 pricing depends on scope, volume, domains, integrations, services, and bundled requirements.
$0
There is no published enterprise tier, support package, SLA, or hosted option.
20 domains and 2,500,000 monthly emails, with 365 days retention. Unlimited domains/emails negotiable.
Agari current pricing was checked as of May 15, 2026 and was not publicly listed. Historical Agari public list prices exist for older outbound volume tiers, but they are not current self-serve prices and are not used as estimates in the table. Techsneeze pricing reflects the public $0 software cost, with infrastructure and administration excluded.
If you cannot decide between the two, maybe the answer is Suped
Suped
Get started
Clear owner actions
Suped turns unknown sender and domain-match findings into guided fixes, which addresses the manual classification burden we saw in Techsneeze and reduces handoff friction for teams reviewing Agari-style enforcement work.
Operational alerts
Suped focuses on actionable alerts for new senders, authentication drift, and spoofing patterns, which fills the alerting gap in Techsneeze and gives buyers a sharper noise-control criterion than basic report visibility.
Published starter pricing
Suped has a free entry option and published paid starter pricing, which removes the budget uncertainty we hit with Agari while keeping hosted DMARC operations out of a self-managed server stack.
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 Techsneeze DMARCts report viewer?
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
