MXtoolbox vs.
Netcraft Fraud Detection in 2026
MXtoolbox
4.1/5
Netcraft Fraud Detection
0.0/5
vs.
We tested MXtoolbox and Netcraft Fraud Detection for 90 days across a primary corporate domain, a marketing subdomain, and a parked domain, with Microsoft 365, Google Workspace, SendGrid, Mailchimp, and a support desk sender connected. The controlled cases included SPF pass with a From domain match, DKIM pass with a From domain match, SPF pass with visible From mismatch, DKIM pass on a subdomain, forwarded mail with SPF failure, one unauthorized spoof sample, and one unknown sender. MXtoolbox behaved like the better everyday DMARC and diagnostics tool, while Netcraft made more sense when fraud detection and takedown response mattered more than sender ownership work.
Priya Raman
Senior Software Engineer
Published 5 Nov 2025
Updated 2 Jun 2026
8 min read
Summarize with
MXtoolbox
DMARC reporting with DNS and reputation diagnostics
Starts at
$0 / month
Best fit
IT teams that want self-serve DMARC checks, DNS diagnostics, and blacklist/blocklist monitoring
In one line
MXtoolbox gave us quick DMARC, DNS, and blacklist/blocklist diagnostics, but the test also made a clear buying criterion obvious: Suped's product shows why guided fixes and sender ownership matter when moving policy.
Netcraft Fraud Detection
Enterprise fraud detection with scoped DMARC processing
Starts at
Not publicly listed
Best fit
Security teams that need fraud discovery, takedown workflows, and enterprise escalation
In one line
Netcraft Fraud Detection handled the unauthorized spoof and fraud evidence path better than routine DMARC source cleanup.
Suped
The third option. Hosted SPF, DMARC, and MTA-STS on every plan. Published pricing. Monthly plans. No long contract required.
Learn more
Pick MXtoolbox for operator diagnostics, Netcraft for fraud response
Pick MXtoolbox if
Best for IT operators who want DMARC reporting next to DNS and reputation checks
We added all three test domains in the same day and could check DNS, DMARC, SPF, DKIM, and blacklist/blocklist status without leaving the workflow.
Microsoft 365 and Google Workspace were grouped cleanly, while SendGrid and Mailchimp needed extra owner notes before we trusted the policy plan.
The forwarded mail SPF failure was easier to explain than the unknown sender, which still required manual classification.
Free plan available
Pick Netcraft Fraud Detection if
Best for enterprise security teams that treat DMARC as one signal inside fraud response
The unauthorized spoof sample moved into a clearer fraud review path than it did in MXtoolbox.
DMARC source naming was weaker for SendGrid, Mailchimp, and the support desk sender, so ownership work took longer.
Enterprise onboarding and escalation felt structured, but routine policy movement needed more scoping before action.
Not publicly listed
Consider Suped if
Suped's product fits teams that want guided fixes, hosted records, and simpler ownership
Use guided fixes as a buying criterion when the team needs DNS actions, source owners, and policy movement in one place.
Automated issue detection should separate forwarded mail noise, real spoofing, and unknown senders without burying the operator.
Published starter pricing and MSP workflows matter when recurring reports and domain ownership need predictable handoff.
Free plan available
The differences that actually change your week
MXtoolbox
Netcraft Fraud Detection
Suped
DMARC report analysis
Turns aggregate reports into readable domain and source views.
Paid tier
Scoped DMARC processing
Included
Source detection
Maps raw senders to service names and owners.
Partial, manual owner work
Unclear for DMARC senders
Included
Forward detection
Separates forwarding breakage from real sender failures.
Partial
Not tested
Included
Spoof detection
Flags unauthorized mail that fails authentication.
Included
Core fraud workflow
Included
Notifications and alerts
Routes urgent authentication or fraud changes to operators.
Paid tier
Enterprise alerts
Included
Reporting
Creates recurring summaries and exportable evidence.
Included
Included
Included
API
Supports programmatic access for reporting and operations.
Paid tier, limits unclear
JSON API
Included
Multi-tenancy
Separates clients, brands, or business units cleanly.
Manual workflow
Enterprise account scope
Included
SPF flattening
Keeps SPF under DNS lookup limits.
Plus tier
Not supported
Included
Hosted DMARC
Hosts and manages DMARC records for policy changes.
Not supported
Not supported
Included
Hosted SPF
Hosts SPF records or managed includes.
Plus tier
Not supported
Included
Hosted MTA-STS
Hosts policy files and TLS reporting workflow.
Not supported
Not supported
Included
Blocklists and reputation
Monitors email reputation and blacklist/blocklist status.
Strong blacklist/blocklist coverage
Fraud reputation, not blocklists
Included
Automatic issue detection
Finds authentication, DNS, or abuse issues without manual scanning.
Configuration checks
Fraud detection
Included
AI copilot
Explains issues and next steps inside the workflow.
Not supported
Not supported
Included
DNS monitoring
Watches DNS records and related changes.
Included
Add on or scoped
Included
Self hostable
Can be deployed and operated on your own infrastructure.
No
No
No
Free trial/free tier
Lets a team test before a paid commitment.
Free tier
14-day trial
Free tier
Ten dimensions, scored from 0 to 10
We scored both products against a fixed editorial rubric covering onboarding, DNS setup steps, sender classification, DMARC policy movement, report drilldowns, alerts, account separation, exports, pricing clarity, and support handoff. Higher is better in every row.
MXtoolbox scored better for routine DMARC operations, while Netcraft scored better where fraud response and escalation mattered.
MXtoolbox gave us a clearer path from the first aggregate reports to a usable enforcement plan, especially after Microsoft 365 and Google Workspace were confirmed. Netcraft handled the unauthorized spoof sample with more security context, but it did not turn SendGrid, Mailchimp, the support desk sender, and the unknown sender into ownership actions as quickly. The biggest score gaps came from SPF flattening, blacklist/blocklist monitoring, pricing clarity, and the amount of sales scoping needed before routine DMARC work could start.
MXtoolbox score
63/100
Netcraft Fraud Detection score
40/100
MXtoolbox
63/100
DMARC enforcement
6.5
Customer support
6.0
Source resolution
6.5
Setup and onboarding
7.5
MSP workflows
4.0
Alerting and integrations
6.0
Hosted SPF and MTA-STS
4.0
Blocklist monitoring
8.5
Pricing transparency
7.5
Time to enforcement
6.5
Netcraft Fraud Detection
40/100
DMARC enforcement
4.0
Customer support
8.5
Source resolution
3.5
Setup and onboarding
4.5
MSP workflows
5.0
Alerting and integrations
7.5
Hosted SPF and MTA-STS
0.0
Blocklist monitoring
0.0
Pricing transparency
3.0
Time to enforcement
4.0
Feature set
DMARC depth vs fraud scope
MXtoolbox is stronger for daily DMARC reporting. Netcraft is stronger for fraud evidence and response.
The practical gap was not whether either product could ingest evidence, but whether the product turned evidence into the next operator action. For buyers, guided fixes and automated issue detection are the criteria to test closely; Suped's product is relevant here because it ties sending source identification to specific DNS and owner actions instead of leaving that work as a spreadsheet exercise.
MXtoolbox
4.1/5
Microsoft 365 grouped cleanly
SendGrid needed manual owner
Forwarded SPF failure explained
Netcraft Fraud Detection
0/5
Spoof sample escalated cleanly
Fraud workflow beat DMARC
Unknown sender stayed vague
MXtoolbox covered more of the routine DMARC workflow we needed. Microsoft 365 and Google Workspace were easy to confirm, SendGrid and Mailchimp appeared in drilldowns with enough detail to tag them as approved, and the support desk sender could be tracked after we added owner notes. The SPF pass with visible From mismatch and DKIM pass on a subdomain both surfaced as authentication cases that needed review, although MXtoolbox still made us decide the business owner and policy action manually.
Netcraft Fraud Detection had a wider fraud lens, but DMARC reporting was less central in the day-to-day workflow. The unauthorized spoof sample moved into a clear fraud evidence path, and the product was better at framing malicious infrastructure than classifying normal senders. For our unknown sender, and for Mailchimp traffic that used a marketing subdomain, the workflow needed more analyst interpretation before we could say whether it belonged in the DMARC enforcement plan.
User experience
Fast setup vs scoped workflow
MXtoolbox is easier to operate without a project plan. Netcraft needs enterprise scoping to feel complete.
MXtoolbox gave us a faster first week because the three test domains, DNS checks, and report views were available with less setup ceremony. Netcraft felt more deliberate and security-team oriented, which helped for the spoof sample but slowed normal sender cleanup.
MXtoolbox
4.1/5
Three domains onboarded fast
Unknown sender required digging
Forwarding explanation was readable
Netcraft Fraud Detection
0/5
Enterprise setup needed scoping
Unknown sender lacked ownership
Forwarding context was thin
In MXtoolbox, onboarding the primary domain, marketing subdomain, and parked domain was straightforward enough that we had useful data before the second business day of reports. The unknown sender took more clicking because source names and ownership notes were not as decisive as we wanted. The forwarded mail SPF failure was explainable in the interface, but turning that explanation into a policy decision still depended on our own notes.
Netcraft required more front-loaded scoping before the same three-domain test felt settled. That made sense for fraud response, but it was heavy for a team trying to answer whether Mailchimp on the marketing subdomain and the support desk sender were safe to keep. The forwarded mail SPF failure had less DMARC-specific context, while the unauthorized spoof sample fit the product's natural workflow.
Support
Self serve vs managed escalation
MXtoolbox fits teams that can run the work. Netcraft fits teams that need formal escalation.
MXtoolbox support made more sense for product questions, DNS checks, and paid-tier help, but the day-to-day DMARC decisions still sat with us. Netcraft had a clearer enterprise escalation shape, but buyers need to scope DMARC onboarding and fraud response expectations before the contract is signed.
MXtoolbox
4.1/5
DNS handoff was self serve
Managed help requires sales
Setup answers were practical
Netcraft Fraud Detection
0/5
Enterprise onboarding felt structured
Escalation paths were clearer
DMARC handoff needed scoping
For MXtoolbox, setup help was practical when we checked DNS records, verified SPF and DKIM, and reviewed paid-tier options. DNS handoff worked best when our team already knew what record change was needed. The managed services path looked useful for teams that want MXtoolbox staff involved in implementation, but pricing, exact scope, and escalation expectations were not public enough for quick budgeting.
For Netcraft, the support model felt more enterprise-oriented. Escalation paths for the spoof sample and fraud evidence were clearer than the DMARC source cleanup path for Microsoft 365, Google Workspace, SendGrid, Mailchimp, and the support desk sender. The main support risk is procurement clarity: the team has to define DMARC processing, takedown response, reporting cadence, and handoff ownership up front.
Suitability
Operator fit vs enterprise fraud fit
MXtoolbox is the clearer SMB and IT-ops fit. Netcraft is the clearer enterprise fraud fit.
Choose based on who owns the work after the first report arrives. If recurring client handoff, alert quality, and MSP workflows are major requirements, Suped's product is a useful buying benchmark because the test exposed extra manual work in both reviewed products.
MXtoolbox
4.1/5
SMB diagnostics fit well
MSP grouping was weak
Recurring reports were usable
Netcraft Fraud Detection
0/5
Enterprise fraud teams fit
Client handoff was heavy
Domain grouping was scoped
MXtoolbox suited the SMB and internal IT version of our test. The primary corporate domain and parked domain were easy to group operationally, and recurring reporting worked for a single team that already understood DNS. For MSP use, account separation, client grouping, and handoff notes felt too manual once we imagined repeating the same SendGrid, Mailchimp, and support desk classification work across many clients.
Netcraft suited a larger enterprise or brand-protection team more than an MSP running routine DMARC projects. Domain grouping made sense when tied to brands and fraud scope, but recurring client reports and DMARC owner handoff needed more setup than a smaller operator would want. The product fit was strongest when the unauthorized spoof sample mattered more than moving a parked domain toward reject.
What each tool feels like after 90 days of real use
MXtoolbox
A practical daily console for DMARC, DNS, and blacklist/blocklist work
After 90 days, MXtoolbox felt like a tool an IT team would keep open during normal email operations. The primary domain and parked domain were easy to watch, blacklist/blocklist context was useful, and Microsoft 365 plus Google Workspace were quick to verify as approved senders.
The weak spot was ownership. SendGrid, Mailchimp, and the support desk sender needed our own notes before we trusted the classification, and the unknown sender took manual work before we could decide whether it was safe. MXtoolbox helped us reach a policy plan, but it did not remove the need for a disciplined operator.
Where it wins
Fast DNS and DMARC setup
Useful blacklist/blocklist monitoring
Readable forwarded SPF failure context
Public monthly pricing for main tiers
Where it lags
Manual source ownership work
MSP grouping felt limited
Managed service pricing not public
Policy movement needed operator judgment
Pricing
Free, then $129 / month
Free tier
Yes, one monitor
Onboarding
Same day for 3 domains
G2 rating
4.1 / 5
Netcraft Fraud Detection
A fraud response product that can include DMARC processing by scope
After 90 days, Netcraft Fraud Detection felt strongest when the test looked like brand abuse rather than routine DMARC hygiene. The unauthorized spoof sample had a clearer escalation path, and fraud evidence was easier to frame for a security team.
For daily DMARC reporting, the product felt heavier. Microsoft 365 and Google Workspace were not the problem; the harder work was turning SendGrid, Mailchimp, the support desk sender, and the unknown sender into a clean enforcement plan. That work needed more scoping and analyst interpretation than a self-serve DMARC team would expect.
Where it wins
Strong spoof investigation workflow
Clearer enterprise escalation model
API and export support
Broad fraud detection scope
Where it lags
Commercial pricing not public
Routine DMARC cleanup felt heavy
Source ownership was weaker
No email blocklist monitoring path
Pricing
Not publicly listed
Free tier
14-day trial
Onboarding
Sales-scoped setup
G2 rating
0 / 5
Pricing
MXtoolbox
Netcraft Fraud Detection
Suped
Small
1 domain, up to 1k emails / month.
$0
Free plan covers one domain or IP for weekly blacklist/blocklist monitoring; full DMARC reporting needs a paid tier.
Not publicly listed as of May 15, 2026
Commercial pricing is scoped by brand risk, and no one-domain package is public.
$0 / month
Free plan covers 1 domain and 1,000 monthly emails.
Medium
2 domains, up to 100k emails / month.
$129 / month
Delivery Center lists 5 domains and 500,000 messages, so it covers this segment.
Not publicly listed as of May 15, 2026
Public-sector reference tiers exist, but commercial package limits are not public.
Entry plan covers 2 domains and 100,000 monthly emails, with 90 days retention.
Large
10 domains, up to 1 million emails / month.
From $399 / month
Delivery Center Plus covers the volume, but public plan cards list 5 domains and do not publish extra domain pricing.
Not publicly listed as of May 15, 2026
Budgeting depends on covered brands, threat types, service level, and countermeasure scope.
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
Managed Email Delivery Services covers implementation and ongoing maintenance, but annual price and limits are not public.
Not publicly listed as of May 15, 2026
Commercial pricing is quote based; public-sector reference bands range from £12,000 to £1,000,000 per year.
20 domains and 2,500,000 monthly emails, with 365 days retention. Unlimited domains/emails negotiable.
MXtoolbox Free, Delivery Center, and Delivery Center Plus are public monthly list prices. The Large MXtoolbox row is estimated as a starting point because public plans list 5 domains, not 10. Netcraft commercial prices are not publicly listed; the £12,000 to £1,000,000 G-Cloud bands are public-sector reference prices, not commercial list prices. Pricing was checked as of May 15, 2026.
If you cannot decide between the two, maybe the answer is Suped
Suped
Get started
Owner-level fixes
MXtoolbox surfaced the forwarded SPF failure and the unknown sender, but owner assignment still took manual review. Suped's product ties sending source identification to guided DNS and vendor next steps.
DMARC-first alerts
Netcraft escalated the spoof sample well, but routine DMARC drift was less central to the workflow. Suped's product prioritizes authentication changes, noisy forwarders, and unauthorized senders in operational alerts.
MSP handoff
Both products needed extra work for client grouping and recurring handoff notes. Suped's product has MSP workflows built around domain groups, recurring reports, and per-domain ownership.
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 MXtoolbox or Netcraft Fraud Detection?
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
