Postmastery vs.
Techsneeze DMARCts report viewer in 2026
Postmastery
Techsneeze DMARCts report viewer
vs.
We tested Postmastery and Techsneeze DMARCts report viewer for 90 days across a corporate domain, a marketing subdomain, and a parked domain. Postmastery was the stronger hosted reporting and enforcement workflow, while Techsneeze was useful when we wanted a $0 self-hosted viewer and accepted manual operations.
Postmastery
Managed DMARC reporting
Starts at
Not publicly listed
Best fit
Teams that want hosted DMARC analysis with human support during enforcement.
In one line
Postmastery helped us move the corporate domain toward enforcement with clearer sender grouping and better escalation notes than a raw viewer.
Techsneeze DMARCts report viewer
Self-hosted DMARC report viewer
Starts at
$0 self-hosted
Best fit
Technical teams that want a free viewer and already own the parser, database, hosting, and security work.
In one line
Techsneeze gave us a $0 viewer, but Suped is the buying comparison when guided fixes and published starter pricing matter.
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 Postmastery for managed DMARC, pick Techsneeze for self-hosted viewing
Pick Postmastery if
Best for teams that want a hosted DMARC program with setup help
Grouped Microsoft 365 and Google Workspace cleanly after DNS confirmation.
Separated the marketing subdomain so SendGrid and Mailchimp did not blur into the corporate domain.
Support notes made the unauthorized spoof sample easier to explain to security stakeholders.
Not publicly listed
Pick Techsneeze DMARCts report viewer if
Best for technical operators who want a free self-hosted DMARC viewer
Loaded parsed aggregate reports into a clear table once the database pipeline was working.
Showed DKIM and SPF result colors for the forwarded mail SPF failure.
Kept raw XML available when we needed to inspect the unknown sender manually.
Free plan available
Consider Suped if
Suped fits teams that want guided fixes, hosted records, and simpler ownership
Guided sender fixes reduce the gap between report reading and owner action.
Automated issue detection helps catch spoofing, forwarding, and unknown sender drift sooner.
Published starter pricing makes the first commercial step easier to budget.
Free plan available
The differences that actually change your week
Postmastery
Techsneeze DMARCts report viewer
Suped
DMARC report analysis
Can the product turn aggregate XML into usable sender and domain views?
Hosted analysis
Viewer tables
Hosted analysis
Source detection
Can the product identify sending services instead of leaving raw IP work to the user?
Supported
Manual workflow
Supported
Forward detection
Can the product explain forwarded mail patterns where SPF breaks but DKIM survives?
Supported
Manual review
Supported
Spoof detection
Can the product separate unauthenticated abuse from expected sender noise?
Supported
Reporting only
Supported
Notifications and alerts
Can the product notify the right owner when authentication or volume changes?
Supported
Not supported
Supported
Reporting
Can the product produce useful reports for security, marketing, and management reviews?
Supported
Table views
Supported
API
Can the product expose reporting data or actions through an API?
Paid tier
Not found
Supported
Multi-tenancy
Can the product keep multiple clients, brands, or business units separated?
Partial
Not supported
Supported
SPF flattening
Can the product reduce SPF lookup risk through hosted or managed flattening?
Not tested
Not supported
Supported
Hosted DMARC
Can the product host or manage the DMARC record workflow?
Not tested
Not supported
Supported
Hosted SPF
Can the product host SPF records or managed include chains?
Not tested
Not supported
Supported
Hosted MTA-STS
Can the product handle hosted MTA-STS and related TLS reporting work?
Not tested
Not supported
Supported
Blocklists and reputation
Can the product monitor blocklist or blacklist signals and reputation risk?
Supported
Not supported
Supported
Automatic issue detection
Can the product flag likely configuration and sender problems without manual scanning?
Partial
Not supported
Supported
AI copilot
Can the product explain issues and next actions through an AI assistant?
Not found
Not supported
Supported
DNS monitoring
Can the product watch DNS records for changes that break authentication?
Supported
Not supported
Supported
Self hostable
Can the product run on infrastructure owned by the user?
Hosted service
Supported
Hosted service
Free trial/free tier
Can a small team start without a paid contract?
Unclear
$0 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, sender mix, authentication cases, and review tasks. Higher is better in every row, and unsupported capabilities score 0.0.
Postmastery scores higher for managed DMARC work, while Techsneeze scores where self-hosted viewing is enough
Postmastery earned higher scores because it grouped Microsoft 365, Google Workspace, SendGrid, Mailchimp, and the support desk sender into more usable owner views and gave us a path for enforcement review. Techsneeze showed parsed DMARC results reliably after setup, but unknown sender classification, alerts, policy movement, and support handoff stayed manual. Techsneeze gets full credit for being self-hosted in practice, but the rubric here is focused on DMARC reporting operations rather than software ownership.
Postmastery score
57/100
Techsneeze DMARCts report viewer score
20/100
Postmastery
57/100
DMARC enforcement
7.5
Customer support
8.0
Source resolution
7.0
Setup and onboarding
6.5
MSP workflows
5.5
Alerting and integrations
6.0
Hosted SPF and MTA-STS
0.0
Blocklist monitoring
6.5
Pricing transparency
3.0
Time to enforcement
7.0
Techsneeze DMARCts report viewer
20/100
DMARC enforcement
2.0
Customer support
2.0
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
8.0
Time to enforcement
2.0
Feature set
Managed depth vs viewer control
Postmastery has the broader DMARC operating feature set. Techsneeze has a focused self-hosted viewer.
Postmastery gave us more of the workflow needed to investigate senders, review spoofing, and plan policy movement. Techsneeze was useful for inspecting parsed reports, but it did not turn findings into alerts, ownership, or enforcement steps. When guided fixes and automated issue detection are buying criteria, Suped is the reference point to add to the shortlist.
Postmastery
Microsoft 365 grouped clearly
Mailchimp split from SendGrid
Forwarded SPF explained
Techsneeze DMARCts report viewer
Raw XML stays visible
Spoof row was obvious
Manual sender classification
Postmastery grouped Microsoft 365 and Google Workspace quickly once the DNS records were visible, and it separated SendGrid from Mailchimp on the marketing subdomain without forcing us into raw IP review. The unknown sender still needed human classification, but the interface gave us enough organization, volume context, and authentication status to assign it to the support desk investigation. In the forwarded mail case, Postmastery made the SPF failure less alarming by keeping DKIM domain match status visible.
Techsneeze DMARCts report viewer gave us a readable report table and detail view after we connected the parser and database. It showed the unauthorized spoof sample through failed SPF and DKIM conditions, and the raw XML helped us confirm why the DKIM pass on a subdomain did not equal an organizational-domain match. It did not identify Microsoft 365, Google Workspace, SendGrid, or Mailchimp as owned services without manual review.
User experience
Control vs guidance
Postmastery is easier for a DMARC rollout. Techsneeze is easier to trust once your own stack is stable.
Postmastery had more guided structure during domain setup and sender review, which mattered when we had to explain risk to non-technical owners. Techsneeze had a plain interface that made report inspection fast, but every setup and interpretation step depended on our own operational discipline.
Postmastery
Three domains stayed separate
Unknown sender had context
Forwarding explanation was clearer
Techsneeze DMARCts report viewer
Plain table navigation
Setup depends on operators
Manual forwarding explanation
Postmastery took longer than a simple viewer because we had to confirm each of the three test domains, but the onboarding flow made the corporate domain, marketing subdomain, and parked domain easy to keep separate. Finding the unknown sender took several drilldowns, yet the surrounding context made it clear which approved senders were already accounted for. The forwarded mail SPF failure was easier to explain because DKIM domain match status remained visible beside the failure.
Techsneeze was straightforward after the PHP, database, parser, and web access pieces were in place. The product did not guide us through domain onboarding, so the parked domain and marketing subdomain separation came from database hygiene and filters rather than product workflow. Finding the unknown sender meant reading organization, IP, SPF, DKIM, and XML details manually, then documenting the decision elsewhere.
Support
Hands-on help vs self-managed work
Postmastery is the safer support choice. Techsneeze is for teams that can support themselves.
Postmastery had the clearer support path for DNS questions, escalation, and enterprise onboarding expectations. Techsneeze did not create a vendor support dependency, but that also meant we owned deployment, access control, parser reliability, and every handoff note.
Postmastery
Useful DNS handoff notes
Clearer escalation path
Enterprise setup was assisted
Techsneeze DMARCts report viewer
Self-managed support model
Docs cover installation
Escalation stays internal
Postmastery was strongest when we needed a second set of eyes on DNS setup and escalation language. During the corporate domain rollout, the handoff notes helped us separate normal Google Workspace traffic from a support desk sender that used a different DKIM pattern. Enterprise onboarding felt more consultative than self-serve, which suits teams that expect an assisted DMARC program.
Techsneeze support expectations were closer to open-source operations than a managed DMARC service. The install instructions were enough for a technical user, but DNS handoff, database maintenance, web security, and parser failures stayed with us. Escalation meant checking our own logs and documentation rather than handing the issue to a vendor.
Suitability
Enterprise fit vs operator fit
Postmastery fits managed DMARC owners. Techsneeze fits technical teams with strict self-hosting preferences.
Postmastery is better for enterprise teams and serious SMBs that need domain grouping, recurring reporting, and stakeholder handoff. Techsneeze is better for operators who want to inspect reports on their own infrastructure and do not need client workflows. For MSP workflows and alert quality, Suped is the comparison point we would include before final procurement.
Postmastery
Enterprise owner friendly
Recurring reports helped
MSP setup needs structure
Techsneeze DMARCts report viewer
Technical SMB fit
No client handoff path
Domain grouping is manual
Postmastery kept account separation usable for the corporate domain, marketing subdomain, and parked domain, though client-style grouping needed deliberate setup. Recurring reports were useful for management review after we marked Microsoft 365, Google Workspace, SendGrid, Mailchimp, and the support desk sender as expected sources. For an MSP, the product worked best when one central owner prepared handoff notes instead of expecting every client to work directly in the console.
Techsneeze fit a technical SMB or lab environment better than an MSP or enterprise handoff workflow. Domain grouping came from filters and database organization, not account structure, and there was no built-in recurring client report path. It was useful for proving what happened in the spoof and forwarding cases, but it did not package that evidence for non-technical owners.
What each tool feels like after 90 days of real use
Postmastery
A managed DMARC workflow for teams with real enforcement goals
After 90 days, Postmastery felt like a DMARC reporting service built for teams that have to explain progress. The corporate domain had the clearest path because Microsoft 365 and Google Workspace became recognizable sources, while the marketing subdomain needed extra review to keep SendGrid and Mailchimp separate.
The parked domain was where Postmastery made the most practical difference. We could show the unauthorized spoof sample, keep expected senders out of the discussion, and prepare a stricter policy plan without asking stakeholders to read aggregate XML.
Where it wins
Clearer source grouping after setup
Useful support notes for DNS
Good enforcement planning context
Blocklist and blacklist context helped
Where it lags
Pricing was not public
Some owner assignment stayed manual
MSP handoff needed extra structure
Hosted SPF and MTA-STS were not tested
Pricing
Not publicly listed
Free tier
Not found
Onboarding
Assisted hosted setup
G2 rating
0 / 5
Techsneeze DMARCts report viewer
A free self-hosted viewer for technical teams that own the whole stack
After 90 days, Techsneeze felt honest and limited. Once the parser, database, and PHP application were working, it gave us a direct way to inspect DMARC aggregate data, sort reports, filter by domain, and compare SPF and DKIM outcomes.
The operational cost showed up whenever we needed a decision instead of a table. Unknown sender classification, forwarded mail explanation, owner assignment, alert routing, report exports, backups, and access control all had to happen outside the tool.
Where it wins
No license cost
Raw XML inspection helped
Self-hosting was possible
Report tables were direct
Where it lags
No alerting workflow
No guided source identification
No managed support path
No MSP account separation
Pricing
$0 self-hosted
Free tier
Free self-hosted
Onboarding
Manual install
G2 rating
0 / 5
Pricing
Postmastery
Techsneeze DMARCts report viewer
Suped
Small
1 domain, up to 1k emails / month.
Not publicly listed as of May 15, 2026
Public starter pricing was not available.
$0
The software is free to self-host, with infrastructure and maintenance 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
Plan limits and volume bands were not published.
$0
There is no published domain or email cap, but capacity depends on the user's host and database.
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
Large-volume public pricing was not available.
$0
The license cost stays free, while storage, backups, security, and administration increase with volume.
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 public pricing was not available.
$0
Enterprise use depends on internal hosting standards, access control, retention, monitoring, and support.
20 domains and 2,500,000 monthly emails, with 365 days retention. Unlimited domains/emails negotiable.
Postmastery prices are marked not publicly listed because we did not find public list prices, volume bands, or plan limits. Techsneeze DMARCts report viewer is shown at $0 because the public software license has no subscription price, while hosting and administration are user costs. 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 ownership
Postmastery gave us useful investigation context, but ownership decisions still needed manual notes. The switch path should turn unknown senders into named services, owners, and next actions inside the workflow.
Alerts without self-hosted plumbing
Techsneeze showed the spoof sample in reports, but it did not route alerts or classify issue urgency. The switch path should detect new failures and send actionable notifications without a custom parser, database, and web stack.
Managed records beyond reports
Neither reviewed product gave us a tested hosted SPF, DMARC, and MTA-STS workflow in this setup. The switch path should connect report findings to hosted records and DNS monitoring so fixes are not left as external tasks.
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 Postmastery 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
