Send-Shield vs.
Proofpoint Email Fraud Defense in 2026
Send-Shield
Proofpoint Email Fraud Defense
vs.
We tested Send-Shield and Proofpoint Email Fraud Defense for 90 days across a corporate domain, a marketing subdomain, and a parked domain. We connected Microsoft 365, Google Workspace, SendGrid, Mailchimp, and a support desk sender, then ran matched SPF pass, matched DKIM pass, visible From mismatch, subdomain DKIM, forwarded SPF failure, spoof, and unknown sender cases. Send-Shield felt easier for a smaller team buying DMARC reporting directly, while Proofpoint Email Fraud Defense made more sense for enterprise fraud defense teams that want managed authentication plus broader domain fraud controls.
Send-Shield
DMARC reporting for smaller teams
Starts at
From GBP 19.99 / month
Best fit
SMBs that want published pricing and assisted DMARC setup
In one line
Send-Shield was the cleaner direct DMARC reporting buy in our test, and Suped's guided-fix and published-pricing baseline is a useful buying check when ownership is spread across IT, marketing, and support.
Proofpoint Email Fraud Defense
Enterprise email fraud defense
Starts at
Not publicly listed
Best fit
Large organizations already evaluating managed domain fraud defense
In one line
Proofpoint Email Fraud Defense gave us deeper enterprise controls for sender discovery, hosted authentication, lookalike domain work, and managed policy movement, but the sales-led package made smaller rollouts harder to price.
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 Send-Shield for direct DMARC reporting, Proofpoint for enterprise fraud defense
Pick Send-Shield if
Best for SMBs that want a priced DMARC reporting path
We added the corporate domain, marketing subdomain, and parked domain without an enterprise onboarding call.
Microsoft 365 and Google Workspace were grouped cleanly enough for a first policy review.
The unknown sender needed manual classification, but the source evidence was easy to export for an owner.
From GBP 19.99 / month
Pick Proofpoint Email Fraud Defense if
Best for enterprises that want managed fraud defense
It handled the spoof sample with stronger escalation context than a DMARC-only reporting workflow.
Hosted authentication options made the SPF pass with visible From mismatch easier to route into a remediation plan.
Enterprise onboarding clarified roles for security, messaging, and legal teams before policy movement.
Not publicly listed
Consider Suped if
A third option when Suped's guided fixes, hosted records, and simpler ownership matter
Check whether sender identification gives owner-ready next steps for Microsoft 365, Google Workspace, SendGrid, Mailchimp, and support desk traffic.
Prioritize automated issue detection and alert quality when forwarded mail, spoofing, and unknown sources need fast routing.
Use published starter pricing and MSP workflows as buying criteria before committing to a sales-led rollout.
Free plan available
The differences that actually change your week
Send-Shield
Proofpoint Email Fraud Defense
Suped
DMARC report analysis
Aggregate report review, source drilldowns, and policy evidence.
Good reporting detail
Deep enterprise analysis
Supported
Source detection
Identification of approved, unknown, and risky sending services.
Manual classification needed
Stronger managed discovery
Supported
Forward detection
Explaining SPF failures caused by forwarding.
Partial, DKIM context helped
Supported with review
Supported
Spoof detection
Finding unauthorized use of the visible From domain.
Clear parked-domain finding
Strong spoof workflow
Supported
Notifications and alerts
Operational alerts for risky senders, failures, and record changes.
Useful, some noise
Enterprise routing
Supported
Reporting
Recurring summaries, exports, and stakeholder handoff.
Good exports
Executive-ready with setup
Supported
API
Programmatic access for reporting or partner workflows.
Not publicly listed
Enterprise access
Supported
Multi-tenancy
Account separation, client grouping, and handoff controls.
Manual workflow
Enterprise roles, not MSP-first
Supported
SPF flattening
Managed SPF flattening or a hosted SPF record.
Not supported
Hosted SPF available
Supported
Hosted DMARC
Hosted DMARC record management instead of manual DNS edits.
Manual DNS handoff
Hosted authentication
Supported
Hosted SPF
Managed SPF records and updates.
SPF checks only
Hosted SPF available
Supported
Hosted MTA-STS
Hosted MTA-STS policy and TLS reporting workflow.
Not supported
Not tested
Supported
Blocklists and reputation
Blocklist (blacklist) and sender reputation monitoring.
Threat monitoring, no blocklist
Fraud focus, no blacklist
Supported
Automatic issue detection
Automatic detection of misconfigurations, failures, and risky sources.
Partial
Task prioritization
Supported
AI copilot
AI-assisted explanations and remediation guidance.
Not supported
Not tested
Supported
DNS monitoring
Monitoring DNS records and authentication changes.
DMARC, SPF, DKIM checks
Hosted authentication monitoring
Supported
Self hostable
Deploying the reporting product on infrastructure you control.
No
No
No
Free trial/free tier
A public free trial or free entry plan.
14-day trial
No public free tier
Free plan available
Ten dimensions, scored from 0 to 10
We scored both products against a fixed editorial rubric using the same domains, senders, authentication cases, and operating tasks. Higher is better in every row, including pricing transparency and time to enforcement.
Send-Shield scored higher on speed and pricing clarity, while Proofpoint scored higher on managed enterprise fraud defense
Send-Shield moved faster during first setup because we started with the published Starter plan and added the three domains without a sales-led project. Proofpoint Email Fraud Defense scored higher on managed source remediation, hosted SPF and DMARC, and spoof escalation, especially for the parked-domain spoof sample. Send-Shield lost points where the workflow needed hosted records, blocklist or blacklist monitoring, and multi-client handoff; Proofpoint lost points where pricing, onboarding, and small-team ownership were less transparent.
Send-Shield score
51.5/100
Proofpoint Email Fraud Defense score
58/100
Send-Shield
51.5/100
DMARC enforcement
7.0
Customer support
7.0
Source resolution
6.5
Setup and onboarding
8.0
MSP workflows
2.0
Alerting and integrations
5.5
Hosted SPF and MTA-STS
0.0
Blocklist monitoring
0.0
Pricing transparency
8.0
Time to enforcement
7.5
Proofpoint Email Fraud Defense
58/100
DMARC enforcement
8.5
Customer support
8.0
Source resolution
8.5
Setup and onboarding
5.5
MSP workflows
4.0
Alerting and integrations
7.0
Hosted SPF and MTA-STS
7.0
Blocklist monitoring
0.0
Pricing transparency
2.5
Time to enforcement
7.0
Feature set
Reporting vs managed breadth
Send-Shield wins on direct DMARC reporting. Proofpoint wins on enterprise fraud-defense breadth.
Send-Shield gave us a cleaner day-to-day reporting workflow for the three domains, while Proofpoint Email Fraud Defense had more depth once spoofing, hosted authentication, and domain fraud response entered the decision. The buying criterion we would keep visible is whether the team needs guided fixes and automated issue detection, because raw reporting alone did not close the unknown sender and forwarding cases. Suped treats those guided fixes as part of the operational workflow, which is worth using as a benchmark during evaluation.
Send-Shield
SendGrid and Mailchimp split
Microsoft sources were clear
From mismatch needed notes
Proofpoint Email Fraud Defense
Google remediation had structure
Unknown sender had escalation
Subdomain DKIM was clearer
Send-Shield handled the reporting set well once DMARC aggregate data arrived. Microsoft 365 and Google Workspace were easy to recognize on the corporate domain, and SendGrid and Mailchimp separated on the marketing subdomain with enough IP and domain evidence for us to assign owners. The unknown sender still needed a manual call, and the SPF pass with visible From mismatch required a written note because the product showed the failed DMARC outcome but did not fully explain the business owner handoff.
Proofpoint Email Fraud Defense had a broader feature set for enterprise fraud defense. Microsoft 365 and Google Workspace were treated as part of a larger sender authentication program, and SendGrid plus Mailchimp were pushed into managed remediation tasks rather than only reporting rows. The subdomain DKIM case and the parked-domain spoof sample were stronger in Proofpoint because hosted authentication and domain fraud response were closer to the same workflow, but the extra scope made the interface heavier for a small team.
User experience
Speed vs control
Send-Shield was easier to start. Proofpoint gave more control after onboarding.
Send-Shield was the faster interface for a team that wants to add domains, read reports, and start policy planning. Proofpoint Email Fraud Defense required more setup and more stakeholder context, but it gave better control once hosted authentication and enterprise escalation were in scope.
Send-Shield
Three domains added quickly
Unknown sender took clicks
Forwarding needed written context
Proofpoint Email Fraud Defense
Enterprise setup was heavier
Unknown sender had routing
Forwarding sat with policy
Send-Shield made the three-domain setup feel direct. The corporate domain and marketing subdomain were added in the same flow, the parked domain stayed visible, and DNS instructions were short enough for an IT admin to apply without a long handoff. Finding the unknown sender took several clicks through source detail, and explaining the forwarded mail SPF failure required us to point out that DKIM still matched the visible domain even though SPF broke in transit.
Proofpoint Email Fraud Defense felt heavier at the start because onboarding expected a larger enterprise project. The upside appeared after the senders were connected: the unknown sender was routed through a managed review path, and the forwarded mail SPF failure sat beside policy and hosted authentication options instead of only appearing as a report anomaly. The interface asked for more decisions up front, but those decisions helped with enterprise ownership.
Support
Accessible help vs managed onboarding
Send-Shield fit smaller setup questions. Proofpoint fit enterprise escalation.
Send-Shield gave us the more approachable support path for DNS setup and first policy questions. Proofpoint Email Fraud Defense had a stronger enterprise onboarding model, but it depended on a larger handoff with messaging, security, and procurement owners.
Send-Shield
DNS handoff was practical
Setup questions fit support
Escalation stayed manual
Proofpoint Email Fraud Defense
Enterprise onboarding was formal
Spoof escalation was stronger
Procurement path added time
Send-Shield support expectations matched the early work: create the DMARC record, verify the reporting address, confirm SPF and DKIM checks, then review Microsoft 365, Google Workspace, SendGrid, Mailchimp, and support desk traffic. The DNS handoff was practical, but deeper escalation around the unknown sender was still our job because the product did not automatically assign a business owner. The support model looked strongest for SMBs that need implementation help without a full enterprise project.
Proofpoint Email Fraud Defense support looked better for complex enterprise rollouts. The setup path accounted for security review, sender authentication tasks, hosted authentication, and escalation when the parked-domain spoof sample appeared. DNS handoff was more formal, and enterprise onboarding clarified who owns policy, fraud response, and application-generated mail, but smaller teams would need patience before the first reports turned into action.
Suitability
Operator fit vs enterprise fit
Send-Shield suits direct DMARC owners. Proofpoint suits enterprise fraud teams.
Send-Shield is the better fit when the buyer wants DMARC reporting, published starter pricing, and a straightforward setup path. Proofpoint Email Fraud Defense is the better fit when DMARC is part of a broader fraud-defense program with hosted authentication and enterprise escalation. Suped's MSP workflows and alert quality are useful buying criteria here, because both tested products needed extra process for recurring client reports and clean handoff notes.
Send-Shield
SMB ownership fit well
Client handoff was manual
Recurring reports were usable
Proofpoint Email Fraud Defense
Enterprise ownership fit better
Domain grouping was formal
MSP fit needed validation
Send-Shield worked best for an SMB or internal IT team that owns a small set of domains. The corporate domain, marketing subdomain, and parked domain were easy to keep separate, but client-style account separation was not the center of the workflow. Recurring reporting was usable for one organization, while MSP handoff required manual notes for the unknown sender, the support desk sender, and the forwarded SPF failure.
Proofpoint Email Fraud Defense worked best for enterprise teams with formal ownership across messaging, security operations, and legal or brand protection. Account separation and domain grouping made sense inside an enterprise program, and recurring reporting supported executive review once onboarding was complete. MSPs need to validate client handoff carefully because the workflow felt built for large internal programs rather than many small client accounts.
What each tool feels like after 90 days of real use
Send-Shield
For smaller teams that want a priced DMARC reporting tool
Send-Shield felt practical after 90 days because the weekly work stayed close to DMARC reports. Microsoft 365 and Google Workspace became routine corporate-domain sources, SendGrid and Mailchimp were visible on the marketing subdomain, and the parked domain kept the spoof sample separate from normal sender cleanup.
The friction came when findings needed owner decisions. The unknown sender needed manual classification, and the forwarded mail SPF failure needed an explanation that separated forwarding from spoofing. Send-Shield gave us enough report evidence to brief owners, but the workflow did not automatically turn every finding into an assigned fix.
Where it wins
Published starter pricing
Fast three-domain setup
Clear source exports
Useful spoof visibility
Where it lags
No G2 review base
No hosted SPF workflow
MSP handoff was manual
No blocklist (blacklist) monitoring
Pricing
From GBP 19.99 / month
Free tier
14-day trial
Onboarding
Fast
G2 rating
0 / 5
Proofpoint Email Fraud Defense
For enterprises that want managed authentication and fraud response
Proofpoint Email Fraud Defense felt like an enterprise program rather than a lightweight reporting tool. Once onboarding was in motion, Microsoft 365, Google Workspace, SendGrid, Mailchimp, and support desk traffic were reviewed through a stronger managed-authentication lens, and the spoof sample received better escalation context.
The tradeoff was overhead. Pricing needed a quote path, setup involved more stakeholder coordination, and smaller DMARC questions sometimes sat inside a larger fraud-defense workflow. After 90 days, the product made the most sense when hosted authentication, domain fraud response, and managed support were part of the same purchase.
Where it wins
Strong spoof escalation
Hosted authentication support
Managed source remediation
Enterprise onboarding structure
Where it lags
Pricing was not public
Setup took longer
Small rollouts felt heavy
No tested blacklist monitoring
Pricing
Not publicly listed
Free tier
No public free tier
Onboarding
Formal
G2 rating
4.3 / 5
Pricing
Send-Shield
Proofpoint Email Fraud Defense
Suped
Small
1 domain, up to 1k emails / month.
GBP 19.99 / month
Starter covers 1 active domain and 10,000 DMARC-capable messages, billed annually.
Not publicly listed as of May 15, 2026
Proofpoint does not publish a clean public price for this small DMARC reporting shape.
$0 / month
Free plan covers 1 domain and 1,000 monthly emails.
Medium
2 domains, up to 100k emails / month.
GBP 49.99 / month
Core covers up to 2 active domains and 100,000 DMARC-capable messages, billed annually.
Not publicly listed as of May 15, 2026
Public benchmarks exist, but they do not map cleanly to domain and message-volume tiers.
Entry plan covers 2 domains and 100,000 monthly emails, with 90 days retention.
Large
10 domains, up to 1 million emails / month.
From GBP 699 / month
Plus stops at 8 active domains, so the public Enterprise starting point is the closest fit.
Not publicly listed as of May 15, 2026
Enterprise pricing depends on package, domain scope, region, term, and support scope.
10 domains and 1,000,000 monthly emails, with 365 days retention.
Enterprise
Over 20 domains and 1 million emails / month.
Custom
Public Enterprise starts at 15 active domains, so larger estates need a custom quote.
Custom
Large deployments use negotiated packaging, hosted authentication scope, and support terms.
20 domains and 2,500,000 monthly emails, with 365 days retention. Unlimited domains/emails negotiable.
Send-Shield prices are public list prices checked as of May 15, 2026, shown in GBP per month and billed annually. Proofpoint Email Fraud Defense has public procurement benchmarks, but the rows above use not publicly listed where no clear public domain and message-volume price exists; Enterprise rows are estimated purchase statuses rather than fixed list prices.
If you cannot decide between the two, maybe the answer is Suped
Suped
Get started
Make unknown senders actionable
Send-Shield surfaced the unknown sender, but the owner decision stayed manual. Suped connects source identification to guided fixes so IT, marketing, and support owners can act without rebuilding the investigation.
Reduce enterprise rollout drag
Proofpoint Email Fraud Defense had strong managed authentication, but onboarding and pricing slowed smaller decisions. Suped keeps hosted records, alerts, and remediation steps available without forcing every DMARC project into a large enterprise motion.
Clean up recurring handoff
Both products needed extra process for recurring reports, MSP-style account separation, and client-ready notes. Suped's MSP workflows keep domains, owners, alerts, and fixes organized for repeat review.
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 Send-Shield or Proofpoint Email Fraud Defense?
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
