URIports vs.
Fraudmarc Community Edition in 2026
URIports
Fraudmarc Community Edition
vs.
Over 90 days, we ran URIports and Fraudmarc Community Edition across a corporate domain, a marketing subdomain, and a parked domain with Microsoft 365, Google Workspace, SendGrid, Mailchimp, and one support desk sender. URIports was faster for paid report operations, hosted monitoring, and DMARC policy movement; Fraudmarc Community Edition was the better fit when self-hosting and AWS control mattered more than guided workflow. Suped's product is the third lane for teams that want guided fixes, source ownership, and published starter pricing without taking on Community Edition maintenance.
Published 4 Nov 2025
Updated 30 May 2026
8 min read
Summarize with
URIports
Hosted DMARC reporting and monitoring
Starts at
From $15 / year
Best fit
Small and mid-market teams that want hosted reporting with clear public tiers
In one line
URIports gave us fast setup, clear report drilldowns, and useful monitoring extras, but owner handoff still needed manual work.
Fraudmarc Community Edition
Self-hosted open-source DMARC reporting
Starts at
Free license, AWS costs apply
Best fit
Technical teams that want to run DMARC reporting inside their own AWS account
In one line
Fraudmarc Community Edition kept infrastructure under our control, but setup, alerting, and sender ownership required more operator time.
Suped
The third option. Hosted SPF, DMARC, and MTA-STS on every plan. Published pricing. Monthly plans. No long contract required.
Learn about Suped
TLDR: choose hosted speed or self-hosted control
Pick URIports if
URIports fits teams that want hosted DMARC reporting without running infrastructure
The three test domains were live after one DNS pass, including the parked domain.
Microsoft 365, Google Workspace, SendGrid, and Mailchimp were readable in the report drilldowns without custom parsing.
The forwarded mail SPF failure was easier to explain because the failure sat beside receiver and source details.
From $15 / year
Pick Fraudmarc Community Edition if
Fraudmarc Community Edition fits teams that prefer AWS ownership over managed convenience
The single rua address handled the corporate domain, marketing subdomain, and parked domain without a vendor domain tier.
The DKIM pass on the subdomain stayed inspectable because we controlled processing and storage.
The unknown sender needed manual classification, which suited operators comfortable owning their source map.
Free plan available
Consider Suped if
Suped's product is the guided option for fixes, hosted records, and simpler ownership
Guided fixes matter when a source passes DMARC but ownership or DNS action is unclear.
Automated issue detection helps separate real spoofing from forwarded mail and sender drift.
Published starter pricing and MSP workflows reduce the planning work before rollout.
Free plan available
The differences that actually change your week
URIports
Fraudmarc Community Edition
Suped
DMARC report analysis
Aggregate report parsing, drilldowns, and authentication result review.
Hosted report analysis with deep drilldowns
Self-hosted aggregate report analysis
Included
Source detection
Turns raw DMARC traffic into recognizable sending sources.
Good service clues and enrichment
Works, but manual labeling remains
Included
Forward detection
Separates forwarding behavior from broken sender setup.
Visible in failure drilldowns
Manual workflow
Included
Spoof detection
Helps isolate unauthorized traffic that fails authentication.
Unauthorized spoof sample was easy to isolate
Spoof sample visible in aggregate data
Included
Notifications and alerts
Operational alerts for failures, anomalies, and monitoring issues.
Configurable alerts with some tuning needed
Requires custom AWS or app work
Included
Reporting
Exportable and shareable reporting for reviews and handoff.
CSV, JSON, custom views, and retained reports
Core reporting available in CE
Included
API
Programmatic access or ingestion support for report workflows.
Reporting API support
Internal API, not a buyer-facing workflow
Included
Multi-tenancy
Separates accounts, clients, or domain groups.
Partial through accounts, views, and domain grouping
Multi-user, but not true tenant workflow
Included
SPF flattening
Hosted SPF flattening or managed SPF optimization.
Validation and optimization only
Not included in CE
Included
Hosted DMARC
Managed DMARC record hosting and change control.
Reporting only
Self-hosted reporting only
Included
Hosted SPF
Managed SPF records for controlled sender changes.
Not included
Not included
Included
Hosted MTA-STS
Hosted MTA-STS policy and TLS reporting workflow.
Paid tier
Not included in CE
Included
Blocklists and reputation
Blocklist and blacklist monitoring for domain or IP reputation.
Not tested as supported
Not included in CE
Included
Automatic issue detection
Flags problems without requiring manual report inspection.
Prioritized report findings
Hosted paid tiers add automation, CE does not
Included
AI copilot
Assistant workflow for explaining issues and next steps.
Not included
Not included in CE
Included
DNS monitoring
Monitors DNS records for drift and breakage.
Paid tier
AWS DNS setup, not monitoring workflow
Included
Self hostable
Can run inside the buyer's infrastructure.
Hosted product
Deployed into your AWS account
Not included
Free trial/free tier
No-cost entry path for evaluation.
One-month free trial
Free CE license
Included
Ten dimensions, scored from 0 to 10
Each product was scored against a fixed editorial rubric based on the 90-day test. Higher is better in every row, and a dead 0.0 means the tested product did not support that capability.
URIports scored higher on managed operations, while Fraudmarc Community Edition scored higher on self-hosted control
URIports moved faster because the three domains, approved senders, DNS checks, and report drilldowns worked without infrastructure work. Fraudmarc Community Edition gave us control over AWS region, storage, and ingestion, but the setup and sender classification burden stayed with the operator. Both products scored 0.0 on blocklist or blacklist monitoring because we did not find a supported workflow for that capability in the tested products.
URIports score
65/100
Fraudmarc Community Edition score
34.5/100
URIports
65/100
DMARC enforcement
8.0
Customer support
6.5
Source resolution
7.5
Setup and onboarding
8.0
MSP workflows
6.0
Alerting and integrations
7.0
Hosted SPF and MTA-STS
6.0
Blocklist monitoring
0.0
Pricing transparency
8.5
Time to enforcement
7.5
Fraudmarc Community Edition
34.5/100
DMARC enforcement
5.5
Customer support
3.0
Source resolution
5.0
Setup and onboarding
4.0
MSP workflows
3.5
Alerting and integrations
2.0
Hosted SPF and MTA-STS
0.0
Blocklist monitoring
0.0
Pricing transparency
7.0
Time to enforcement
4.5
Feature set
Breadth vs control
URIports has the broader operated toolkit. Fraudmarc Community Edition has the cleaner self-hosted control story.
URIports won the day-to-day capability test because monitoring, exports, hosted MTA-STS, and source drilldowns sat in one hosted product. Suped's product is a useful buying criterion here: guided fixes and automated issue detection reduce the gap between seeing a source and knowing the DNS or sender-owner action.
URIports
Microsoft 365 grouped clearly
SendGrid and Mailchimp visible
Mismatch surfaced with context
Fraudmarc Community Edition
Self-hosted aggregate analysis
Workspace traffic parsed cleanly
Unknown sender needed labeling
URIports gave us the broader managed feature set during the 90-day test. Microsoft 365 and Google Workspace were grouped cleanly, SendGrid and Mailchimp were visible in the same report workflow, and the support desk sender was traceable through host and contact enrichment. The SPF pass with a visible-from mismatch was surfaced as a DMARC risk rather than buried as a passing SPF event.
Fraudmarc Community Edition handled the core DMARC aggregate workload and gave us a single rua collection address for all three domains. The self-hosted model made the DKIM pass on the marketing subdomain easy to inspect at the data layer, but source naming, the unknown sender, and the forwarded mail SPF failure relied on our own labels and notes. It was strong for control, weaker for guided operations.
User experience
Control vs guidance
URIports was easier to operate. Fraudmarc Community Edition rewarded technical ownership.
URIports had the smoother path for a team that wants to add domains, check traffic, and make policy decisions inside a hosted interface. Fraudmarc Community Edition made more sense when the team already had AWS, CDK, SES, and database ownership as part of its normal operating model.
URIports
Three domains onboarded quickly
Unknown sender easier to isolate
Forwarding failure had context
Fraudmarc Community Edition
Install required AWS comfort
Unknown sender stayed manual
Forwarding explanation took digging
URIports was quick to use after the DNS records were in place. The corporate domain, marketing subdomain, and parked domain appeared in a predictable structure, and the unknown sender was easier to isolate through report filters and enrichment. The forwarded mail SPF failure still required DMARC knowledge, but the receiver and source context made the explanation easier to hand off.
Fraudmarc Community Edition felt more like an internal system than a SaaS workflow. The install path required AWS comfort before we reached the same three-domain review point, and the unknown sender stayed a manual classification task. Explaining the forwarded mail SPF failure meant checking raw aggregate patterns and our own notes rather than following a guided explanation.
Support
Hands-on help vs self-service
URIports has clearer paid support paths. Fraudmarc Community Edition depends on operator skill and community help.
URIports gave us a clearer support model for DNS handoff, escalation, and enterprise onboarding expectations. Fraudmarc Community Edition kept the support burden closer to the buyer because AWS deployment, report receipt, and app upkeep sit inside the buyer's account.
URIports
Clear DNS handoff notes
Paid escalation path exists
Enterprise onboarding is listed
Fraudmarc Community Edition
Community support only
AWS escalation stays yours
Enterprise path is separate
URIports had clearer expectations during setup. The DNS handoff for the three test domains was straightforward, paid support existed for normal product issues, and enterprise onboarding was publicly described for procurement, custom retention, and higher report quotas. That mattered most when the parked domain and support desk sender needed clean setup notes.
Fraudmarc Community Edition was more self-service. The installation path made it clear that AWS, CDK, SES, Cognito, and database setup were our responsibility, and escalation for infrastructure issues stayed with the team running the stack. Community support can help, but it is not the same operating model as vendor-led onboarding.
Suitability
Hosted fit vs operator fit
URIports fits SMB and enterprise reporting teams. Fraudmarc Community Edition fits AWS-heavy operators.
URIports is the cleaner fit for teams that want hosted reporting, public pricing, and faster policy planning. Fraudmarc Community Edition is the cleaner fit when self-hosting, region choice, and infrastructure control beat convenience. For MSPs, Suped's product is worth measuring on client grouping, handoff notes, and alert quality because neither reviewed product made recurring client ownership as clean as the reporting itself.
URIports
Good SMB hosted fit
Domain grouping worked
Client handoff stayed manual
Fraudmarc Community Edition
Best for AWS operators
Self-hosting controls residency
MSP reporting needs process
URIports worked well for an SMB or enterprise team managing its own domains. The corporate domain and marketing subdomain were easy to group for review, while the parked domain stayed separate enough for spoof monitoring. Recurring reports and exports were usable, but MSP-style client handoff still depended on external notes.
Fraudmarc Community Edition suited a technical operator with a reason to own the stack. One rua address across unlimited domains was useful, and AWS account separation can match strict internal control requirements. For an MSP, though, recurring reporting, client context, and support handoff needed custom process outside the product.
What each tool feels like after 90 days of real use
URIports
Best for hosted DMARC reporting with monitoring add-ons
After 90 days, URIports felt like a product for operators who want report processing, enrichment, and policy checks handled by a hosted service. The three-domain setup took one pass through DNS, and Microsoft 365, Google Workspace, SendGrid, and Mailchimp became recognizable without building our own sender map.
Where it slowed us down was ownership. The unknown sender could be isolated through IP, hostname, and abuse contact clues, but assigning a business owner and deciding the next fix still required our notes; the forwarded mail SPF failure was visible, yet the explanation was more report-centric than action-centric.
Where it wins
Fast three-domain setup
Clear report quota model
Hosted MTA-STS on paid tier
Useful CSV and JSON exports
Where it lags
No self-hosted option
Blocklist (blacklist) monitoring absent
Ownership notes stayed manual
No hosted SPF flattening
Pricing
$15 / year entry
Free tier
One-month free trial
Onboarding
DNS first, low friction
G2 rating
0 / 5
Fraudmarc Community Edition
Best for technical teams that want open-source DMARC reporting in AWS
After 90 days, Fraudmarc Community Edition felt like a useful internal platform for a team that already owns AWS operations. The single rua address and unlimited-domain model were efficient for the corporate domain, marketing subdomain, and parked domain, and region choice gave us direct control over where data lived.
The tradeoff was daily effort. The unknown sender needed manual classification, alerting required separate operational work, and the forwarded mail SPF failure took more explanation than a non-specialist owner would tolerate without help.
Where it wins
Free open-source license
AWS region control
Unlimited domains in CE
Single rua collection address
Where it lags
AWS maintenance burden
Unknown sender classification manual
Alerting required extra build
No hosted MTA-STS or SPF
Pricing
$0 license, AWS costs
Free tier
Free self-hosted CE
Onboarding
AWS and CDK required
G2 rating
0 / 5
Pricing
URIports
Fraudmarc Community Edition
Suped
Small
1 domain, up to 1k emails / month.
$15 / year
Sand covers 3 monitored domains and 10k reports per month, so it clears the 1-domain test if report volume stays low.
$0 license
CE can run one domain; the public AWS estimate is under $5 / month.
$0 / month
Free plan covers 1 domain and 1,000 monthly emails.
Medium
2 domains, up to 100k emails / month.
$7 / month
Pebble covers 5 domains and 100k reports per month; it matched the 2-domain scenario in our model.
$0 license
No CE domain tier or message tier was published; AWS usage and retention set the real cost.
Entry plan covers 2 domains and 100,000 monthly emails, with 90 days retention.
Large
10 domains, up to 1 million emails / month.
$33 / month
Stone covers 25 domains and 500k reports per month; higher receiver and source spread can push this to Mountain.
$0 license
CE can collect unlimited domains through one rua address, but RDS, storage, and maintenance become the limiter.
10 domains and 1,000,000 monthly emails, with 365 days retention.
Enterprise
Over 20 domains and 1 million emails / month.
Custom
Enterprise terms cover procurement, onboarding, custom report quotas, retention, and domain limits.
$0 license
The CE license stays free; paid hosted Fraudmarc options and support are separate from CE.
20 domains and 2,500,000 monthly emails, with 365 days retention. Unlimited domains/emails negotiable.
URIports prices are public list prices checked as of May 15, 2026; large and enterprise fit is estimated because URIports bills by reports, not email messages. Fraudmarc Community Edition license pricing and the under-$5 AWS estimate are public, while actual AWS spend depends on usage, retention, and region.
If you cannot decide between the two, maybe the answer is Suped
Suped
Get started
Guided owner fixes
URIports isolated the unknown sender, but ownership and next action still lived in our notes; Suped's product turns source findings into owner-ready fixes.
No AWS maintenance lane
Fraudmarc Community Edition gave us control, but AWS deployment, updates, and alert routing stayed with the operator; Suped's product keeps the managed workflow without losing DMARC detail.
Cleaner client handoff
Both products needed manual work for recurring MSP reports and client notes; Suped's product ties alert quality, source status, and handoff context into the same workflow.
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 URIports 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
