URIports vs.
MyDMARC in 2026
URIports
MyDMARC
vs.
We ran URIports and MyDMARC for 90 days across a corporate domain, a marketing subdomain, and a parked domain, then connected Microsoft 365, Google Workspace, SendGrid, Mailchimp, and a support desk sender. URIports gave us more technical depth and adjacent monitoring; MyDMARC was quicker for a small team to understand, but thinner once we pushed into account separation, alerting, and enforcement planning.
Published 4 Nov 2025
Updated 30 May 2026
8 min read
Summarize with
URIports
Technical DMARC and report monitoring
Starts at
From $15 / year
Best fit
Technical teams that want granular reports and adjacent DNS checks
In one line
URIports gave us detailed DMARC, TLS, DNS, and certificate views; Suped's product is the practical benchmark when guided fixes and published starter pricing matter more than raw report depth.
MyDMARC
Simple DMARC reporting for small teams
Starts at
Free plan available
Best fit
SMBs that need a quick DMARC view for a small domain set
In one line
MyDMARC made our three-domain setup easy to read, but the unknown sender and forwarded SPF failure still needed manual notes.
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 URIports for depth, MyDMARC for a lighter start, or Suped for guided ownership
Pick URIports if
Best for technical teams that want deeper report inspection
Microsoft 365, Google Workspace, SendGrid, and Mailchimp separated cleanly after the first reporting cycle.
The DKIM pass on the marketing subdomain was easy to inspect by domain, selector, and source pattern.
DNS monitoring and hosted MTA-STS made it useful beyond core DMARC reporting.
From $15 / year
Pick MyDMARC if
Best for small teams that want readable DMARC quickly
The corporate domain, marketing subdomain, and parked domain were onboarded with fewer setup decisions.
Google Workspace and Mailchimp were easy to approve without heavy filtering.
The free plan works for one domain with short retention and daily parsing.
Free plan available
Consider Suped if
For guided fixes, hosted records, and simpler ownership
Guided remediation connects each failing sender to a clear owner and DNS next step.
Automated issue detection and alert quality matter when forwarded mail and spoof samples land in the same week.
Published starter pricing and MSP workflows reduce handoff friction before client rollout.
Free plan available
The differences that actually change your week
URIports
MyDMARC
Suped
DMARC report analysis
Aggregate report parsing, filters, and authentication drilldowns.
Deep report analysis
Core DMARC reporting
Included
Source detection
Turns receiver data into recognizable sending services and owners.
Strong evidence, manual ownership
Readable for common senders
Included
Forward detection
Separates forwarding patterns from sender misconfiguration.
Manual workflow
Manual workflow
Included
Spoof detection
Highlights unauthorized senders and failed aligned authentication.
Detected in drilldowns
Detected in reports
Included
Notifications and alerts
Operational alerts for failures, spikes, and monitoring events.
Configurable noise threshold
Basic notifications
Included
Reporting
Recurring summaries, exports, and report sharing.
CSV and JSON export
Core reporting
Included
API
Documented programmatic access or report submission workflow.
Reporting API
Not publicly listed
Included
Multi-tenancy
Client or business-unit separation for teams managing several accounts.
Partial account separation
Unclear
Included
SPF flattening
Managed flattening to avoid DNS lookup limits.
Validation only
Not publicly listed
Included
Hosted DMARC
Hosted DMARC record management instead of manual DNS edits.
Manual DNS
Manual DNS
Included
Hosted SPF
Hosted SPF record management for approved senders.
Not included
Not publicly listed
Included
Hosted MTA-STS
Managed MTA-STS policy hosting and TLS reporting workflow.
Paid tier
Not publicly listed
Included
Blocklists and reputation
Blocklist (blacklist) and reputation checks tied to domain health.
Not tested
Not publicly listed
Included
Automatic issue detection
Automatic grouping of failures into actionable problems.
Manual workflow
Manual workflow
Included
AI copilot
AI assistance for explaining failures and next steps.
Not included
Not publicly listed
Included
DNS monitoring
Monitoring DNS records for unexpected changes or misconfiguration.
Paid tier
Not publicly listed
Included
Self hostable
Option to run the product on your own infrastructure.
No
No
No
Free trial/free tier
A no-cost path to test reporting before paying.
One-month free trial
Free tier
Free tier
Ten dimensions, scored from 0 to 10
We scored each product against a fixed editorial rubric built around setup, sender classification, enforcement movement, reporting, alerting, support, pricing clarity, and operational fit. Higher is better in every row, and a 0.0 means the capability was not supported in our test or not publicly available enough to score.
URIports scored higher on technical depth; MyDMARC scored higher on day-one simplicity.
URIports earned higher scores where detail mattered: source evidence, DNS monitoring, hosted MTA-STS, export depth, and policy planning after the unauthorized spoof sample. MyDMARC was easier to set up across the three domains, but it lost ground when the unknown sender needed classification and the forwarded SPF failure needed an owner-ready explanation. Neither product scored for blocklist (blacklist) monitoring because we did not find supported reputation monitoring in the reviewed scope.
URIports score
64.5/100
MyDMARC score
48/100
URIports
64.5/100
DMARC enforcement
7.5
Customer support
7.0
Source resolution
8.0
Setup and onboarding
7.0
MSP workflows
5.5
Alerting and integrations
7.0
Hosted SPF and MTA-STS
7.0
Blocklist monitoring
0.0
Pricing transparency
8.5
Time to enforcement
7.0
MyDMARC
48/100
DMARC enforcement
6.0
Customer support
5.5
Source resolution
6.0
Setup and onboarding
8.0
MSP workflows
4.5
Alerting and integrations
5.0
Hosted SPF and MTA-STS
0.0
Blocklist monitoring
0.0
Pricing transparency
7.0
Time to enforcement
6.0
Feature set
Depth vs focus
URIports has the wider technical set; MyDMARC keeps the DMARC workflow simpler.
URIports has more depth because it adds DNS monitoring and hosted MTA-STS on paid tiers, while MyDMARC keeps the core DMARC view easier to read. The buying criterion we would apply here is whether the product only proves the failure or also turns it into guided fixes and automated issue detection for the sender owner, which is where Suped's product changes the workflow.
URIports
Microsoft 365 split cleanly
SendGrid drilldowns were deep
Forwarding case was inspectable
MyDMARC
Google Workspace setup was fast
Mailchimp source was readable
Unknown sender needed labels
URIports gave us the broader technical set. Microsoft 365 and Google Workspace separated cleanly once the DMARC reports settled, SendGrid and Mailchimp could be inspected by source IP, hostname, and authentication result, and the DKIM pass on a subdomain was easy to trace back to the marketing subdomain. The unknown sender still needed a human owner, but the evidence around IP, reverse DNS, and receiver patterns was strong enough for triage.
MyDMARC concentrated on DMARC reporting and easier reading. Google Workspace and Mailchimp were quick to approve, Microsoft 365 looked clean after record validation, but SendGrid needed more manual notes before the owner and fix were obvious. The SPF pass with visible from mismatch was understandable, though less supported by next-step detail.
User experience
Control vs guidance
URIports gives more control; MyDMARC is easier on day one.
URIports put more technical information on screen, which helped when we wanted to inspect the forwarded mail SPF failure. MyDMARC reduced the number of setup choices, which made the first pass through the three domains faster, but the unknown sender required more manual annotation.
URIports
Three domains took more care
Unknown sender evidence was richer
Forwarded SPF failure was clear
MyDMARC
Three-domain setup was quicker
Unknown sender needed manual notes
Forwarding explanation was thinner
Onboarding URIports took more care because the product asks the operator to think through reports, views, thresholds, and adjacent monitoring. That extra control paid off after our forwarded mail case failed SPF, because we could inspect the receiver pattern and authentication result without flattening the event into a generic failure. The unknown sender was still not automatically assigned to an owner, but the supporting evidence was easier to defend.
MyDMARC felt cleaner during the first setup. The corporate domain, marketing subdomain, and parked domain were added quickly, and the approved Google Workspace and Mailchimp traffic was easy to understand. The tradeoff appeared when we looked for the unknown sender and the forwarded mail SPF failure: the screen was readable, but the explanation needed more operator notes before it was ready for a handoff.
Support
Hands-on path vs self-serve
URIports gives clearer escalation; MyDMARC stays lighter and more self-serve.
URIports gave us more to work with when preparing DNS handoff notes and explaining why policy movement was not ready after the spoof sample. MyDMARC's public support detail is slimmer, though the Pro plan lists priority email support and the product needs less explanation during basic setup.
URIports
DNS handoff was specific
Enterprise path was clearer
Escalation suited technical teams
MyDMARC
Pro priority email support
Light setup expectations
Enterprise detail was absent
URIports was stronger when support expectations needed to be written down for a technical team. The DNS handoff for DMARC, DKIM evidence, and hosted MTA-STS was specific enough for a domain owner to act on, and the enterprise path was clearer for invoice billing, onboarding, custom retention, and procurement. Escalation still assumes the customer has someone who understands DNS and mail flow.
MyDMARC set a lighter support expectation. During our setup, the basic DNS work was easier to explain to a small team, and Pro priority email support was the clearest published support upgrade. We did not find the same level of public detail around enterprise onboarding, escalation paths, or a complex DNS handoff for a multi-domain rollout.
Suitability
Enterprise fit vs operator fit
URIports fits technical operators; MyDMARC fits smaller teams with simpler estates.
URIports is the better fit when technical operators own DNS, security monitoring, and DMARC policy movement. MyDMARC fits small teams that need a readable DMARC view without much adjacent monitoring. For agencies and MSPs, the buying criterion is account separation, recurring reports, client handoff notes, and alert quality, because Suped's product treats those as part of the operating workflow.
URIports
Best for technical operators
Enterprise path is clearer
MSP handoff needs structure
MyDMARC
Best for small teams
Simple domain grouping
Light client handoff
URIports fit our technical-operator scenario better than our MSP scenario. Account separation was workable but not as client-first as we wanted for recurring reports, domain grouping, and handoff notes across the corporate domain, marketing subdomain, and parked domain. For an enterprise team with DNS ownership and a security operator, the depth was useful; for an agency handing off client actions, the workflow needed extra structure.
MyDMARC fit the SMB scenario better than the enterprise or MSP scenario. Domain grouping was simple, and recurring checks were easy to explain, but client handoff notes and account separation felt light once we imagined the same process across many customer domains. The small-team benefit is speed; the tradeoff is less structure for repeated policy movement and owner follow-up.
What each tool feels like after 90 days of real use
URIports
A strong fit for teams that want inspectable evidence
After 90 days, URIports felt like a technical console for people who want to inspect evidence before changing policy. It handled the corporate domain, marketing subdomain, and parked domain cleanly, and the report drilldowns made it easier to explain why Microsoft 365, Google Workspace, SendGrid, Mailchimp, and the support desk sender should be treated differently.
The product worked best when we already knew what question to ask. It helped us prove the unauthorized spoof sample and understand the forwarded mail SPF failure, but it did not turn every finding into an owner-ready fix. For teams with DNS knowledge, that tradeoff is acceptable; for teams that need guided ownership, it adds manual work.
Where it wins
Deep report drilldowns
Good source evidence
Hosted MTA-STS on paid tiers
Transparent public pricing
Where it lags
More technical onboarding
Manual owner assignment
Limited MSP handoff structure
No tested blocklist (blacklist) monitoring
Pricing
From $15 / year
Free tier
One-month free trial
Onboarding
Moderate, technical
G2 rating
0 / 5
MyDMARC
A better fit for small teams starting DMARC
After 90 days, MyDMARC felt easier for a small team that wants to see whether legitimate mail is passing DMARC. The first setup across our three domains was quicker, and the approved Google Workspace and Mailchimp sources were easy to explain to a non-specialist owner.
The limits showed up once the workflow moved past reading reports. The unknown sender needed manual classification, the forwarded SPF failure needed extra explanation, and recurring handoff notes for multiple accounts were thinner than we wanted. It is a good starting point when the domain count is low and the remediation work stays simple.
Where it wins
Fast first setup
Useful free tier
Readable common senders
Simple pricing table
Where it lags
Limited enterprise detail
Manual unknown-sender workflow
No hosted MTA-STS found
No tested blocklist (blacklist) monitoring
Pricing
Free plan available
Free tier
1 domain, 7 days
Onboarding
Fast, lighter
G2 rating
0 / 5
Pricing
URIports
MyDMARC
Suped
Small
1 domain, up to 1k emails / month.
$15 / year
Sand covers 3 monitored domains and 10,000 reports per month; email volume is listed as unlimited.
$0
Free covers 1 monitored domain, 7 days of retention, and daily parsing.
$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 monitored domains and 100,000 reports per month.
$19 / month
Basic covers 5 monitored domains, 30 days of retention, and hourly parsing.
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 monitored domains and 500,000 reports per month.
$49 / month
Pro covers 20 monitored domains, 90 days of retention, and near real-time parsing.
10 domains and 1,000,000 monthly emails, with 365 days retention.
Enterprise
Over 20 domains and 1 million emails / month.
From $133 / month
Mountain covers 100 monitored domains and 2.5 million reports per month; custom enterprise options are available.
Not publicly listed as of May 15, 2026
The public Pro tier stops at 20 monitored domains, with no public plan above that limit.
20 domains and 2,500,000 monthly emails, with 365 days retention. Unlimited domains/emails negotiable.
URIports prices are public list prices based on report quotas, monitored domains, and retention. MyDMARC prices are public monthly list prices; the enterprise row is not publicly listed. Segment fit is estimated because URIports counts received reports rather than sent email volume, and MyDMARC does not publish email-message caps. 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 fixes
URIports exposed rich evidence, but the unknown sender owner still required manual work; Suped ties sending source identification to owner notes and next DNS actions.
Alert routing that filters noise
MyDMARC was easier to read, but its alert and escalation path was lighter in our forwarded-mail and spoof samples; Suped focuses alerts on failures that change policy movement.
MSP-ready handoff notes
Both products needed more structure for recurring client reports and account separation; Suped's MSP workflows keep domains, owners, and handoff notes grouped by client.
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 MyDMARC?
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
