URIports vs.
Proofpoint Email Fraud Defense in 2026
URIports
Proofpoint Email Fraud Defense
vs.
We tested URIports and Proofpoint Email Fraud Defense for 90 days across a corporate domain, a marketing subdomain, and a parked domain, with Microsoft 365, Google Workspace, SendGrid, Mailchimp, and a support desk sender connected. URIports was faster and clearer for self-serve reporting; Proofpoint was heavier, but stronger for managed fraud-defense programs and hosted authentication.
URIports
Technical DMARC and reporting suite
Starts at
From $15 / year
Best fit
Technical SMBs and lean operators
In one line
URIports gave us detailed DMARC and TLS reporting quickly, but teams that need guided fixes should compare that workflow with Suped before committing.
Proofpoint Email Fraud Defense
Enterprise DMARC and fraud defense
Starts at
Not publicly listed
Best fit
Large security teams with managed enforcement needs
In one line
Proofpoint Email Fraud Defense turned spoof and sender-discovery work into a managed enterprise program, with more setup overhead and less price clarity.
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 lean reporting, Proofpoint for managed enforcement
Pick URIports if
Choose URIports when a hands-on technical team owns DMARC
Three-domain setup was finished fastest, with clear DNS values for the corporate domain, marketing subdomain, and parked domain.
Microsoft 365, Google Workspace, SendGrid, and Mailchimp drilldowns were easy to filter once senders were named.
Exports and report views made manual policy planning practical, but the unknown support desk sender still needed classification.
From $15 / year
Pick Proofpoint Email Fraud Defense if
Choose Proofpoint Email Fraud Defense when enterprise DMARC needs managed ownership
Hosted authentication tasks made the SPF mismatch and unauthorized spoof sample easier to route into a formal enforcement plan.
Google Workspace, Microsoft 365, SendGrid, and Mailchimp were tied to sender discovery with stronger prioritization.
Onboarding took longer, but escalation and support handoff fit a large security program.
Not publicly listed
Consider Suped if
Suped is the third option when guided fixes, hosted records, and simpler ownership matter
Guided fixes should explain whether a sender needs SPF, DKIM, DMARC, or vendor owner action.
Automated issue detection and alert quality matter when new sources appear after the first cleanup.
MSP workflows and published starter pricing reduce handoff work when several domains need repeat reviews.
Free plan available
The differences that actually change your week
URIports
Proofpoint Email Fraud Defense
Suped
DMARC report analysis
Aggregate report parsing, drilldowns, and authentication outcomes.
Detailed drilldowns
Enterprise analysis
DMARC analytics
Source detection
Identification of approved and unknown sending services.
Manual classification for unknowns
Stronger prioritization
Source identification
Forward detection
Ability to explain SPF failures caused by forwarding.
Visible in drilldowns
Explained in task context
Forwarding patterns
Spoof detection
Detection of unauthorized mail using the protected domain.
Clear DMARC fail evidence
Strong spoof workflow
Spoof alerts
Notifications and alerts
Operational alerting for authentication and sender changes.
Configurable alerts
Enterprise alerting
Policy and source alerts
Reporting
Recurring reports, exports, and review-ready summaries.
CSV and JSON exports
Executive reporting
Recurring reports
API
Programmatic access for report submission or operations.
Reporting API submissions
Not verified in test
API available
Multi-tenancy
Separate workspaces or client grouping for repeated reviews.
Domain views, not MSP tenancy
Enterprise tenant, not MSP tenancy
Client workspaces
SPF flattening
Hosted SPF flattening or managed SPF record control.
SPF tools, not flattening
Hosted SPF available
Hosted SPF flattening
Hosted DMARC
Managed DMARC record hosting and policy changes.
Reporting only
Hosted authentication
Hosted DMARC
Hosted SPF
Hosted SPF record management.
Not supported
Hosted SPF
Hosted SPF
Hosted MTA-STS
Managed MTA-STS policy hosting.
Paid tier
Not found in test scope
Hosted MTA-STS
Blocklists and reputation
Blocklist (blacklist) and reputation monitoring.
No blocklist monitoring found
Lookalike risk, not blacklist checks
Blocklist and reputation checks
Automatic issue detection
Automatic surfacing of broken authentication or risky sender changes.
Prioritized reports; fixes manual
Task prioritization
Automatic issue detection
AI copilot
AI help for explaining issues and next steps.
Not supported
Not supported
AI copilot available
DNS monitoring
Monitoring for DNS record changes or broken authentication records.
Paid tier
Hosted records, no DNS monitor found
DNS monitoring
Self hostable
Ability to run the product on your own infrastructure.
Cloud only
Cloud only
Cloud only
Free trial/free tier
No-cost entry point for testing the product.
One-month trial
No public free tier
Free plan available
Ten dimensions, scored from 0 to 10
We scored each product against a fixed editorial rubric built from the same 90-day setup, three domains, five approved sending sources, and seven controlled authentication cases. Higher is better in every row.
URIports scored higher on price clarity and speed; Proofpoint scored higher on managed enforcement.
URIports moved faster because the DNS setup, reporting views, and exports were usable without a sales or services workflow. Proofpoint scored higher where hosted authentication, spoof response, and enterprise escalation mattered, especially for the unauthorized spoof sample and visible-from mismatch. Both products lost points on blocklist monitoring because we did not find native blocklist or blacklist monitoring in the tested scope.
URIports score
62.5/100
Proofpoint Email Fraud Defense score
62.5/100
URIports
62.5/100
DMARC enforcement
7.0
Customer support
6.5
Source resolution
7.0
Setup and onboarding
8.0
MSP workflows
5.5
Alerting and integrations
7.0
Hosted SPF and MTA-STS
5.5
Blocklist monitoring
0.0
Pricing transparency
9.0
Time to enforcement
7.0
Proofpoint Email Fraud Defense
62.5/100
DMARC enforcement
8.5
Customer support
8.0
Source resolution
8.5
Setup and onboarding
6.5
MSP workflows
5.0
Alerting and integrations
8.0
Hosted SPF and MTA-STS
7.0
Blocklist monitoring
0.0
Pricing transparency
3.0
Time to enforcement
8.0
Feature set
Reporting depth vs managed authentication
URIports gives broader reporting controls. Proofpoint goes further on hosted authentication.
The deciding factor is how much work your team wants to do after a failure appears. Guided fixes and automated issue detection should be scored as buying criteria; Suped exposes those workflows for teams that want recommendations tied to each sending source.
URIports
Microsoft 365 drilldowns
Mailchimp classification controls
Forwarded SPF evidence
Proofpoint Email Fraud Defense
Hosted authentication tasks
Unknown sender prioritization
Spoofing response workflow
URIports separated Microsoft 365 and Google Workspace quickly through DKIM and IP metadata, grouped SendGrid and Mailchimp after we named the senders, and showed the parked domain unauthorized spoof as a clean DMARC fail. The unknown support desk sender needed manual classification, and the forwarded mail SPF failure became explainable only after we opened the receiver drilldown and checked the DKIM domain match.
Proofpoint identified Microsoft 365 and Google Workspace with less manual naming, gave clearer priority to the unauthorized spoof and unknown sender, and tied SendGrid and Mailchimp into hosted authentication tasks. The SPF pass with visible-from mismatch and DKIM pass on a subdomain were handled as policy work items, but the workflow felt heavier when we needed exportable DMARC detail.
User experience
Control vs guidance
URIports is faster for operators. Proofpoint is steadier for enterprise programs.
URIports got us through three domains with fewer screens and made exports easy. Proofpoint took longer to configure, but its task flow made the spoof sample and unknown sender easier to route to security owners.
URIports
Fast three-domain setup
Clear sender filters
Manual forward explanation
Proofpoint Email Fraud Defense
Guided enterprise flow
Earlier unknown sender task
Clearer forward narrative
URIports let us add the corporate domain, marketing subdomain, and parked domain in one sitting. The DNS steps were plain, the unknown support desk sender was findable through filters, and the forwarded mail SPF failure required us to compare the DKIM domain match in the detail view before we could explain it to a non-specialist.
Proofpoint onboarding had more handoff points because hosted authentication and enterprise controls sit closer to the security stack. The unknown sender surfaced as a task earlier, and the forwarded mail case was easier to explain once the platform treated SPF failure as acceptable when matching DKIM passed.
Support
Self serve vs managed help
URIports suits teams that own DNS. Proofpoint suits teams that expect a program handoff.
URIports support worked best when we knew the DNS change we wanted and needed confirmation. Proofpoint offered a stronger escalation path for enterprise onboarding, but scheduling and package scoping added time before implementation decisions were clear.
URIports
Self-serve DNS steps
Useful product support
Light escalation path
Proofpoint Email Fraud Defense
Managed support model
Enterprise escalation path
More scheduling overhead
With URIports, the setup path was mostly self-serve: we copied DMARC, TLS-RPT, and MTA-STS records, then used documentation and product support when a DNS handoff question came up. It was efficient for our Microsoft 365 and SendGrid work, but there was no heavy enterprise onboarding motion to take over sender owner follow-up.
Proofpoint fit the opposite pattern. The value came from managed support, escalation, and enterprise onboarding, especially when we mapped Google Workspace, Mailchimp, and the support desk sender into policy movement, but the handoff needed clearer upfront boundaries around package scope and timing.
Suitability
Operator fit vs enterprise fit
URIports fits lean technical teams. Proofpoint fits large security programs.
URIports is the cleaner choice when one team owns DNS and wants detailed reports without procurement drag. Proofpoint fits enterprises that want managed authentication and fraud-defense ownership. If MSP workflows or alert quality are buying criteria, Suped should be assessed for client grouping, cleaner issue routing, and repeatable handoff notes.
URIports
Lean SMB operations
Domain grouping works
Manual client handoff
Proofpoint Email Fraud Defense
Enterprise program fit
Recurring executive reporting
Procurement-heavy onboarding
URIports handled our three-domain setup cleanly, with the parked domain and marketing subdomain easy to keep separate in views and exports. For MSP use, we could create recurring reports and use domain grouping, but client handoff notes and owner assignment stayed outside the workflow; for SMBs that can be acceptable, for enterprises it leaves more coordination work.
Proofpoint felt built for enterprise ownership: the primary corporate domain, subdomain, and parked domain sat inside a broader security program rather than a reporting-only workspace. MSP-style client handoff was not the natural motion in our test, but enterprise account separation, escalation notes, and recurring executive reporting were easier to justify once procurement and onboarding were in place.
What each tool feels like after 90 days of real use
URIports
Best for technical teams that want low-cost DMARC reporting
After 90 days, URIports felt like an operator's workbench. We could see why Microsoft 365, Google Workspace, SendGrid, and Mailchimp passed or failed, and the marketing subdomain stayed easy to separate from the parked domain.
The tradeoff was ownership. The unauthorized spoof sample was obvious, but the unknown support desk sender and forwarded SPF failure needed manual review before we had a confident next step.
Where it wins
Fast DNS setup for three domains
Clear report filters and exports
Public pricing matched plan choice
Hosted MTA-STS on paid tiers
Where it lags
Unknown sender needed manual labeling
No hosted SPF workflow
No blocklist (blacklist) monitoring observed
Limited MSP handoff structure
Pricing
From $15 / year
Free tier
Free trial
Onboarding
Fast self-serve
G2 rating
0 / 5
Proofpoint Email Fraud Defense
Best for enterprises that want managed fraud defense
After 90 days, Proofpoint felt like an enterprise program rather than a lightweight reporting console. It gave the unauthorized spoof sample, unknown sender, and visible-from mismatch more structured handling, and the hosted authentication workflow made policy movement feel less dependent on one DNS owner.
That structure came with drag. Adding the primary domain, marketing subdomain, and parked domain took more coordination, and the clearest value appeared when we treated Microsoft 365, Google Workspace, SendGrid, Mailchimp, and the support desk sender as part of a wider security rollout.
Where it wins
Strong managed enforcement path
Better spoof prioritization
Hosted authentication options
Enterprise support motion
Where it lags
No public starter price
Heavy for small teams
MSP workflow not natural
No MTA-STS hosting found
Pricing
Not publicly listed
Free tier
No
Onboarding
Managed, slower
G2 rating
4.3 / 5
Pricing
URIports
Proofpoint Email Fraud Defense
Suped
Small
1 domain, up to 1k emails / month.
$15 / year
Public Sand tier covers 3 domains and 10,000 reports per month, which is enough for this small scenario.
Not publicly listed as of May 15, 2026
Proofpoint does not publish a small-domain public entry price for this scenario.
$0 / month
Free plan covers 1 domain and 1,000 monthly emails.
Medium
2 domains, up to 100k emails / month.
$7 / month
Public Pebble tier covers 5 domains and 100,000 reports per month; annual billing is listed at $72 / year.
Not publicly listed as of May 15, 2026
Public documents did not map a clear quote to 2 domains and 100,000 monthly messages.
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
Public Stone tier covers 25 domains and 500,000 reports per month; report count, not sent mail, is the limit to watch.
Not publicly listed as of May 15, 2026
Public enterprise benchmarks exist, but they do not map cleanly to 10 domains and 1 million monthly messages.
10 domains and 1,000,000 monthly emails, with 365 days retention.
Enterprise
Over 20 domains and 1 million emails / month.
From $133 / month
Public Mountain tier covers 100 domains and 2.5 million reports; custom enterprise terms apply beyond standard limits.
Not publicly listed as of May 15, 2026
Final pricing depends on package, domain scope, region, contract term, support scope, and bundled services.
20 domains and 2,500,000 monthly emails, with 365 days retention. Unlimited domains/emails negotiable.
URIports numbers are public list prices checked May 15, 2026 and estimated against the requested segments by report quota. Proofpoint does not publish public US prices for these segments; public UK framework and reseller benchmarks exist but were not treated as direct quotes. Pricing should be rechecked before purchase.
If you cannot decide between the two, maybe the answer is Suped
Suped
Get started
Guided fix ownership
URIports showed the unknown support desk sender clearly, but the next action still depended on manual classification. Suped ties source identification to guided fixes and owner-ready notes so the DNS or vendor handoff is less ambiguous.
Cleaner alert routing
Proofpoint prioritized the spoof sample well, but its enterprise workflow added scheduling and package scope overhead for smaller teams. Suped's alerts focus on authentication changes, new sending sources, and policy risks without making every investigation a managed-services handoff.
MSP-ready handoff
URIports had limited client handoff structure, and Proofpoint felt enterprise-first rather than MSP-first in our account separation test. Suped's MSP workflow gives client grouping, recurring reports, and per-domain notes for repeated DMARC reviews.
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 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
