Summary
Many ESPs utilize ARF reports (or similar feedback loop data like FBLs) to monitor and manage email deliverability, enabling them to identify and address spam traps, high complaint rates, and other issues impacting sender reputation. While some, like Acoustic, may directly pay Validity for ARF data, many do not. This data provides insights into complaint trends, helps normalize complaint rates based on sending volume, and supports proactive management of email programs. Key uses include identifying sources of abuse, improving email authentication practices, refining targeting and messaging, and taking corrective action against spammers. Mailbox providers also leverage complaint data from feedback loops to inform their deliverability decisions. While ARF data is valuable, alternative metrics may be more effective for pinpointing specific instances of abuse. Processing ARF data manually can be complex, necessitating dedicated tools and services. Monitoring complaint rates and participating in feedback loops are crucial for maintaining a good sender reputation.
Key findings
- ARF Utility: ARF reports (or similar FBL data) are widely used by ESPs to monitor complaints, improve deliverability, and maintain sender reputation.
- Data Normalization: Normalizing complaint rates based on sending volume provides a more accurate picture of sender reputation.
- Proactive Management: ARF data enables proactive management of email programs, including identifying and penalizing abusive senders.
- Deliverability Impact: Mailbox providers use feedback loop data to inform deliverability decisions, impacting message filtering and blocking.
- Actionable Insights: Analyzing ARF reports allows senders to identify and address problematic sending practices, refine targeting, and improve messaging.
Key considerations
- Alternative Metrics: While ARF reports are valuable, other metrics may be more effective for identifying specific instances of abuse.
- Processing Complexity: Parsing ARF reports manually can be complex, requiring dedicated tools or services for automation and analysis.
- Feedback Loop Importance: Participating in feedback loops (FBLs) and acting on the data is crucial for maintaining a good sender reputation.
- Data Aggregation: Data may be aggregated by date and not campaign.
What email marketers say
16 marketer opinions
Many ESPs utilize ARF reports (or similar feedback loop data) to monitor and manage their email deliverability. While some ESPs directly pay Validity for ARF data (Acoustic is mentioned as an example), many others do not. The data from ARF reports and feedback loops is used to identify sources of abuse, improve sender reputation, manage complaint rates, and ultimately maintain the health of outbound email servers. ESPs analyze this data to identify spammers, understand complaint trends, normalize complaint rates based on volume, and take corrective action against abusive sending practices. Aggregate data can be used internally and presented to users to provide context. Normalizing complaint rates is important. It is often aggregated by date not campaign. While ARF data is helpful it's not a particularly good way to find abuse, other metrics are better. Mailbox providers also leverage this complaint data to inform deliverability decisions.
Key opinions
- ARF Usage: ESPs use ARF reports (or similar FBL data) to monitor complaints and improve deliverability, identifying issues like spam traps and high complaint rates.
- Data Aggregation: ARF data is often aggregated by date, not campaign, to understand complaint trends.
- Normalization: Many ESPs normalize complaint rates based on sending volume, providing a more accurate picture of sender reputation.
- Proactive Management: ARF data enables ESPs to proactively manage their network, penalize abusive senders, and protect overall reputation.
- Deliverability Decisions: Mailbox providers use complaint data from feedback loops to inform deliverability decisions, impacting whether messages are blocked or filtered.
Key considerations
- ARF Alternatives: While ARF reports are valuable, other metrics may be more effective for identifying specific instances of abuse.
- Data Parsing Complexity: Manually parsing ARF reports can be complex, necessitating dedicated tools or services for automation and analysis.
- Feedback Loop Participation: Participating in feedback loops (FBLs) and acting on the data is crucial for maintaining good sender reputation.
- Actionable Insights: The value of ARF data lies in taking corrective action based on the insights gained, such as improving email content or adjusting sending practices.
- Data Accuracy: Validity data is often aggregated by date rather than campaign.
Marketer view
Email marketer from Email Geeks shares that Acoustic is getting ARF report data, so assumes they are paying for it.
24 Sep 2021 - Email Geeks
Marketer view
Email marketer from Email Vendor Selection explains that many ESPs subscribe to feedback loop (FBL) reports, which are similar to ARF reports, to monitor complaints and improve deliverability. ESPs use this data to identify and address issues like spam traps and high complaint rates within their client base.
25 Jun 2021 - Email Vendor Selection
What the experts say
2 expert opinions
Experts from Spam Resource and Word to the Wise explain that ARF reports provide data on recipients marking messages as spam. ESPs use this feedback loop data to identify problematic sending practices and improve filtering, enabling them to refine targeting and messaging, reduce complaints, improve engagement, and maintain a good sender reputation.
Key opinions
- FBL/CFBL Mechanism: Feedback Loops (FBLs) and Complaint Feedback Loops (CFBLs) provide senders with data on spam complaints.
- Problem Identification: ARF report data helps identify problematic sending practices and specific campaigns that generate complaints.
- Targeting and Messaging: Data from ARF reports enables senders to refine targeting and messaging to reduce recipient complaints.
Key considerations
- Actionable Data: ARF reports supply critical data for maintaining email deliverability and sender reputation.
- Proactive Improvement: ESPs and senders should proactively use feedback loop data to improve their email programs.
Expert view
Expert from Word to the Wise, Laura Atkins, answers that feedback loop reports (the data from ARF reports) help senders identify specific campaigns, content, or sending practices that lead to recipient complaints. By analyzing this data, senders can refine their targeting and messaging to reduce complaints and improve engagement.
20 Oct 2022 - Word to the Wise
Expert view
Expert from Spam Resource, Steve Jones, explains that Feedback Loops (FBLs) and Complaint Feedback Loops (CFBLs) are mechanisms where ISPs provide senders with data about recipients who mark their messages as spam, which is the data that ARF reports provide. By participating in FBLs, ESPs can identify problematic sending practices, improve filtering, and maintain a good sender reputation.
14 Jan 2022 - Spam Resource
What the documentation says
4 technical articles
ARF reports provide summarized complaint data that allows senders to understand overall complaint trends and identify potential issues with their email programs. The Abuse Reporting Format (ARF) standardizes email feedback reports. ESPs provide tools to analyze feedback loop data from ARF reports, helping senders understand complaint rates. Google Postmaster Tools allows senders to monitor their spam rates, and these can indicate issues that ARF reports would highlight.
Key findings
- Summarized Complaint Data: ARF reports provide summarized complaint data from various mailbox providers.
- Standardized Format: The Abuse Reporting Format (ARF) standardizes email feedback reports.
- Feedback Loop Analysis: ESPs provide tools to analyze feedback loop data and ARF reports.
- Spam Rate Monitoring: Tools like Google Postmaster Tools help monitor spam rates, indicating issues similar to ARF reports.
Key considerations
- Complaint Trend Identification: ARF data assists in identifying overall complaint trends and potential issues affecting email programs.
- Actionable Information: ARF reports enable senders and ESPs to process and act on complaint data more easily.
- Complaint Rate Awareness: ARF data helps senders understand and monitor their complaint rates.
- Corrective Actions: High spam rates, as monitored by Google Postmaster Tools, can indicate the need for corrective actions.
Technical article
Documentation from Google explains that While not directly ARF, Google Postmaster Tools allows senders to monitor their spam rates, which is crucial for understanding how users are marking their emails. High spam rates can indicate issues that ARF reports would also highlight, suggesting similar corrective actions are needed.
4 Dec 2022 - Google Postmaster Tools
Technical article
Documentation from SparkPost explains that they provide tools to help senders analyze their feedback loop data, including information derived from ARF reports. This data helps senders understand their complaint rates and identify potential issues affecting deliverability.
21 Nov 2024 - SparkPost Documentation
Are there any tools available to report on Verizon's new data feeds?
Do SuretyMail and Validity Sender Certification increase inbox reach, and how do they work?
How did Yahoo update their FBL ARF format and how did it impact ESPs?
How do ESPs collect Yahoo FBL data using double DKIM signing?
How do spam complaints from Google and Yahoo inform ESPs, and how should ARF reports be used?
What ESPs use Validity's FBLs and what is the status of Comcast data and DKIM FBL implementation?
