Email deliverability experts and platform documentation consistently define hard bounces as permanent delivery failures, primarily due to invalid or non-existent email addresses, often signaled by 5xx SMTP error codes. Conversely, soft bounces are temporary delivery issues, such as a full inbox or server problems, typically indicated by 4xx codes. The overwhelming consensus is to never resend emails to addresses that have hard bounced, advocating for their immediate removal or suppression to safeguard sender reputation. For soft bounces, however, the system may automatically retry sending, as these issues are often transient and may resolve over time. A notable nuance from experienced marketers highlights that despite standard SMTP definitions, real-world ISP behavior can sometimes blur the lines, where some 'hard' bounce codes may not imply permanent unrecoverability, requiring ESPs to interpret actual bounce meanings beyond strict code adherence.
13 marketer opinions
When managing email lists, a critical aspect of maintaining deliverability involves understanding and correctly handling email bounces. Industry experts widely agree that hard bounces, signifying permanent delivery failures often due to invalid addresses or permanent blocks, necessitate immediate removal from mailing lists to preserve sender reputation. Conversely, soft bounces denote temporary issues, such as a full inbox or server unavailability, which email service providers (ESPs) typically attempt to retry. While standard SMTP codes define 5xx as hard and 4xx as soft, seasoned marketers caution that Internet Service Providers (ISPs) do not always strictly adhere to these standards, meaning some 'hard' bounce codes may not represent truly unrecoverable addresses in practice. This complexity underscores the importance of ESPs' sophisticated interpretation systems to differentiate genuine permanent failures from temporary anomalies.
Marketer view
Email marketer from Email Geeks explains that he disagrees with resending to addresses that have hard bounced, and notes that many 5XX SMTP codes are effectively "soft" in practice, as receivers often don't adhere strictly to the hard bounce definition, requiring ESPs to interpret actual bounce meanings.
13 Jun 2023 - Email Geeks
Marketer view
Email marketer from Email Geeks shares his evolving understanding of hard bounces, initially believing resending is harmful but then acknowledging that some "hard" bounces may not be unrecoverable. He suggests it's not always best practice to immediately render hard bounces inactive, despite SMTP codes typically defining 5xx as hard and 4xx as soft.
26 Feb 2025 - Email Geeks
2 expert opinions
Understanding the distinction between hard and soft bounces is fundamental for effective email list management and maintaining strong sender reputation. Hard bounces signify a permanent inability to deliver an email, typically due to an invalid or non-existent address, and demand immediate removal from mailing lists to protect deliverability. In contrast, soft bounces indicate a temporary delivery issue, such as a full inbox or a server being temporarily offline, which often leads to automated retry attempts by the sending platform. Therefore, emails should never be resent to addresses that hard bounce, while soft bounces are handled differently due to their transient nature.
Expert view
Expert from Spam Resource explains that a hard bounce signifies a permanent delivery failure, such as an invalid email address or non-existent domain, and these addresses should be immediately removed from the mailing list, meaning you should not resend to them. A soft bounce, however, indicates a temporary issue, like a full inbox or server unavailability.
11 Mar 2022 - Spam Resource
Expert view
Expert from Word to the Wise clarifies that a hard bounce signifies a permanent delivery failure, indicating an invalid or non-existent email address, and should lead to immediate removal from the mailing list to prevent future resends. A soft bounce, conversely, denotes a temporary issue like a full mailbox or server problem, which typically results in retry attempts.
22 Oct 2021 - Word to the Wise
5 technical articles
The consensus among leading email platforms and technical standards is clear: never attempt to resend emails to addresses that result in a hard bounce. A hard bounce signifies a permanent delivery failure, usually due to an invalid or non-existent email address, and is often indicated by a 5xx SMTP error code. Conversely, a soft bounce signals a temporary delivery issue, such as a full inbox or a server being momentarily unavailable, typically associated with 4xx SMTP errors. While hard bounces necessitate immediate suppression to safeguard sender reputation, soft bounces are generally handled by automated retries from email service providers, as these issues are often transient.
Technical article
Documentation from Mailchimp explains that a hard bounce is a permanent delivery failure because the email address is invalid or non-existent, and you should never resend emails to them. A soft bounce is a temporary issue, such as a full inbox or server problem, which may resolve itself, making resending potentially viable.
21 May 2024 - Mailchimp Knowledge Base
Technical article
Documentation from SendGrid explains that hard bounces are permanent email delivery failures, often due to an invalid recipient address, and should be immediately suppressed. Soft bounces are temporary issues, such as a recipient's inbox being full or the server being temporarily unavailable, which may eventually resolve.
11 Jan 2025 - SendGrid Documentation
Do soft bounces affect email deliverability and sender reputation?
Should I resend emails that hard bounced during the Gmail outage?
Should I resend emails to users with soft bounces due to full mailboxes, and what bounce rate is acceptable?
Should I send emails to a list with a high hard bounce rate and how to prevent them?
What are the best practices for managing hard and soft bounces in daily email campaigns?
What is the difference between hard and soft email bounces and how should they be managed?