Summary
The importance of email warming, even on shared IPs, is a nuanced topic that heavily depends on the interplay between your domain and IP reputations. While IP warming is traditionally associated with dedicated IPs, maintaining good sending practices and gradually increasing volume remains crucial when using shared IPs, especially when migrating to a new platform.
Key findings
- Domain and IP warming: Both domain and IP reputations are critical for deliverability. It is no longer a case of one or the other, as both contribute to the overall sender identity and trustworthiness. This is especially true when migrating email sending to a new platform.
- Shared IP considerations: On shared IPs, your sending reputation can be influenced by other users on the same IP. This means there can be both a bleed-through benefit from good senders and a potential downside from poor ones. Despite this, a slow ramp-up of sending volume is still recommended.
- Domain/IP interaction: Internet Service Providers (ISPs), like Google, often treat each unique domain/IP combination as its own identifier. This means moving an existing domain to a new IP (even a shared one) can trigger suspicion and necessitate a re-establishment of trust. For more details, explore the difference between IP and domain reputation.
- Reputation continuity: While a new IP starts with a neutral or unknown reputation, an established domain carries its existing sender history. ISPs give some partial credit based on your domain's past performance.
Key considerations
- Gradual ramp-up: Even on shared IPs, gradually increasing your sending volume (warming) helps ISPs recognize your consistent and legitimate sending patterns, building trust for your specific domain/IP combination. This helps recover or maintain reputation.
- Volume assessment: For senders with high monthly volumes (e.g., 160k unique contacts), considering a dedicated IP might be beneficial to gain more control over your sending reputation and minimize impact from other senders.
- Monitor all identifiers: Actively monitor both your domain reputation and the reputation of the specific IPs you are using (which might be aggregated under your domain in tools like Google Postmaster Tools) to quickly identify and address any issues.
What email marketers say
Email marketers often find themselves navigating the complexities of IP and domain reputation, especially when switching platforms or scaling their sending. Their experiences highlight the practical challenges and best practices for warming on shared IPs and understanding reputation dynamics.
Key opinions
- Domain importance: Many marketers emphasize that domain warming is as important, if not more important, than IP warming. This is because recipient mail servers increasingly rely on domain reputation as a primary indicator of sender trustworthiness.
- Shared IP reality: On a shared IP, marketers recognize that their sender reputation can be affected by other users. While some consider the pre-warmed nature of shared IPs a bonus, the potential for negative bleed-through from poor senders on the same blocklist or blacklist is a common concern. Learn more about how shared IP issues can impact campaigns.
- Migration impact: Migrating to a new email service provider (ESP) and consequently a new IP (even shared) can feel like a deliverability reset, even with an established domain. Marketers acknowledge the need for caution during this period.
- Volume triggers: For high-volume senders, many marketers suggest that the benefits of a dedicated IP often outweigh the complexities of warming it up, due to greater control over reputation.
Key considerations
- Strategic warming: Even on shared IPs, adopting a slow and steady warm-up approach helps new domain/IP combinations build trust with ISPs and avoid early filtering.
- Monitoring multiple factors: Marketers need to monitor not only their domain reputation but also the specific IPs used for sending, as both contribute to deliverability, especially after a migration.
- Choosing IP type: The decision between shared and dedicated IPs should factor in sending volume, frequency, and risk tolerance, as shared IPs introduce an element of external influence on reputation.
An email marketer from Email Geeks indicates that domain warming is as crucial as IP warming, emphasizing that deliverability is no longer solely dependent on the IP. Both aspects need to be considered when establishing sender reputation, especially with a new sending setup.
A marketer from Email Geeks asks about the combination of an existing domain with a new IP, questioning if this setup would effectively reset their sending reputation to zero, implying a need to re-establish trust from scratch.
What the experts say
Deliverability experts provide invaluable insights into how ISPs, particularly major ones like Google, evaluate senders. Their perspectives often go beyond surface-level observations, delving into the intricacies of how domain and IP reputations are assessed and how changes in sending patterns are perceived.
Key opinions
- Identifier granularity: Experts confirm that Google (and often other ISPs) treats each domain/IP combination as a distinct identifier for reputation purposes. This means that a change in IP, even with an established domain, is viewed as a new sending identity that needs to build trust.
- Reputation flow: Reputation is dynamic and flows both up and down. A positive history from your domain can eventually improve the standing of a new (or shared) IP, but initial caution from ISPs is to be expected until consistent, legitimate sending is proven.
- ISP suspicion: ISPs are inherently wary of any sudden changes in sending patterns or infrastructure, including a domain moving to a new IP. This initial suspicion underscores the need for a careful ramp-up strategy, even if it's a shared IP that's already 'warm'.
- Comprehensive domain reputation: Every domain present in an email, whether in links, headers, or the visible text, contributes to the overall domain reputation. This broader view of domain reputation extends beyond just the sending domain. Understand how Google Postmaster Tools (GPT) track this.
Key considerations
- Holistic monitoring: While tools like GPT provide insight into both domain and IP reputation separately, experts caution that these metrics do not always directly correlate with actual inbox placement. A 'bad/low' reputation score in GPT might still result in good inboxing if other factors are strong, highlighting the complexity of deliverability. Dive into the ultimate guide to Google Postmaster Tools.
- Adaptation period: Senders should prepare for a period where ISPs might be scrutinizing their new domain/IP sending pattern, even on shared IPs, as consistency and positive engagement are established.
- Beyond metrics: Relying solely on reported reputation scores can be misleading. A nuanced understanding of engagement metrics and recipient feedback is essential for truly gauging deliverability, regardless of IP type.
A deliverability expert from Email Geeks notes that in many contexts, there will be a 'bleed over' of reputation when using shared IPs, meaning the actions of other senders on the same IP can influence one's own standing.
An expert from Email Geeks states that Google specifically considers each unique domain and IP combination as its own distinct identifier for reputation tracking purposes, emphasizing the granular nature of Google's evaluation.
What the documentation says
Official documentation from ESPs and technical resources often provides generalized guidelines for email deliverability, which sometimes do not explicitly differentiate between dedicated and shared IP warming. However, the underlying principles of reputation building remain consistent.
Key findings
- General warming advice: Many ESPs provide advice on deliverability for new senders that broadly applies to both shared and dedicated IPs, advocating for a gradual increase in sending volume (warming) to build trust. This implies that even on shared IPs, there's a need to establish your specific domain's positive sending habits.
- Migration impact: Documentation often acknowledges that moving to a new email platform can lead to a temporary drop in deliverability, comparing it to losing search engine rankings. This highlights the importance of careful migration planning, regardless of IP type. See the ActiveCampaign support document for example.
- Reputation components: Documentation often stresses that both IP and domain reputation are integral components of overall email sender reputation, and both must be managed effectively for optimal inbox placement.
Key considerations
- Beyond IP warming: While some documentation suggests shared IPs don't require warming, this often pertains to the IP's baseline reputation. Your domain's specific sending behavior and engagement still need to be established with ISPs. Learn about common deliverability issues during migration.
- Consistent sending practices: Regardless of IP type, maintaining consistent sending volume, frequency, and high engagement rates is key to building and sustaining a positive reputation. This includes managing bounces and spam complaints effectively. Consider how to consolidate platforms and warm up a new IP.
Documentation from ActiveCampaign Help Center suggests that migrating to a new email provider is analogous to changing a domain name and potentially losing SEO rankings. It states that senders might experience a temporary drop in deliverability and outlines steps to mitigate this, emphasizing a cautious approach.
Klaviyo Help Center documentation clarifies that the IP warming process for a dedicated IP concludes once 100% of the anticipated email volume is consistently sent through that IP. This typically signifies the completion of the reputation-building phase for that specific IP address.
