Summary
Splitting email sends to engaged users before broadcasting to a wider list is a strategy some marketers consider to boost deliverability. The core idea is that the initial high engagement from a small, active segment could positively influence how internet service providers (ISPs) perceive the subsequent, larger send. However, experts generally caution against this tactic, arguing that it's often an unnecessary complication when proper list hygiene and permission practices are in place. The effectiveness of such a strategy is debated, with concerns that separating highly engaged users might dilute the overall engagement signals for the broader list, potentially harming deliverability for the majority of recipients.
Key findings
- Limited impact: ISPs may not differentiate between two closely timed sends if the sending infrastructure and content are identical, effectively treating it as one large deployment.
- Underlying issues: This strategy is often considered by senders who may have broader issues with consent and list quality, rather than a fundamental deliverability best practice.
- Engagement signals: High engagement rates are crucial for positive sender reputation, as explained by ActiveCampaign. Splitting sends might dilute these signals for the main bulk of the audience.
- Focus on core practices: Prioritizing strong sender reputation, list hygiene, and genuine recipient interest generally yields better and more sustainable deliverability results.
Key considerations
- Segmentation strategy: Consider if your segmentation truly improves overall inbox placement, rather than just an isolated segment.
- Audience size: For very large audiences, sending duration can mean that a 30-minute gap between sends might not be enough to truly separate performance signals.
- Effort vs. reward: Evaluate if the operational complexity of splitting sends outweighs the potential, often marginal, deliverability benefits.
- Holistic deliverability: Focus on comprehensive strategies to improve email deliverability, including list cleaning and content optimization, rather than workarounds.
What email marketers say
Email marketers often explore various tactics to optimize campaign performance and inbox placement. While the idea of leveraging high engagement from a segmented group is appealing, their opinions on splitting sends typically fall into two camps: those who have seen it work in specific contexts, often when facing existing deliverability challenges, and those who view it as an unnecessary complexity or a symptomatic treatment for deeper issues. Many prioritize foundational best practices over such layered strategies.
Key opinions
- Tactic effectiveness: Some marketers report having seen this tactic work for clients, especially when aiming to improve deliverability.
- Contextual necessity: The strategy is often considered when there are pre-existing deliverability issues, rather than as a standard practice for healthy sending.
- Engagement impact: There's a concern that removing highly engaged users from the main send could negatively affect the engagement metrics of the larger, subsequent email, impacting overall sender reputation.
- Seasonality considerations: Marketers recognize that declines in open and click-through rates can be due to seasonal demand shifts, not necessarily deliverability problems.
Key considerations
- List engagement: Focus on strategies for re-engaging inactive subscribers or removing them to maintain a healthy list.
- Metrics monitoring: Carefully monitor engagement thresholds to determine if declines are normal or indicate deliverability issues.
- Efficiency: For many, the additional effort of splitting sends for marginal gains is not justified, especially if deliverability is already robust.
- Permission-based sending: Ensure your list acquisition practices prioritize informed consent, which naturally leads to higher engagement and better deliverability.
Marketer view
Email marketer from Email Geeks discusses their boss's strategy, which involves sending an email to their most engaged customers 30 minutes before sending to the rest of the list. The goal is to leverage high opens and CTRs from the initial segment to improve deliverability for the broader send, effectively piggybacking on the positive response.
Marketer view
Email marketer from EverywhereMarketer states that understanding how to improve email deliverability is fundamental for ensuring emails are seen, opened, and interacted with by subscribers, while also preventing them from being flagged as spam.
What the experts say
Experts in email deliverability typically advocate for fundamental, permission-based sending practices as the cornerstone of good deliverability. They often view elaborate sending strategies, such as splitting lists, as attempts to compensate for underlying issues like poor list quality or inadequate consent. While acknowledging that some senders claim success with such methods, experts generally advise against complicating the sending process unnecessarily, emphasizing that ISPs are sophisticated enough to evaluate overall sending behavior regardless of minor timing variations.
Key opinions
- Permission is key: If recipients truly want your mail, complex splitting strategies are often unnecessary.
- ISP detection: ISPs (Internet Service Providers) are unlikely to perceive two closely timed sends of identical content as distinct campaigns.
- Efficiency concern: Experts often advise against wasting time on tactics that don't address core deliverability principles.
- Large audience deployment: For very large lists, a 30-minute gap may still fall within the same deployment window for the ESP, making the split negligible to the ISP.
Key considerations
- Root cause analysis: Instead of workarounds, focus on diagnosing and fixing the actual reasons why emails go to spam.
- Sender reputation: Maintaining a strong domain reputation through consistent positive engagement is paramount.
- List quality: Address collection practices should prioritize informed and freely given permission to minimize the need for such tactics.
- Overall sending behavior: ISPs evaluate an IP's and domain's overall sending pattern and engagement, not isolated short bursts of high performance.
Expert view
Email expert from Email Geeks notes that this type of recommendation has been heard before and seems to work for some senders. They imply that senders using this strategy often have address collection practices that do not prioritize informed and freely given permission, suggesting it becomes a workaround rather than a necessity.
Expert view
Deliverability expert from Word to the Wise suggests that an email reputation is fundamentally built by the recipients' reactions to the mail they receive. This includes how much email they want, how they interact with it, and what they do with mail they do not want.
What the documentation says
Official documentation and research often emphasize fundamental deliverability principles that prioritize sender reputation, list quality, and audience engagement over tactical workarounds. While some sources discuss segmentation by engagement, it's typically framed within the context of improving relevance and managing list health rather than as a method to manipulate ISP perception through timed sends. The consensus generally points towards maintaining a consistently positive sending history derived from genuinely desired communications.
Key findings
- Engagement's role: Emails that consistently achieve high recipient engagement are more likely to bypass spam folders and reach the primary inbox.
- Segmentation: Strategic segmentation based on engagement levels can make messages more relevant and improve overall deliverability, but this is distinct from timed splitting.
- List quality: Maintaining a clean mailing list is critical to avoid hard bounces and ensure emails reach valid, engaged recipients.
- User-centric approach: Optimizing deliverability involves a user-centric approach to list management and monitoring, crucial for a strong sending reputation.
Key considerations
- Fundamental authentication: Ensure robust authentication protocols like DMARC, SPF, and DKIM are correctly configured, as they are foundational to trust.
- Consistent best practices: Adhering to general best practices for technical email solutions is more impactful than attempts to 'game' sending patterns.
- Re-engagement campaigns: Consider pairing re-engagement campaigns with sends to your core engaged audience, or immediately after, as a deliberate strategy.
- Long-term engagement: Focus on keeping subscribers engaged for the long term by understanding the deliverability cycle and recipient preferences.
Technical article
Documentation from Acoustic confirms that separating sends by user engagement and initially sending to active subscribers improves the likelihood of achieving good email deliverability.
Technical article
Salesforce documentation highlights that ensuring email subscribers remain engaged for their lifetime and avoiding the spam filter begins with a comprehensive understanding of the email deliverability cycle.
Related resources
15 resources
Related pages
How can managing inactive email subscribers improve Gmail deliverability?
How to re-engage inactive email subscribers and when should you stop sending?
How to improve email inbox placement with sending priority and audience segmentation?
How to manage deliverability when re-engaging inactive email subscribers?
What are recommended initial email sending volumes for email deliverability?
How to rebuild Gmail sender reputation with limited engaged subscribers?
How to persuade management to remove unengaged email list subscribers for better deliverability?
What are good email engagement thresholds for deliverability monitoring?
Should unengaged email subscribers be sent separate campaigns or mixed with active recipients?
Why Your Emails Fail: Expert Guide to Improve Email Deliverability [2025]
