It can be unsettling to check your sender score and find data that just doesn't seem right. Perhaps it's showing a massive spike in email volume that doesn't align with your internal logs, or a drastic drop in reputation when your deliverability metrics appear stable. This kind of inconsistency can trigger alarm bells, making you wonder if there's a serious issue with your email program or if the reporting tool itself is flawed.
The feeling of confusion is understandable. When a key metric like sender score, which is meant to reflect your email sending health, provides seemingly inaccurate information, it leaves you questioning the validity of your entire email security and deliverability strategy. You might begin to suspect your IPs are being used nefariously or that some hidden problem is impacting your sending.
In reality, there are several reasons why sender score data might appear inaccurate, ranging from the nature of how the data is collected to specific, temporary technical issues. Understanding these factors is crucial for accurately interpreting your score and taking appropriate action.
The nature of sender score data
Sender score is typically based on a sample of data rather than a complete overview of all your sending activity. This means the metrics you see, especially volume, are extrapolations and not always a direct reflection of your total email throughput. For instance, if your actual email volume is in the millions, a reported increase of a few thousand messages in the sampled data might appear significant on a graph, but it could be negligible in the context of your overall sending. This can lead to a perception of inaccurate data.
Furthermore, the underlying data sources that contribute to these scores can change dynamically. Providers may add or remove data feeds, or a specific feed might temporarily go offline or be restored. Such changes can cause sudden shifts in reported volume or reputation, even if your sending practices haven't changed. This transient nature of data collection points can create inconsistent data ranges and make the score appear unreliable.
These fluctuations are often due to the complexities of gathering a comprehensive view of global email traffic. While platforms like Sender Score aim to provide valuable insights, their aggregated data doesn't always paint a perfect picture of an individual sender's activity or reputation.
Sampled data vs. actual volume
Sender Score relies on a portion of global email traffic, which may not always accurately represent your full sending volume. A small, anomalous spike in this sampled data can look like a major problem on the graph, even if your total email volume remains consistent.
Discrepancies with other monitoring tools
When your sender score data appears inconsistent, it's essential to compare it with other reputable monitoring tools and your own internal logs. For instance, if Google Postmaster Tools, Microsoft SNDS, or your own PowerMTA (PMTA) logs show normal volumes and healthy engagement, this disparity strongly suggests that the issue might lie with the sender score's reporting, not your actual email performance. Mailbox providers often rely more heavily on their internal proprietary data to determine your reputation.
Geographical factors can also play a role in these discrepancies. We've observed instances where senders targeting specific regions, like France, experienced drastic volume increases or score drops on Sender Score, while their actual sending patterns remained unchanged. These localized anomalies can be due to new data providers being integrated or temporary data glitches specific to certain regions, further muddying the waters.
It's important to remember that a single reputation score, even from a widely used service, isn't the sole determinant of your deliverability. As highlighted by Mailjet, ISPs (Internet Service Providers) ultimately make their own decisions based on their internal datasets. Therefore, a high score doesn't guarantee inbox placement, nor does a temporarily low one always spell disaster.
Sender score perspective
Data often based on samples, leading to potential exaggerations in volume changes or score drops. May not reflect real-time deliverability issues due to varying data sources.
Internal logs & ISP tools
Provide a more direct and often more accurate representation of your actual sending volume, spam trap hits, and engagement data. ISPs rely heavily on these metrics for their filtering decisions.
Factors that genuinely impact your sender score
While some inaccurate reporting is due to the nature of aggregated data, a genuine drop in your sender score (or email sender reputation) can occur for several reasons. These are the factors that true email deliverability experts focus on. Common culprits include high bounce rates from sending to invalid or old addresses, an increase in spam complaints, and hitting spam traps. These actions signal to mailbox providers that your sending practices are poor, regardless of what a third-party score might show on a given day.
Poor list hygiene is a primary driver of these issues. Sending to unengaged subscribers, purchased lists, or very old lists often results in higher bounce rates and increased spam trap hits. Spam traps are particularly damaging, as they are email addresses designed solely to catch senders who aren't maintaining clean lists or who are sending unsolicited mail.
Another factor is inconsistent sending volume or erratic sending patterns. Mailbox providers monitor for spikes or sudden changes in your normal volume, which can be flagged as suspicious behavior. Proper implementation of email authentication protocols—namely SPF, DKIM, and DMARC—is also critical. Failures in these areas can significantly damage your reputation, regardless of your content or list quality.
Maintaining a healthy sender reputation
List hygiene: Regularly clean your email lists to remove inactive subscribers, hard bounces, and known spam traps.
Engagement: Focus on sending relevant content to engaged subscribers to minimize spam complaints and maximize positive interactions.
Volume consistency: Maintain a consistent sending volume and schedule to build a predictable reputation with ISPs.
What to do when your sender score seems off
When you encounter seemingly inaccurate sender score data, the first step is always to cross-reference with other sources. Check your internal email sending logs (like your PMTA data) for the actual volume sent from the IP addresses in question. Then, consult postmaster tools from major mailbox providers, such as Gmail and Yahoo, as these provide direct insights into how these providers view your sending reputation.
If your internal metrics and major ISP feedback mechanisms indicate healthy sending, it's likely that the sender score inaccuracy is a quirk of their data collection. However, if those other tools also show a decline or unusual activity, it's time to troubleshoot. This involves reviewing your recent email campaigns for any changes in audience, content, or sending volume that might have triggered an actual reputation impact. For example, a sudden increase in hard bounces could indicate a list quality problem.
Addressing a dropping sender score requires a multi-faceted approach. Regularly monitor your IP address on various blacklists (or blocklists) to catch any listings early. Implement robust list cleaning processes, and ensure your email authentication records are correctly configured. Don't let a single, potentially misleading metric distract you from the broader picture of your email deliverability health.
While you can't control the quirks of third-party reporting, you can control your sending practices. Focus on maintaining a healthy, engaged subscriber list and ensuring all your technical setups are in order. This proactive approach will build a strong sender reputation that is resilient to minor data inconsistencies and ensure your emails reach the inbox effectively.
Views from the trenches
Best practices
Always cross-reference sender score data with your internal mail logs and other postmaster tools from major ISPs like Gmail and Microsoft.
Focus on the underlying deliverability metrics such as bounce rates, spam complaint rates, and inbox placement, rather than solely relying on a single third-party score.
Regularly clean your email lists to remove inactive addresses and avoid spam traps. This is fundamental for maintaining a good reputation.
Ensure all your email authentication protocols (SPF, DKIM, DMARC) are correctly configured to prevent spoofing and improve trust.
Maintain consistent sending volumes and frequencies to build a predictable reputation profile with mailbox providers.
Actively monitor for blocklist (or blacklist) listings, as these are a clear indicator of reputation issues that need immediate attention.
Common pitfalls
Overreacting to temporary fluctuations in sender score without investigating the underlying causes or cross-referencing with other data sources.
Assuming an inaccurate sender score means no real deliverability problems, leading to complacency in list hygiene and sending practices.
Neglecting to monitor internal email sending volumes and engagement metrics, which are often more reliable indicators than external scores.
Failing to adapt sending strategies based on feedback from postmaster tools, even if a third-party score looks acceptable.
Ignoring localized data anomalies, such as specific regional ISP data affecting scores, which might impact deliverability in those areas.
Believing a 'certified' IP is immune to reputation issues or blocklistings, as even certified IPs can face problems if sending practices are poor.
Expert tips
If Sender Score shows drastic volume increases not reflected elsewhere, it's often due to their sampled data being a small fraction (sometimes less than 10%) of a sender's actual list, magnifying small fluctuations.
Data sources for Sender Score can be volatile; new ones may be added or existing ones might temporarily go offline, causing score and volume shifts without changes in your sending.
Be aware of regional data anomalies. Some senders have seen significant Sender Score drops (e.g., from 98 to 7) for IPs sending to specific countries like France, even with no change in IP activity.
While Sender Score inaccuracies can occur, some mailbox providers do use this data for rate limiting or blocking decisions, so even if it seems 'wacky', it can still impact delivery.
Lingering reputation damage on Sender Score after reported volume returns to normal suggests the score calculation might retain historical (and possibly skewed) data for a period, making recovery appear slow.
A sudden blocklisting (or blacklisting) of certified IPs on Sender Score, as reported by some ESPs, indicates that even high-reputation IPs are not immune to issues if new, problematic data sources are integrated.
Expert view
Expert from Email Geeks says Sender Score often reports unusual metrics that do not match actual IP activity because their data is based on a small sample, typically less than 10% of a sender's list. Focus on the actual volume counts; a seemingly large percentage increase might still be a small absolute number of messages that won't significantly impact overall sending.
December 22, 2022 - Email Geeks
Expert view
Expert from Email Geeks says data sources for Sender Score can fluctuate, going offline or being restored, which can cause traffic to be reported for the first time or after a period of absence, leading to apparent volume increases.
December 22, 2022 - Email Geeks
Navigating your sender reputation
Dealing with inaccurate sender score data can be frustrating, but it's important to approach it with a clear understanding of what the score represents and its limitations. While it offers a snapshot of your IP's reputation, it's not the definitive word on your deliverability. Always prioritize your internal metrics and direct feedback from major mailbox providers.
By focusing on core email best practices—like maintaining clean lists, ensuring strong authentication, and monitoring engagement—you build a resilient sender reputation that will perform well, regardless of temporary quirks in third-party reporting. Your efforts in these areas will ultimately have the greatest impact on your inbox placement.
Microsoft SNDS, or your own PowerMTA (PMTA) logs show normal volumes and healthy engagement, this disparity strongly suggests that the issue might lie with the sender score's reporting, not your actual email performance. Mailbox providers often rely more heavily on their internal proprietary data to determine your reputation.
Yahoo, as these provide direct insights into how these providers view your sending reputation.
