What deliverability monitoring tools are good alternatives to Return Path, Everest and Sparkpost?

Key findings

• Diverse offerings: The market offers a wide array of tools beyond the traditional Return Path/Everest and Sparkpost, catering to various needs from advanced inbox placement to DMARC monitoring.
• Integration importance: For users of specific email service providers (ESPs) like Salesforce Marketing Cloud, direct integrations or recommended partners are often a priority.
• Specialized tools: Some solutions focus on specific aspects, such as DMARC reporting, while others offer broader deliverability suites.
• Cost-effectiveness: There's a growing interest in tools that offer robust features without the premium price tag of established players.
• New market entrants: Several newer or smaller companies are providing competitive and innovative deliverability monitoring services.

Key considerations

• Feature set alignment: Evaluate if a tool's capabilities, such as inbox placement testing or blacklist monitoring, truly match your organization's specific needs.
• Scalability: Consider how well a tool can scale with your email volume and complexity, especially for large senders.
• Reporting and analytics: Assess the depth and clarity of the insights provided, including spam trap hits, authentication failures, and overall deliverability trends.
• Support and expertise: Look for vendors who offer strong customer support and deliverability expertise.
• Integration with existing stack: Ensure compatibility with your current email sending infrastructure, whether it's an ESP or an in-house solution. For a broader view of market options, explore resources like EmailTooltester's review of the best email deliverability tools.

Key opinions

• Need for alternatives: Marketers are actively seeking viable replacements for services like Return Path, driven by changes in vendor offerings.
• Distinction between tools: There's a recognition that deliverability tracking tools (like inbox placement monitors) differ from broader deliverability platforms or sending services (like Sparkpost).
• Interest in specific features: Marketers often focus on specific functionalities like inbox placement data, blacklist monitoring, and authentication reporting.
• Seeking recommendations: Peer recommendations are highly valued for discovering new and effective tools.

Key considerations

• Functionality vs. platform: Clearly define whether you need a dedicated deliverability monitoring tool or a full sending platform with deliverability features.
• RFQ process: Include a diverse set of options in your Request for Quote (RFQ) to ensure a comprehensive evaluation.
• Vendor reputation and support: Consider the reliability and customer support offered by alternative vendors, especially smaller or newer entrants.
• Specific ESP integrations: If you use a specific ESP (e.g., Salesforce Marketing Cloud), prioritize tools with proven integrations. For a list of SparkPost alternatives that might offer better delivery, see Moosend's analysis.

Key opinions

• Data accuracy: Experts stress the importance of reliable data from monitoring tools, as inaccurate insights can lead to misguided deliverability strategies.
• Holistic view: A good tool should provide more than just inbox placement rates; it needs to include DMARC reports, feedback loop data, and spam trap insights.
• Proactive monitoring: The best tools enable senders to identify and address issues before they significantly impact deliverability.
• Beyond the big players: While Everest is a dominant force, numerous other tools offer specialized functionalities that might be superior for particular use cases.

Key considerations

• Reputation tracking: Choose a tool that offers robust IP and domain reputation monitoring, including real-time blocklist checks.
• Benchmark data: Tools that provide industry benchmarks can help assess performance relative to competitors.
• Actionable insights: The tool should not just present data, but also offer actionable recommendations to improve deliverability. Consider this when choosing tools, as suggested by experts in SpamResource.com.
• Customization: Look for flexibility in reporting and alerting to tailor the monitoring to your specific needs.

Key findings

• Protocol adherence: Effective deliverability tools are built upon a deep understanding and accurate implementation of email authentication protocols like SPF, DKIM, and DMARC.
• Data aggregation: Key to monitoring is the ability to accurately aggregate and interpret data from various sources, including email service providers, blocklists, and DMARC aggregate reports.
• Impact of standards: Changes in industry standards (e.g., Google/Yahoo sender requirements) directly influence tool effectiveness and necessary features.
• Machine learning: Advanced tools increasingly use machine learning to identify patterns in email traffic that signal deliverability issues or spam. This capability helps in proactively identifying and mitigating threats, leading to improved inbox placement rates.

Key considerations

• Comprehensive data feeds: Look for tools that integrate a wide range of data sources for a complete picture of deliverability. This includes leveraging Postmaster Tools and FBLs.
• Technical depth: Evaluate if the tool provides granular technical insights, such as DMARC alignment failures or DNSBL listings, which are crucial for technical teams.
• API access: For advanced users, API access allows for integration with internal systems and custom reporting.
• Compliance with evolving standards: Ensure the tool is regularly updated to reflect new email client requirements and industry best practices. For example, understanding how Klaviyo monitors email performance can provide insight into integrated monitoring within ESPs.