Why is Validity charging for Universal Feedback Loop (UFL) ARF reports, and what are the costs?
Matthew Whittaker
Co-founder & CTO, Suped
Published 29 May 2025
Updated 17 Aug 2025
8 min read
The email deliverability landscape is constantly evolving, and recent announcements from Validity have certainly stirred the waters. Many in the industry, including myself, have been closely watching the discussions around their decision to start charging for Universal Feedback Loop (UFL) Abuse Reporting Format (ARF) reports.
For years, these reports were provided at no cost, serving as a vital tool for senders to monitor spam complaints and maintain a healthy sender reputation. This shift introduces new considerations for email marketers and service providers who rely on this data.
I’ll delve into why Validity is implementing these charges, what the costs are, and what this means for senders navigating email deliverability and sender reputation in the future.
Understanding Universal Feedback Loops and ARF reports
Feedback loops (FBLs) are an indispensable part of email deliverability. They are mechanisms by which mailbox providers (ISPs) notify senders when a recipient marks an email as spam. These notifications are typically sent in a standardized format called Abuse Reporting Format, or ARF, reports. Receiving and acting on these reports is critical for senders to remove disengaged subscribers, prevent future complaints, and avoid being placed on a blocklist (or blacklist) for sending unwanted mail.
Validity, through its acquisition of Return Path, became a central aggregator for many of these FBLs, particularly for smaller ISPs and those that don't offer their own direct feedback loop services. This consolidated approach, known as the Universal Feedback Loop (UFL), has historically made it easier for senders to collect complaint data from a wide array of providers without having to register individually with each one. You can learn more about why abuse reports and feedback loops are still useful.
The importance of FBLs
Reputation management: High complaint rates can severely damage your sender reputation, leading to emails landing in spam folders or even your domain being added to a blocklist (or blacklist).
List hygiene: FBLs allow senders to quickly identify and remove recipients who have complained, which is crucial for maintaining a clean and engaged email list. This proactive approach helps avoid spam traps and further damage to your sending reputation.
Deliverability improvement: By addressing complaint issues, senders can improve their inbox placement rates and ensure their legitimate emails reach their intended audience. Without these reports, it’s much harder to pinpoint and resolve deliverability problems.
The ability to monitor these complaints is fundamental to good email practices. Without this data, senders are flying blind, making it nearly impossible to understand subscriber engagement and react effectively to feedback from ISPs. The Universal Feedback Loop (UFL) has been a cornerstone for many email programs precisely because it provided this consolidated view.
The shift to a paid service
Validity’s decision to start charging for ARF reports from their Universal Feedback Loop service stems from what they describe as increasing operational costs. They state that they have underwritten the service since 2009, considering FBLs a key component of good deliverability practices. As the service has grown, so have the expenses associated with transporting individual ARF reports.
This move to monetize a service that has long been free has been met with mixed reactions within the email community. While some acknowledge that operating such a platform incurs costs, others express concern over the timing and clarity of the communication, especially given the essential nature of FBL data for maintaining sender health.
Initially, there was confusion due to different messages being sent to various subscribers. Some received notices about charges, while others only heard about new features, leading to uncertainty about who would be affected and by how much. This lack of clear, unified communication compounded the industry’s concerns.
Free aggregated data
Validity states they will continue to offer a free version of their FBL service. This free tier provides access to aggregated complaint trends, categorized by provider and group, for the last 120 days. It offers a high-level overview of your complaint activity.
While aggregated data can give a general sense of performance, it lacks the granular detail needed for precise list hygiene and targeted issue resolution. It doesn't allow senders to identify and remove individual problematic email addresses from their lists, which is crucial for long-term sender reputation.
Paid ARF reports
To receive individual Abuse Reporting Format (ARF) reports, which detail specific complaint instances, senders will need to upgrade to a paid plan. These reports contain anonymized information that allows senders to pinpoint which specific messages or subscribers are generating complaints.
The individual ARF reports are essential for actively managing sender reputation and maintaining clean email lists. Without them, senders cannot effectively remove complaining users, leading to higher complaint rates and potential blocklisting, which can significantly impair deliverability.
The costs and implications for senders
The announced price for continuing to receive ARF reports is $1,500 USD annually for up to 100,000 complaints. This cost applies to senders who wish to access the granular data necessary for effective complaint management. It’s important to note that this fee covers the transport of individual ARF reports, not necessarily the data collection itself.
This sudden introduction of a fee, especially with limited notice, presents significant challenges for many organizations. Email senders, particularly larger ones, often operate on fixed budgets, and a new, unexpected annual fee of this nature can be difficult to absorb, especially when it applies to a service that was previously free and considered essential.
The implications extend beyond just the financial cost. Without these detailed ARF reports, senders may struggle to identify and suppress complainers effectively. This could lead to an increase in overall complaint rates, potentially resulting in more emails landing in spam folders and even escalating to blocklist (or blacklist) listings. The industry relies heavily on these feedback loops to maintain a healthy email ecosystem. You can find more details about Validity's Universal Feedback Loop pricing tiers in our dedicated guide.
Service Tier
Price
Complaint Volume
Data Type
Key Benefit
Free edition
$0 annually
N/A
Aggregated complaint trends
High-level overview of complaint activity for last 120 days
Paid ARF reports
$1,500 US annually
Up to 100,000 complaints
Individual Abuse Reporting Format (ARF) reports
Detailed, actionable data for precise list hygiene and deliverability improvement
Navigating the landscape and alternatives
While Validity's Universal Feedback Loop covers many ISPs, it’s crucial to remember that some major mailbox providers, like Microsoft (through its Junk Mail Reporting Program, JMRP) and Yahoo (through its Complaint Feedback Loop, CFL), operate their own direct FBLs. These are separate from Validity’s service and will continue to be free. It's essential for senders to register for these directly if they aren't already.
Beyond traditional FBLs, DMARC (Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting, and Conformance) offers another avenue for receiving abuse reports, specifically via the RUF (Reporting URI for Forensic Reports) tag in your DMARC record. While RUF reports aren't as widely supported or as detailed as ARF reports from FBLs, they can provide additional insights into fraudulent or abusive email activity originating from your domain. If you are not familiar with these, you can use our free DMARC record generator to set one up.
The changing landscape highlights the need for senders to diversify their complaint monitoring strategies. Relying on a single source, especially one that can introduce costs or changes without extensive notice, puts deliverability at risk. Many are looking at alternatives to Validity's feedback loop services to ensure consistent access to critical complaint data.
It’s a clear reminder that proactive monitoring and swift action on complaint data are paramount for maintaining a good sender reputation and avoiding blacklists (or blocklists). Senders must adapt their strategies to ensure they continue to receive and process complaint information efficiently, regardless of the cost implications or service changes from third-party providers. Our guide on how critical FBLs are for sender reputation emphasizes this point.
Views from the trenches
Best practices
Actively pursue direct FBL enrollments with major mailbox providers like Google, Microsoft, and Yahoo to reduce reliance on third-party aggregators.
Integrate DMARC RUA reports into your monitoring strategy to gain aggregated insights into authentication failures and potential abuse.
Prioritize internal list hygiene processes, including regular suppression of unengaged subscribers and maintaining strong opt-in practices.
Common pitfalls
Over-relying solely on Validity's UFL for all complaint data, especially for major ISPs with direct FBLs.
Underestimating the impact of lost individual ARF reports on targeted list cleaning and complaint resolution.
Ignoring the timing of changes and budget cycles, leading to unexpected costs or service disruptions.
Expert tips
Consider the long-term sustainability and cost-effectiveness of various FBL solutions.
Diversify your data sources for deliverability insights, combining FBLs, DMARC reports, and engagement metrics.
Engage in industry forums and communities to stay updated on changes and shared experiences from other senders.
Marketer view
Marketer from Email Geeks says they received similar messaging about the new charges and found it disappointing, feeling that FBL data should be free to encourage best practices.
2023-08-23 - Email Geeks
Marketer view
Marketer from Email Geeks says they found the communication unclear, noting that not everyone received the same message about the upcoming charges.
2023-08-23 - Email Geeks
Adapting to the evolving email landscape
Validity’s decision to charge for Universal Feedback Loop ARF reports marks a significant shift in how email senders access critical complaint data. While their rationale points to increasing operational costs for a service underwritten since 2009, the implications for email marketers are substantial. The $1,500 annual fee for individual ARF reports means businesses must now factor this into their budget for maintaining optimal email deliverability.
This change underscores the importance of a robust, multi-faceted approach to email deliverability. Relying on a single source for FBL data, particularly one that can introduce unexpected costs or service model changes, carries inherent risks. It encourages senders to explore all available avenues, including direct FBLs from major ISPs and leveraging DMARC RUF reports, to ensure uninterrupted access to complaint intelligence.
Ultimately, the goal remains the same: to minimize spam complaints, maintain a strong sender reputation, and achieve high inbox placement rates. Senders who adapt quickly and strategically to these changes will be best positioned to navigate the evolving email landscape successfully, ensuring their messages continue to reach their intended recipients. If you are struggling with email deliverability, check out our guide on email deliverability issues.
Free edition
Microsoft (through its Junk Mail Reporting Program, JMRP) and 
Yahoo (through its Complaint Feedback Loop, CFL), operate their own direct FBLs. These are separate from Validity’s service and will continue to be free. It's essential for senders to register for these directly if they aren't already.
