Who uses what for email DAILY

Mailbox providers and ESPs across the Tranco top-1M — snapshot of 2016-03-01.

865 090
Domains with MX
456 873
Domains with SPF
0
Domains with DMARC
865 090
Total scanned

What you're looking at. Four headline counts for the analysed Tranco snapshot: how many domains publish each kind of email-related DNS record. Higher MX vs SPF gap = more domains receive mail than authorise sending; higher SPF vs DMARC gap = SPF adopted but no policy/feedback enforcement yet.

Trend — last 30 day(s) · KPIs

Top mailbox providers

What this block shows. Where each domain hosts incoming mail — derived from its primary MX record (lowest mx_preference). This is the receiving side of email: Google Workspace, Microsoft 365, Zoho, on-prem Exchange, etc. "Generic / unmatched" buckets are common mail.* / mx*.* hostnames we couldn't attribute to a specific provider; "Unknown / Other" is everything else.

#Mailbox providerDomainsShare of MX-having domains
1Self-Hosted380 56943.99%
2Google Workspace131 83115.24%
3Unknown / Other87 58710.12%
4Generic / unmatched (mx*.*)36 8504.26%
5GoDaddy35 5354.11%
6Microsoft 36534 8214.03%
7Generic / unmatched (mail.*)20 3382.35%
8Yandex 36018 3792.12%
9QQ Mail (Tencent)10 0531.16%
10Rackspace Email7 6460.88%
Show rows 11 – 30
#Mailbox providerDomainsShare of MX-having domains
11OVH Mail7 4690.86%
12Symantec MessageLabs6 4950.75%
13Zoho Mail5 8540.68%
14Namecheap Email Forwarding4 3190.5%
15McAfee/Mxlogic4 0850.47%
16Mimecast3 6470.42%
17DreamHost3 3230.38%
18Beget (RU)2 8940.33%
19Generic / unmatched (smtp.*)2 6720.31%
20Proofpoint2 5640.3%
21GMO Lolipop (JP)2 1550.25%
221&1 IONOS2 1080.24%
23Timeweb (RU)2 0710.24%
24ISPGateway (DE)2 0620.24%
25Gandi Mail2 0460.24%
26MailHostBox1 8380.21%
27SpamExperts (SolarWinds)1 8300.21%
28Mail.ru for Business1 8100.21%
29Locaweb (BR)1 7440.2%
30Alibaba Mail (China)1 5780.18%

Trend — last 30 day(s) · Top mailbox providers

Long-tail / Unknown MX — the rest of the internet

What this block shows. The slice of domains whose mailbox cannot be attributed to a named provider — regional hosters, self-built Postfix/Exim, corporate gateways, niche ESPs. Researchers ask for this specifically because it captures the deliverability reality outside the Google / Microsoft monoculture. The detailed report drills down into Top-1000 most common unmatched hosts, 100 hand-picked curiosities (longest one-off names) and a TLD breakdown.

Unknown / Generic share
17.04%
147 447 domains
Unique unmatched MX hosts
55 070
individual hostnames in the long tail
Self-hosted
44.01%
380 714 domains running their own MX
📋 Open detailed long-tail report →·🏠 Providers portfolio →·📧 SaaS/ESP senders →·📮 Mailing services (ESPs) →·⬇ Download top-1000 unmatched MX (CSV)·⬇ Download 100 curiosities (CSV)

Top ESPs / mass-mailing services

What this block shows. Outbound mass-mailing platforms each domain authorises in its SPF record — the marketing-automation, transactional-email and customer-engagement layer (SendGrid, Mailchimp, Mailgun, Klaviyo, HubSpot, Salesforce Marketing Cloud, etc.). One domain can use several ESPs, so percentages sum to more than 100% of SPF-publishing domains.

#ESPDomainsShare of SPF-publishing domains
1Mandrill21 8964.79%
2SendGrid (Twilio)13 8723.04%
3Zendesk8 6851.9%
4Mailgun7 3711.61%
5Mailchimp6 4211.41%
6Amazon SES6 3041.38%
7Namecheap Forwarding5 0371.1%
8Mailjet (Sinch)3 1290.68%
9Marketo (Adobe)2 9380.64%
10Postmark2 4910.55%
Show rows 11 – 30
#ESPDomainsShare of SPF-publishing domains
11Locaweb (BR)2 1600.47%
12MailHostBox2 1010.46%
13Mimecast1 6910.37%
14Help Scout1 1860.26%
15Kagoya (JP, sender)1 1400.25%
16Elastic Email9910.22%
17Salesforce9420.21%
18Freshdesk9080.2%
19A Random Server (parking)7440.16%
20AuthSMTP7380.16%
21Unisender (RU)7270.16%
22Salesforce Marketing Cloud7130.16%
23MailChannels6380.14%
24Sailthru6060.13%
25SMTP2GO5520.12%
26Customer.io4800.11%
27Infomaniak (CH)4570.1%
28Constant Contact4120.09%
29KingHost (BR)3920.09%
30Emarsys (SAP)3420.07%

Trend — last 30 day(s) · Top ESPs

SaaS senders (Notion, Slack, Zendesk, Atlassian, Stripe…)

What this block shows. SaaS apps that send mail FROM a customer's domain on the customer's behalf — productivity, support, payments, HR, e-commerce and other business apps appearing as include: targets in the customer's SPF. Distinct from ESPs (mass-mailing platforms) and mailbox providers (where the inbox lives).

#SaaS appDomainsShare of SPF-publishing domains
1Pardot (Salesforce)2 4670.54%
2Trustpilot1 8200.4%
3Zendesk1 6820.37%
4BigCommerce1 1230.25%
5PayPal Braintree5160.11%
6Statuspage (Atlassian)4400.1%
7Qualtrics3620.08%
8ClickDimensions3250.07%
9Recurly1820.04%
10NetSuite (Oracle)1560.03%
Show rows 11 – 30
#SaaS appDomainsShare of SPF-publishing domains
11Shopify1280.03%
12pair Networks760.02%
13Autotask (ConnectWise)480.01%
14One.com (DK hosting)450.01%
15SchoolMessenger370.01%
16Gannett (USA Today)320.01%
17SurveyMonkey230.01%
18DocuSign210.0%
19Firebase (Google)210.0%
20ConnectWise200.0%
21Docebo (LMS)190.0%
22RetailCRM120.0%
23Basecamp100.0%
24Heureka (CZ comparison)100.0%
25CodeTwo Email Signatures 36590.0%
26Workday90.0%
27Brightspace (D2L)70.0%
28Exact Online (NL ERP)60.0%
29Chargebee50.0%
30Atlassian (Jira/Confluence)50.0%

Trend — last 30 day(s) · Top SaaS senders

DMARC adoption

What this block shows. The policy each DMARC-publishing domain advertises at _dmarc.<domain>: none = monitor only, quarantine = mark as spam on fail, reject = drop on fail, invalid = a syntactically broken record. "Enforced %" treats only quarantine / reject with pct=100 as actually enforcing.

Trend — last 30 day(s) · DMARC enforced %

7d ago▼ -46.78%30d ago▼ -46.00%90d ago▼ -45.15%1y ago▼ -42.73%

Trend — last 30 day(s) · DMARC policies

Top 100 most-used DMARC records (verbatim)

The literal record string copied verbatim from DNS — useful to spot copy-pasted "starter" policies and identify reporting endpoints (the rua= / ruf= tags) shared across many domains.

#DMARC recordDomains
1v=DMARC1; p=none;53 819
2v=DMARC1; p=none31 635
3v=DMARC1; p=none; rua=mailto:rua@dmarc.brevo.com8 034
4v=DMARC1; p=quarantine;4 753
5v=DMARC1; p=quarantine3 897
6v=DMARC1;p=none;3 765
7v=DMARC1; p=reject;3 674
8v=DMARC1; p=reject; fo=1; rua=mailto:dmarc_rua@emaildefense.proofpoint.com; ruf=mailto:dmarc_ruf@emaildefense.proofpoint.com3 272
9v=DMARC1; p=quarantine; adkim=s; aspf=s3 195
10v=DMARC1; p=reject2 858
11v=DMARC1; p=quarantine; adkim=r; aspf=r; rua=mailto:dmarc_rua@onsecureserver.net;2 701
12v=DMARC1; p=quarantine; pct=1002 330
13v=DMARC1; p=none; aspf=r; adkim=r;2 266
14v=DMARC1; p=none; sp=none; rua=mailto:dmarc@mailinblue.com!10m; ruf=mailto:dmarc@mailinblue.com!10m; rf=afrf; pct=100; ri=864002 117
15v=DMARC1; p=reject; sp=reject; adkim=s; aspf=s;1 827
16v=DMARC1; p=none; aspf=r; sp=none1 750
17v=DMARC1;p=none1 716
18v=DMARC1; p=none; adkim=r; aspf=r;1 456
19v=DMARC1;p=quarantine;pct=100;fo=11 364
20v=DMARC1;p=reject;1 329
21v=DMARC1; p=reject; fo=1; rua=mailto:dmarc_rua@emaildefense.proofpoint.com; ruf=mailto:dmarc_ruf@emaildefense.proofpoint.com;1 300
22v=DMARC1; p=none; rua=mailto:dmarc_agg@vali.email1 291
23v=DMARC1; p=reject; rua=mailto:dmarc_agg@vali.email1 223
24v=DMARC1;p=none;sp=none;adkim=r;aspf=r;pct=100;fo=0;rf=afrf;ri=864001 213
25v=DMARC1; p=none; rua=mailto:dmarc_agg@vali.email;1 064
Show rows 26 – 100
#DMARC recordDomains
26v=DMARC1; p=none; sp=none1 055
27v=DMARC1; p=reject; adkim=r; aspf=r; rua=mailto:dmarc_rua@onsecureserver.net;1 051
28v=DMARC1; p=none; fo=1; rua=mailto:dmarc_rua@emaildefense.proofpoint.com; ruf=mailto:dmarc_ruf@emaildefense.proofpoint.com1 044
29v=DMARC1; p=none; sp=none;1 039
30v=DMARC1; p=reject; sp=reject; rua=mailto:dmarc.report@axa.com;976
31v=DMARC1; p=reject; rua=mailto:report@dmarc.amazon.com; ruf=mailto:report@dmarc.amazon.com887
32v=DMARC1; p=reject; sp=reject; adkim=s; aspf=s886
33v=DMARC1; p=quarantine; rua=mailto:dmarc_agg@vali.email788
34v=DMARC1; p=reject; rua=mailto:dmarc.report@axa.com;772
35v=DMARC1; p=none; pct=100702
36v=DMARC1; p=reject; pct=100694
37v=DMARC1;p=quarantine;sp=none;adkim=r;aspf=r;pct=100;fo=0;rf=afrf;ri=86400643
38v=DMARC1; p=quarantine; fo=1; ruf=mailto:dmarc@qiye.163.com; rua=mailto:dmarc_report@qiye.163.com610
39v=DMARC1; p=reject; rua=mailto:mailauth-reports@google.com607
40v=DMARC1; p=none; fo=1; ruf=mailto:dmarc@qiye.163.com; rua=mailto:dmarc_report@qiye.163.com584
41v=DMARC1; p=none; sp=none; rf=afrf; pct=100; ri=86400568
42v=DMARC1; p=reject; fo=1; ri=3600; rua=mailto:ewai10d2@ag.eu.dmarcian.com; ruf=mailto:ewai10d2@fr.eu.dmarcian.com556
43v=DMARC1;p=quarantine508
44v=DMARC1; p=quarantine; rua=mailto:dmarc_agg@vali.email;507
45v=DMARC1; p=none; rua=mailto:mailauth-reports@qq.com478
46v=DMARC1; p=quarantine; pct=100;474
47v=DMARC1;p=reject;sp=reject;adkim=s;aspf=s453
48v=DMARC1; p=reject; pct=100;443
49v=DMARC1; p=reject; rua=mailto:dmarc_rua@onsecureserver.net; adkim=r; aspf=r;439
50v=DMARC1; p=reject; rua=mailto:dmarc_agg@vali.email;436
51v=DMARC1; p=reject; rua=mailto:dmarc_rua@emaildefense.proofpoint.com; ruf=mailto:dmarc_ruf@emaildefense.proofpoint.com; fo=1385
52v=DMARC1; p=reject; adkim=s; aspf=s381
53v=DMARC1; p=none; sp=none; adkim=r; aspf=r371
54v=DMARC1; p=none; fo=1; rua=mailto:dmarc_rua@emaildefense.proofpoint.com; ruf=mailto:dmarc_ruf@emaildefense.proofpoint.com;359
55v=DMARC1; p=reject; adkim=s; aspf=s;359
56v=DMARC1; p=none; adkim=r; aspf=r358
57v=DMARC1;p=reject;fo=1;rua=mailto:dmarc_rua@emaildefense.proofpoint.com;ruf=mailto:dmarc_ruf@emaildefense.proofpoint.com352
58v=DMARC1;p=reject341
59v=DMARC1; p=none; pct=100;334
60v=DMARC1330
61v=DMARC1; p=reject; sp=none; rf=afrf; pct=100; ri=86400325
62v=DMARC1; p=none; rua=mailto:dmarc@smtp.mailtrap.live; ruf=mailto:dmarc@smtp.mailtrap.live; rf=afrf; pct=100325
63v=DMARC1; p=none; fo=1324
64v=DMARC1; p=reject; rua=mailto:tnoff9hr@ag.eu.dmarcadvisor.com; aspf=s; adkim=s;314
65v=DMARC1;p=quarantine;312
66v=DMARC1; p=reject; rua=mailto:zsrbf6su@ag.eu.dmarcadvisor.com;296
67v=DMARC1; p=reject; sp=reject; pct=100; fo=1; ri=3600; rua=mailto:dmarcrecord@gmail.com; ruf=mailto:dmarcrecord@gmail.com;281
68v=DMARC1; p=reject; rua=mailto:dmarc_rua@emaildefense.proofpoint.com; ruf=mailto:dmarc_ruf@emaildefense.proofpoint.com;fo=1276
69v=DMARC1; p=none; rua=mailto:mailauth-reports@google.com271
70v=DMARC1;p=reject;sp=none;adkim=r;aspf=r;pct=100;fo=0;rf=afrf;ri=86400269
71v=DMARC1;p=none;sp=none;pct=50;adkim=r;aspf=r;258
72v=DMARC1; p=none; aspf=r; adkim=r250
73v=DMARC1;p=none;rua=mailto:dmarc_report@service.aliyun.com247
74v=DMARC1;p=none;pct=100244
75v=DMARC1; p=reject; fo=1; ri=3600; rua=mailto:dmarc_rua@emaildefense.proofpoint.com; ruf=mailto:dmarc_ruf@emaildefense.proofpoint.com236
76v=DMARC1; p=quarantine; fo=1; rua=mailto:dmarc_rua@emaildefense.proofpoint.com; ruf=mailto:dmarc_ruf@emaildefense.proofpoint.com231
77v=DMARC1; p=quarantine; adkim=s; aspf=s;227
78v=DMARC1; p=none; rua=mailto:rua-mpse@mpub.ne.jp225
79v=DMARC1; p=reject; rua=mailto:dmarc_rua@onsecureserver.net;223
80v=DMARC1; p=reject; rua=mailto:zicaptxt@ag.dmarcian.com;211
81v=DMARC1; p=quarantine; rua=mailto:rua@dmarc.brevo.com206
82v=DMARC1; p=quarantine; adkim=r; aspf=r199
83v=DMARC1; p=reject; sp=reject196
84v=DMARC1;p=none;sp=none;adkim=r;aspf=r;pct=100190
85v=DMARC1; p=none; sp=none; rua=mailto:dmarc-raports@dhosting.pl186
86v=DMARC1; p=quarantine; pct=100; rua=mailto:61e7fc8674b33@ag.eu.dmarcly.com; ruf=mailto:61e7fc8674b33@fo.eu.dmarcly.com; sp=quarantine; fo=1;185
87v=DMARC1; p=none; pct=100; rua=mailto:dmarc@fbl.optin.com;182
88v=DMARC1; p=none; rua=mailto:dmarc@reporting.unisender.com179
89v=DMARC1;p=none;pct=100;aspf=r;adkim=r;178
90v=DMARC1; p=reject; fo=1; ri=3600; rua=mailto:lufthansa@rua.agari.com;176
91v=DMARC1;""p=none;""rua=mailto:dmarc_agg@vali.email175
92v=DMARC1;p=none;rua=mailto:rua@dmarc.brevo.com172
93v=DMARC1;p=reject;pct=100;172
94v=DMARC1; p=quarantine; fo=1; rua=mailto:dmarc_rua@emaildefense.proofpoint.com; ruf=mailto:dmarc_ruf@emaildefense.proofpoint.com;171
95v=DMARC1; p=quarantine; sp=none; pct=100; ri=86400169
96v=DMARC1; p=reject; pct=100; adkim=s; aspf=s168
97v=DMARC1; p=none; rua=mailto:dmarc.rua@edrone.app; ruf=mailto:dmarc.ruf@edrone.app167
98v=DMARC1; p=quarantine; fo=1164
99v=DMARC1; p=quarantine; sp=none; rf=afrf; pct=100; ri=86400161
100v=DMARC1;p=reject;pct=100158

Unmatched MX targets — top 100

What this block shows. The most popular MX hostnames our dictionary does not yet attribute to a named mailbox provider. Public list — these feed back into dictionaries/mx_providers.py for the next iteration so coverage keeps improving.

#MX targetDomains
1mx01.1and1.com2 476
2mx00.1and1.com2 420
3mx01.1and1.es1 330
4mx00.1and1.es1 300
5p.webcom.ctmail.com1 228
6mx01.1and1.fr1 210
7mx00.1and1.fr1 196
8mx01.1and1.co.uk1 104
9mx-biz.mail.am0.yahoodns.net1 088
10mx00.1and1.co.uk1 074
11smx2.web-hosting.com702
12mx7.webfaction.com658
13mx8.webfaction.com649
14mx9.webfaction.com643
15mail3.eqx.gridhost.co.uk643
16mail.net4india.com615
17smx1.web-hosting.com497
18smx3.web-hosting.com495
19mx1.firstserver.ne.jp463
20mx2.firstserver.ne.jp463
21webmail2.sitebuildit.com456
22mx01.schlund.de446
23mx00.schlund.de443
24mx4.volusion.com423
25smx4.web-hosting.com418
Show rows 26 – 100
#MX targetDomains
26mx3.volusion.com418
27eforwardct.name-services.com393
28eforwardct2.name-services.com392
29eforwardct3.name-services.com390
30sitemail.everyone.net377
31mx-backup1.serveriai.lt373
32mx-backup2.serveriai.lt373
33relay2.netnames.net370
34mail.global.frontbridge.com369
35relay1.netnames.net367
36cluster.relay.agava.net330
37smtp-02.servidoresdns.net317
38mx1.dnsmadeeasy.com315
39mx.usa.net312
40mx2.dnsmadeeasy.com305
41mx.cm.hc.ru302
42mail.nickstel.com298
43asp.reflexion.net297
44mx.aams4.jp293
45mx-0.aams4.jp292
46mx-1.aams4.jp291
47mx3.dnsmadeeasy.com287
48vcgw1.ocn.ad.jp284
49smtp-01.servidoresdns.net284
50vcgw2.ocn.ad.jp281
51allmail.parklogic.com278
52mail.post-host.net276
53mailstation.office-on-the.net273
54mxcom.263xmail.com272
55mxwcom.263xmail.com271
56mx2.mailhop.org270
57exchange.dewile.net266
58smtp-scan01.mx.reflected.net244
59mail.mxproc.com241
60mail.messaging.microsoft.com238
61your-dns-needs-immediate-attention.dev237
62smtp-fwd.wordpress.com235
63mx1.servage.net231
64mx2.servage.net227
65mx1.jimdo.com227
66mx2.jimdo.com227
67mxi.alpha-prm.jp226
68mx2.peterhost.ru225
69mx3.peterhost.ru225
70mailgw.nic.in224
71mx.ct.mbox.net210
72mxa.expurgate.de210
73mx4.peterhost.ru205
74mx.smtp.cz204
75smtp-avas.seeweb.it204
76p.nsm.ctmail.com199
77mxs.ht-systems.ru199
78in.smtp.cz195
79inbound.registeredsite.com193
80mx4.name.com192
81mx5.name.com192
82mx30.aha.ru192
83mx3.name.com191
84mx8.name.com191
85mx6.name.com190
86mx7.name.com189
87mx1.zone.eu188
88mx2.zone.eu188
89mail1.sbnation.com188
90webmail1.sitebuildit.com187
91gmail22.gadmail.de187
92gmail23.gadmail.de187
93wmail22.gadmail.de187
94wmail23.gadmail.de187
95mail2.infomart2000.com182
96mx-100.reflexion.net181
97mmxs.majordomo.ru179
98mforward.dtag.de178
99mx-110.reflexion.net175
100mail.b-io.co167

Unmatched SPF includes — top 100

What this block shows. The most popular SPF include: targets that don't match any known ESP, mailbox-as-sender, or SaaS pattern yet. Same feedback loop: top hits get added to dictionaries/esps.py or dictionaries/saas_senders.py.

#SPF includeDomains
1bluehost.com7 692
2outlook.com2 293
3cmail1.com2 208
4mxlogic.net1 341
5beget.ru1 238
6hotmail.com1 235
7hostmonster.com1 186
8spf.mail.intercom.io1 152
9nicmail.ru1 141
10justhost.com817
11_spfcls.natrohost.com805
12icpbounce.com784
13salesforce.com769
14_spf.heteml.jp749
15_spf.zdsys.com636
16smtp1.uservoice.com608
17spf.secure.ne.jp607
18infusionmail.com596
19spf.messaging.microsoft.com545
20_spf.websupport.sk528
21spf2.auinmeio.com.br509
22spf1.auinmeio.com.br508
23spf.whservidor.com492
24_spfcls.natrohost.net488
25gmail.com481
Show rows 26 – 100
#SPF includeDomains
26msgfocus.com477
27google.com467
28outboundmail.convio.net442
29netcore.co.in437
30rhostbh.com401
31spf.linuxpl.com398
32spf.serveriai.lt385
33_spf.hoster.by382
34spf.mailengine1.com369
35spf.tld.pl366
36spfgw.fsi.ne.jp351
37sharepointonline.com350
38spf.263xmail.com349
39_senderspf.copernica.com347
40turbo-smtp.com342
41spf.masterbase.com341
42spf.virtualtarget.com.br339
43spf.postini.com335
44jangomail.com327
45spf.repica.jp313
46spf.hostmar.com312
47mh.blackboard.com306
48emsmtp.com299
49gridhost.co.uk295
50_spf.anpdm.com294
51bluehornet.com293
52_spf.turhost.com291
53mailcontrol.com290
54spf.aams4.jp289
55spf.protection.3dcart.com278
56_spf.zenbox.pl277
57spf.shopserve.jp276
58spf001.shop-pro.jp271
59_spf.uni5.net265
60mailplus.nl259
61spf.dondominio.com247
62spf.securemx.jp243
63eblastengine.com242
64e2ma.net236
65ncfp.asia235
66spf.futoka.jp231
67messaging-master.com229
68spf.digitalinsight.com224
69spf.tobizaru.jp223
70spf.alpha-prm.jp223
71aweber.com219
72activetrail.com218
73datadrivenemail.com218
74srv.cat207
75rnmk.com205
76spf.clearslide.com202
77spf.bserver.jp202
78spf.maropost.com191
79worldsecuresystems.com189
80_netblocks.google.com188
81rhostjh.com187
82listrak.com186
83_spf.bizmw.com184
84md02.com183
85bmsend.com183
86_spf.act-on.net181
87_spf.loading.es180
88smp.ne.jp179
89spf.microsoftonline.com178
90email-od.com178
91spf.usa.net175
92veinteractive.biz173
93spf.haihaimail.jp171
94retailspf.smtp.com168
95spf.tricorn.net167
96spf.splio.com162
97smtproutes.com162
98spf.emailmanager.com162
99custspf.register.com159
100bslogin.com156

Methodology — how the numbers were produced

1. Data source

The dataset is the daily OpenINTEL forward-DNS Tranco snapshot, produced by the OpenINTEL project (University of Twente / SURFnet / SIDN Labs). OpenINTEL queries the entire Tranco top-1M domain list (https://tranco-list.eu/) daily for MX, TXT, NS, A, AAAA, SOA, CAA, DNSSEC and other records, publishing the results as Apache Parquet.

Cite: Roland van Rijswijk-Deij et al., "A High-Performance, Scalable Infrastructure for Large-Scale Active DNS Measurements", IEEE JSAC 2016.

2. Sample

We process the snapshot for a single date (the latest available, typically <24h delay) covering the entire Tranco top-1M list. No sub-sampling; every domain queried by OpenINTEL is included.

3. Mailbox provider classification

For each domain we read its MX RRset and pick the record with the lowest mx_preference as the primary mailbox host. The hostname of that primary MX is matched against an open regex dictionary (dictionaries/mx_providers.py). Specific patterns (e.g. .mail.protection.outlook.com) are tried first; generic fallbacks (mail.*, mx*.*) only after. Domains whose MX matches no rule are kept as "Unknown / Other" — never dropped — and exported in Unmatched MX targets below for dictionary improvement.

4. ESP (mass-mailing service) classification

For each domain's apex SPF record (TXT starting with v=spf1) we extract every include: and redirect= target and resolve them against an open dictionary (dictionaries/esps.py). One domain may use several ESPs simultaneously (e.g. SendGrid + Mailchimp), so ESP shares sum to more than 100% of SPF-publishing domains.

Note: this method does not count "flattened" SPF (where include chains were replaced with raw IPs to fit the 10-lookup limit) — those domains will appear as ESP-less even when an ESP is in fact used. This is a known limitation of any DNS-only methodology and is consistent across competitive surveys.

5. DMARC

For each domain we query the _dmarc.<domain> TXT record. Records starting with v=DMARC1 are parsed for p= (policy) and pct= (percentage covered). A domain is counted as enforced if p=quarantine or p=reject with pct=100 (or pct absent, which defaults to 100).

6. Tier breakdown

Each domain is assigned a tier from its Tranco rank: top-1k, top-10k, top-100k, top-1M, or unranked if absent from the list at scan time.

7. Reproducibility

Every published report includes the exact OpenINTEL date, dictionary hashes, and counts of unmatched MX hosts and SPF includes — so any reader can verify or reproduce the figures. Raw OpenINTEL parquet is downloaded into a temporary cache and deleted after analysis; only aggregated, non-redistributable counts are kept here (per OpenINTEL data agreement).

8. Limitations to be aware of

  • Tranco bias. Top-1M skews toward US/EU and global SaaS; ccTLD-only domains with low traffic may be under-represented.
  • SPF flattening hides ESP identity (see §4).
  • CNAME chains on MX (e.g. mail.example.com → mail.example.protection.outlook.com) are not unrolled — only the first MX target is matched. This biases a small share of domains toward "Unknown" when their MX is a CNAME to a known provider.
  • Vanity MX with white-label provider (e.g. some Mimecast/Proofpoint customers use their own brand) is not detectable from DNS alone.

Comments & corrections

Spotted a mis-classified MX target, missed ESP, or want to discuss a finding? We publish corrections in the next daily snapshot.

Send feedback to support@live-direct-marketing.online

Inline comments coming soon. For now, email is the fastest path — you'll see your fix reflected in tomorrow's run.

Historical reports

Daily snapshots — last 90 days kept fully, older ones thinned to monthly.

2026-04-28 — 1 174 598 MX, 730 483 SPF2026-04-27 — 665 219 MX, 624 507 SPF2026-04-26 — 673 272 MX, 632 104 SPF2026-04-01 — 667 720 MX, 625 567 SPF2026-03-01 — 683 543 MX, 639 798 SPF2026-02-01 — 688 114 MX, 641 985 SPF2026-01-01 — 660 114 MX, 616 352 SPF2025-12-01 — 668 692 MX, 622 313 SPF2025-11-01 — 659 524 MX, 613 922 SPF2025-10-01 — 644 366 MX, 599 103 SPF2025-09-01 — 685 366 MX, 635 390 SPF2025-08-01 — 681 988 MX, 632 521 SPF2025-07-01 — 687 700 MX, 638 068 SPF2025-06-01 — 699 879 MX, 648 954 SPF2025-05-01 — 711 257 MX, 659 028 SPF2025-04-01 — 702 306 MX, 651 786 SPF2025-03-01 — 705 611 MX, 653 173 SPF2025-02-01 — 696 358 MX, 644 666 SPF2025-01-01 — 674 214 MX, 626 064 SPF2024-12-01 — 675 247 MX, 626 465 SPF2024-11-01 — 669 912 MX, 614 354 SPF2024-10-01 — 659 879 MX, 603 315 SPF2024-09-01 — 660 693 MX, 604 347 SPF2024-08-01 — 639 733 MX, 586 007 SPF2024-07-02 — 632 526 MX, 578 066 SPF2024-06-01 — 614 961 MX, 562 373 SPF2024-05-01 — 621 817 MX, 566 602 SPF2024-04-01 — 641 948 MX, 582 732 SPF2024-03-01 — 666 638 MX, 601 954 SPF2024-02-01 — 653 497 MX, 588 373 SPF2024-01-01 — 657 371 MX, 586 519 SPF2023-12-01 — 660 455 MX, 588 456 SPF2023-11-01 — 666 944 MX, 591 587 SPF2023-10-01 — 675 039 MX, 597 200 SPF2023-09-01 — 694 895 MX, 612 567 SPF2023-08-01 — 716 729 MX, 622 501 SPF2023-07-01 — 653 321 MX, 565 370 SPF2023-06-01 — 656 260 MX, 561 661 SPF2023-05-01 — 657 236 MX, 561 046 SPF2023-04-01 — 662 162 MX, 562 122 SPF2023-03-01 — 730 155 MX, 620 415 SPF2023-02-01 — 715 023 MX, 602 519 SPF2023-01-01 — 712 767 MX, 599 702 SPF2022-12-01 — 712 641 MX, 594 977 SPF2022-11-01 — 710 891 MX, 590 969 SPF2022-10-01 — 716 152 MX, 594 587 SPF2022-09-01 — 716 956 MX, 595 410 SPF2022-08-11 — 427 823 MX, 354 634 SPF2022-07-01 — 968 388 MX, 789 788 SPF2022-06-01 — 1 026 911 MX, 833 170 SPF2022-05-01 — 921 706 MX, 748 398 SPF2022-04-01 — 1 217 939 MX, 976 244 SPF2022-03-01 — 975 521 MX, 779 131 SPF2022-02-01 — 569 414 MX, 464 224 SPF2022-01-01 — 552 174 MX, 447 427 SPF2021-12-01 — 786 477 MX, 631 833 SPF2021-11-01 — 525 808 MX, 424 311 SPF2021-10-01 — 794 460 MX, 633 349 SPF2021-09-01 — 788 407 MX, 628 585 SPF2021-08-01 — 619 384 MX, 493 457 SPF2021-07-01 — 728 817 MX, 579 133 SPF2021-06-01 — 660 453 MX, 523 956 SPF2021-05-01 — 788 324 MX, 620 170 SPF2021-04-01 — 792 560 MX, 621 808 SPF2021-03-01 — 646 458 MX, 507 824 SPF2021-02-01 — 430 383 MX, 339 425 SPF2021-01-01 — 714 286 MX, 554 817 SPF2020-12-01 — 814 029 MX, 629 118 SPF2020-11-01 — 748 490 MX, 574 865 SPF2020-10-01 — 618 268 MX, 476 027 SPF2020-09-01 — 768 508 MX, 586 561 SPF2020-08-01 — 754 330 MX, 572 036 SPF2020-07-01 — 947 188 MX, 717 066 SPF2020-06-01 — 703 956 MX, 531 244 SPF2020-05-01 — 965 680 MX, 721 262 SPF2020-04-01 — 859 917 MX, 639 926 SPF2020-03-01 — 780 292 MX, 579 459 SPF2020-02-01 — 947 773 MX, 696 310 SPF2020-01-01 — 565 274 MX, 417 038 SPF2019-12-01 — 826 277 MX, 600 095 SPF2019-11-01 — 1 039 570 MX, 747 867 SPF2019-10-01 — 966 667 MX, 692 386 SPF2019-09-01 — 838 362 MX, 594 935 SPF2019-08-01 — 1 162 343 MX, 819 141 SPF2019-07-01 — 1 177 952 MX, 806 744 SPF2019-06-01 — 1 205 558 MX, 822 402 SPF2019-05-01 — 1 196 890 MX, 811 837 SPF2019-04-01 — 1 120 142 MX, 752 449 SPF2019-03-01 — 1 170 801 MX, 787 932 SPF2019-02-01 — 1 202 345 MX, 799 255 SPF2019-01-01 — 1 190 206 MX, 783 686 SPF2018-12-01 — 1 196 068 MX, 792 282 SPF2018-11-01 — 1 177 133 MX, 775 137 SPF2018-10-01 — 1 140 868 MX, 743 256 SPF2018-09-01 — 1 183 473 MX, 765 011 SPF2018-08-01 — 1 194 344 MX, 772 448 SPF2018-07-01 — 1 165 617 MX, 745 554 SPF2018-06-01 — 1 193 038 MX, 753 513 SPF2018-05-01 — 1 168 881 MX, 732 275 SPF2018-04-01 — 1 174 598 MX, 730 483 SPF2018-03-01 — 827 056 MX, 516 103 SPF2018-02-01 — 1 195 663 MX, 725 044 SPF2018-01-01 — 813 525 MX, 512 876 SPF2017-12-01 — 818 419 MX, 513 903 SPF2017-11-01 — 815 080 MX, 507 477 SPF2017-10-01 — 823 380 MX, 508 173 SPF2017-09-01 — 815 671 MX, 500 347 SPF2017-08-01 — 829 376 MX, 505 516 SPF2017-07-01 — 830 824 MX, 502 438 SPF2017-06-01 — 828 635 MX, 497 007 SPF2017-05-01 — 828 210 MX, 493 097 SPF2017-04-01 — 828 454 MX, 490 217 SPF2017-03-01 — 824 804 MX, 483 151 SPF2017-02-01 — 839 476 MX, 482 733 SPF2017-01-01 — 827 995 MX, 470 990 SPF2016-12-01 — 825 158 MX, 467 480 SPF2016-11-01 — 837 849 MX, 472 624 SPF2016-10-01 — 838 377 MX, 469 807 SPF2016-09-01 — 835 089 MX, 462 936 SPF2016-08-01 — 848 095 MX, 469 528 SPF2016-07-01 — 842 098 MX, 463 893 SPF2016-06-01 — 848 829 MX, 462 786 SPF2016-05-01 — 843 824 MX, 455 820 SPF2016-04-01 — 843 843 MX, 449 460 SPF
Data source: https://openintel.nl/data/forward-dns/top-lists/
Generated automatically from OpenINTEL Tranco snapshot 2016-03-01. Aggregates only — raw OpenINTEL data is deleted after analysis per their data agreement.
Last build: 2026-04-29T18:38:14Z.