Who uses what for email DAILY

Mailbox providers and ESPs across the Tranco top-1M — snapshot of 2016-07-01.

842 098
Domains with MX
463 893
Domains with SPF
0
Domains with DMARC
842 098
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-Hosted355 73042.24%
2Google Workspace131 15115.57%
3Unknown / Other88 31710.49%
4Microsoft 36539 1474.65%
5Generic / unmatched (mx*.*)35 2074.18%
6GoDaddy32 9143.91%
7Generic / unmatched (mail.*)19 8082.35%
8Yandex 36017 7412.11%
9QQ Mail (Tencent)11 1391.32%
10Rackspace Email7 5700.9%
Show rows 11 – 30
#Mailbox providerDomainsShare of MX-having domains
11OVH Mail7 1340.85%
12Symantec MessageLabs6 5280.78%
13Zoho Mail6 4950.77%
14Namecheap Email Forwarding4 7580.57%
15Mimecast4 1770.5%
16McAfee/Mxlogic3 5140.42%
17DreamHost3 1360.37%
18Beget (RU)2 8780.34%
19Proofpoint2 8240.34%
20Generic / unmatched (smtp.*)2 6140.31%
21GMO Lolipop (JP)2 5450.3%
22Gandi Mail2 0830.25%
231&1 IONOS2 0310.24%
24Alibaba Mail (China)1 9460.23%
25ISPGateway (DE)1 8750.22%
26Mail.ru for Business1 8320.22%
27MailHostBox1 8100.21%
28SpamExperts (SolarWinds)1 8040.21%
29Timeweb (RU)1 7310.21%
30Locaweb (BR)1 6890.2%

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
17.33%
145 946 domains
Unique unmatched MX hosts
55 055
individual hostnames in the long tail
Self-hosted
42.26%
355 876 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
1Mandrill25 6885.54%
2SendGrid (Twilio)15 2543.29%
3Mailchimp10 1382.19%
4Zendesk10 0022.16%
5Mailgun9 8152.12%
6Amazon SES7 1951.55%
7Namecheap Forwarding5 2681.14%
8Mailjet (Sinch)3 5070.76%
9SparkPost3 3190.72%
10Marketo (Adobe)3 1130.67%
Show rows 11 – 30
#ESPDomainsShare of SPF-publishing domains
11Postmark2 8250.61%
12Mimecast2 1160.46%
13MailHostBox2 0510.44%
14Locaweb (BR)2 0310.44%
15MailChannels1 8360.4%
16Help Scout1 2970.28%
17Salesforce1 2820.28%
18Elastic Email1 2790.28%
19Kagoya (JP, sender)1 2380.27%
20Unisender (RU)1 0890.23%
21Freshdesk1 0160.22%
22A Random Server (parking)8020.17%
23AuthSMTP7810.17%
24Salesforce Marketing Cloud7540.16%
25Sailthru6210.13%
26SMTP2GO6130.13%
27Constant Contact5790.12%
28Customer.io5140.11%
29Infomaniak (CH)4180.09%
30KingHost (BR)3970.09%

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 7920.6%
2Trustpilot1 8390.4%
3Zendesk1 5550.34%
4BigCommerce1 1570.25%
5Statuspage (Atlassian)5810.13%
6PayPal Braintree5510.12%
7Qualtrics4170.09%
8ClickDimensions4080.09%
9NetSuite (Oracle)1990.04%
10Shopify1990.04%
Show rows 11 – 30
#SaaS appDomainsShare of SPF-publishing domains
11Recurly1880.04%
12pair Networks770.02%
13One.com (DK hosting)590.01%
14Autotask (ConnectWise)570.01%
15CodeTwo Email Signatures 365520.01%
16Gannett (USA Today)420.01%
17SchoolMessenger400.01%
18Firebase (Google)360.01%
19Docebo (LMS)310.01%
20SurveyMonkey290.01%
21RetailCRM290.01%
22ConnectWise280.01%
23DocuSign220.0%
24Brightspace (D2L)140.0%
25Workday100.0%
26Basecamp90.0%
27Sage Intacct90.0%
28Umantis (Haufe HR)90.0%
29Heureka (CZ comparison)80.0%
30Shoptet70.0%

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 538
2mx00.1and1.com2 499
3p.webcom.ctmail.com1 964
4smx2.web-hosting.com1 535
5smx1.web-hosting.com1 383
6smx3.web-hosting.com1 383
7mx01.1and1.es1 165
8mx00.1and1.es1 144
9mx01.1and1.fr1 092
10mx00.1and1.fr1 081
11mx-biz.mail.am0.yahoodns.net1 013
12mx01.1and1.co.uk990
13mx00.1and1.co.uk966
14mail.net4india.com635
15mail3.eqx.gridhost.co.uk611
16mx7.webfaction.com580
17mx8.webfaction.com573
18mx9.webfaction.com567
19asp.reflexion.net433
20mx1.firstserver.ne.jp433
21mx2.firstserver.ne.jp433
22mx01.schlund.de431
23mx00.schlund.de424
24mx4.volusion.com418
25mx3.volusion.com417
Show rows 26 – 100
#MX targetDomains
26webmail2.sitebuildit.com412
27mailstation.office-on-the.net390
28eforwardct.name-services.com368
29eforwardct2.name-services.com367
30eforwardct3.name-services.com364
31mail.global.frontbridge.com362
32relay1.netnames.net362
33relay2.netnames.net362
34sitemail.everyone.net355
35mx-backup1.serveriai.lt330
36mx-backup2.serveriai.lt330
37mx.aams4.jp326
38mx-0.aams4.jp325
39mx-1.aams4.jp324
40mx.usa.net316
41vcgw1.ocn.ad.jp316
42vcgw2.ocn.ad.jp313
43mx-100.reflexion.net298
44smx4.web-hosting.com298
45smtp-02.servidoresdns.net298
46mx1.dnsmadeeasy.com293
47mx-110.reflexion.net289
48mx2.dnsmadeeasy.com280
49mxcom.263xmail.com275
50smtp-01.servidoresdns.net275
51mxwcom.263xmail.com272
52cluster.relay.agava.net270
53mx2.mailhop.org269
54smtp-scan01.mx.reflected.net268
55mail.post-host.net265
56mx3.dnsmadeeasy.com263
57mxi.alpha-prm.jp258
58mailgw.nic.in258
59exchange.dewile.net241
60mail.messaging.microsoft.com236
61mail.nickstel.com222
62your-dns-needs-immediate-attention.dev221
63smtp-avas.seeweb.it220
64mx.ct.mbox.net214
65mx1.servage.net209
66mx.cm.hc.ru208
67smtp-fwd.wordpress.com208
68mx2.servage.net206
69gmail22.gadmail.de201
70gmail23.gadmail.de201
71wmail22.gadmail.de201
72wmail23.gadmail.de201
73mx2.peterhost.ru199
74mail.b-io.co199
75mx3.peterhost.ru196
76mail1.sbnation.com196
77mxa.expurgate.de195
78mx1.jimdo.com188
79mx2.jimdo.com188
80mx8.name.com183
81mx5.name.com182
82mx7.name.com181
83mx3.name.com181
84mx6.name.com180
85mx4.name.com180
86mx.smtp.cz179
87inbound.registeredsite.com179
88mx.orangegeek.net178
89mforward.dtag.de176
90mx30.aha.ru172
91mx4.peterhost.ru170
92mail2.infomart2000.com169
93s0.protection.alastyr.com168
94in.smtp.cz167
95webmail1.sitebuildit.com158
96mxs.ht-systems.ru158
97mx2.zone.eu158
98mx1.zone.eu157
99mxgw1.mail.nationalnet.com156
100mxgw2.mail.nationalnet.com155

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.com6 733
2outlook.com2 155
3cmail1.com2 060
4mxlogic.net1 343
5spf.mail.intercom.io1 275
6hotmail.com1 125
7beget.ru1 106
8hostmonster.com1 046
9nicmail.ru908
10_spf.heteml.jp895
11icpbounce.com811
12salesforce.com724
13infusionmail.com715
14spf.secure.ne.jp714
15_spf-client-servers.sitesellmail.com686
16justhost.com655
17smtp1.uservoice.com602
18_spf.zdsys.com600
19_spfcls.natrohost.com569
20spf1.auinmeio.com.br530
21spf2.auinmeio.com.br530
22spf.messaging.microsoft.com524
23_spf.websupport.sk505
24sharepointonline.com502
25gmail.com498
Show rows 26 – 100
#SPF includeDomains
26msgfocus.com475
27google.com469
28outboundmail.convio.net439
29spf.whservidor.com428
30netcore.co.in411
31spf.263xmail.com404
32spfgw.fsi.ne.jp381
33_senderspf.copernica.com378
34spf.masterbase.com371
35_spf.hoster.by360
36spf.serveriai.lt359
37mailcontrol.com353
38turbo-smtp.com353
39jangomail.com340
40spf.mailengine1.com340
41_spf.anpdm.com338
42_spfcls.natrohost.net337
43spf.linuxpl.com336
44gridhost.co.uk332
45spf.repica.jp329
46spf.virtualtarget.com.br325
47emsmtp.com324
48spf.aams4.jp320
49mh.blackboard.com314
50rhostbh.com307
51spf.shopserve.jp306
52spf.hostmar.com299
53spf.postini.com296
54ncfp.asia293
55spf001.shop-pro.jp290
56spf.securemx.jp289
57spf.tld.pl288
58e2ma.net287
59mailplus.nl287
60spf.protection.3dcart.com283
61bluehornet.com278
62relays.webhost-mail.com275
63spf.futoka.jp274
64spf.bserver.jp260
65spf.alpha-prm.jp254
66eblastengine.com245
67bmsend.com244
68spf.digitalinsight.com244
69datadrivenemail.com241
70_spf.uni5.net236
71spf.maropost.com235
72activetrail.com234
73_spf.zenbox.pl230
74spf.clearslide.com224
75spf.tobizaru.jp223
76rnmk.com223
77smtproutes.com221
78spf.autopilothq.com220
79_spf.act-on.net219
80smtp.groovehq.com218
81_spf.turhost.com214
82smp.ne.jp207
83spf.usa.net207
84_netblocks.google.com205
85messaging-master.com205
86smtpout.com202
87spf.dondominio.com202
88_spf.bizmw.com199
89spf.haihaimail.jp197
90_spf.daum.net197
91email-od.com194
92veinteractive.biz190
93spf.tricorn.net184
94spf.shopback.com.br183
95listrak.com181
96worldsecuresystems.com180
97md02.com179
98aweber.com177
99_spf.srv.cat176
1001lejend.com176

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 SPF
Data source: https://openintel.nl/data/forward-dns/top-lists/
Generated automatically from OpenINTEL Tranco snapshot 2016-07-01. Aggregates only — raw OpenINTEL data is deleted after analysis per their data agreement.
Last build: 2026-04-29T18:22:36Z.