Who uses what for email DAILY

Mailbox providers and ESPs across the Tranco top-1M — snapshot of 2026-04-29.

665 578
Domains with MX
624 625
Domains with SPF
452 463
Domains with DMARC
665 578
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-Hosted →154 06923.15%
2Google Workspace →143 42921.55%
3Microsoft 365 →110 92416.67%
4Unknown / Other →51 4017.72%
5Generic / unmatched (mx*.*) →18 3592.76%
6Proofpoint →13 0171.96%
7Yandex 360 →12 0351.81%
8Generic / unmatched (mail.*) →11 5551.74%
9Mimecast →10 6561.6%
10Cloudflare Email Routing →10 0151.5%
Show rows 11 – 30
#Mailbox providerDomainsShare of MX-having domains
11Hostinger →6 9691.05%
12Zoho Mail →6 6671.0%
13Namecheap Email Forwarding →6 5070.98%
14GoDaddy →4 9070.74%
15QQ Mail (Tencent) →4 8430.73%
16Amazon WorkMail →4 8190.72%
17OVH Mail →4 5240.68%
18Mail.ru for Business →3 9940.6%
19Barracuda →3 7150.56%
201&1 IONOS →3 3160.5%
21Cisco IronPort →2 8680.43%
22Proofpoint Essentials →2 8220.42%
23Jellyfish (Namecheap) →2 3760.36%
24Mailgun (inbound) →2 3740.36%
25Rackspace Email →2 3570.35%
26SpamExperts (SolarWinds) →2 2810.34%
27Beget (RU) →2 2640.34%
28Alibaba Mail (China) →1 8000.27%
29Zoho Mail (EU) →1 7060.26%
30Hosted Email (Rackspace/IONOS) →1 6290.24%
🏠 Open Providers portfolio → cards with country, blurb, sparkline & TLD breakdown — click any provider name above to drill into a detail page

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
12.38%
82 366 domains
Unique unmatched MX hosts
37 408
individual hostnames in the long tail
Self-hosted
23.18%
154 250 domains running their own MX
📋 Open detailed long-tail report →·⬇ 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
1Amazon SES →38 1156.1%
2SendGrid (Twilio) →29 8804.78%
3Mailgun →25 3624.06%
4Zendesk →24 3493.9%
5Mailchimp →23 4093.75%
6Mandrill →21 4443.43%
7HubSpot →19 6983.15%
8Salesforce →16 4992.64%
9Mailjet (Sinch) →13 3522.14%
10Cloudflare Email Routing →10 5751.69%
Show rows 11 – 30
#ESPDomainsShare of SPF-publishing domains
11Mimecast →9 3081.49%
12Brevo (ex-Sendinblue) →8 6991.39%
13MailerSend →7 7961.25%
14Namecheap Forwarding →6 7451.08%
15MailChannels →6 7021.07%
16Elastic Email →4 4290.71%
17Unisender (RU) →3 9370.63%
18Constant Contact →3 7260.6%
19Campaign Monitor →3 4450.55%
20Marketo (Adobe) →3 3710.54%
21Zoho Campaigns →3 2020.51%
22Emsd1 (transactional) →3 0830.49%
23SendPulse →2 9670.48%
24Postmark →2 9450.47%
25SparkPost →2 7360.44%
26Exclaimer (signatures) →2 7270.44%
27Zoho ZeptoMail →2 7060.43%
28Help Scout →2 4020.38%
29Barracuda Essentials →2 2780.36%
30Salesforce Marketing Cloud →2 2360.36%
📮 Open Mailing services portfolio → all detected ESPs with descriptions, country, sparklines — click any ESP above to drill into a detail page

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) →5 1170.82%
2Shopify →5 0530.81%
3CodeTwo Email Signatures 365 →4 5260.72%
4KnowBe4 →3 5150.56%
5Statuspage (Atlassian) →2 1680.35%
6Trustpilot →1 9070.31%
7Atlassian (Jira/Confluence) →1 9010.3%
8Firebase (Google) →1 7320.28%
9BigCommerce →1 2490.2%
10Lark / Feishu →1 2330.2%
Show rows 11 – 30
#SaaS appDomainsShare of SPF-publishing domains
11NetSuite (Oracle) →1 1600.19%
12Qualtrics →1 1250.18%
13Sage Intacct →1 1160.18%
14Oracle Cloud Email →1 0410.17%
15Docebo (LMS) →9390.15%
16WordPress.com / WP Cloud →9010.14%
17Oracle Cloud →8380.13%
18One.com (DK hosting) →7790.12%
19Zoho Books →7360.12%
20AFAS →6600.11%
21Greenhouse →6500.1%
22SAP SuccessFactors →6160.1%
23PayPal Braintree →6000.1%
24ClickDimensions →6000.1%
25UKG / UltiPro →5570.09%
26Autotask (ConnectWise) →5360.09%
27ConnectWise →5210.08%
28TOPdesk →4900.08%
29Freshservice (Freshworks) →4540.07%
30FormAssembly →4370.07%
📧 Open SaaS/ESP senders portfolio → SaaS apps sending FROM customer domains — click any SaaS name above for detail

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▲ +0.25%30d ago▲ +1.03%90d ago▲ +1.88%1y ago▲ +4.30%

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;53 976
2v=DMARC1; p=none31 734
3v=DMARC1; p=none; rua=mailto:rua@dmarc.brevo.com8 073
4v=DMARC1; p=quarantine;4 778
5v=DMARC1; p=quarantine3 914
6v=DMARC1;p=none;3 778
7v=DMARC1; p=reject;3 683
8v=DMARC1; p=reject; fo=1; rua=mailto:dmarc_rua@emaildefense.proofpoint.com; ruf=mailto:dmarc_ruf@emaildefense.proofpoint.com3 273
9v=DMARC1; p=quarantine; adkim=s; aspf=s3 195
10v=DMARC1; p=reject2 871
11v=DMARC1; p=quarantine; adkim=r; aspf=r; rua=mailto:dmarc_rua@onsecureserver.net;2 713
12v=DMARC1; p=quarantine; pct=1002 336
13v=DMARC1; p=none; aspf=r; adkim=r;2 273
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;1 833
16v=DMARC1; p=none; aspf=r; sp=none1 746
17v=DMARC1;p=none1 724
18v=DMARC1; p=none; adkim=r; aspf=r;1 461
19v=DMARC1;p=quarantine;pct=100;fo=11 364
20v=DMARC1;p=reject;1 337
21v=DMARC1; p=reject; fo=1; rua=mailto:dmarc_rua@emaildefense.proofpoint.com; ruf=mailto:dmarc_ruf@emaildefense.proofpoint.com;1 303
22v=DMARC1; p=none; rua=mailto:dmarc_agg@vali.email1 295
23v=DMARC1; p=reject; rua=mailto:dmarc_agg@vali.email1 225
24v=DMARC1;p=none;sp=none;adkim=r;aspf=r;pct=100;fo=0;rf=afrf;ri=864001 221
25v=DMARC1; p=none; rua=mailto:dmarc_agg@vali.email;1 059
Show rows 26 – 100
#DMARC recordDomains
26v=DMARC1; p=none; sp=none1 056
27v=DMARC1; p=reject; adkim=r; aspf=r; rua=mailto:dmarc_rua@onsecureserver.net;1 053
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;1 035
30v=DMARC1; p=reject; sp=reject; rua=mailto:dmarc.report@axa.com;1 012
31v=DMARC1; p=reject; sp=reject; adkim=s; aspf=s897
32v=DMARC1; p=reject; rua=mailto:report@dmarc.amazon.com; ruf=mailto:report@dmarc.amazon.com888
33v=DMARC1; p=reject; rua=mailto:dmarc.report@axa.com;841
34v=DMARC1; p=quarantine; rua=mailto:dmarc_agg@vali.email788
35v=DMARC1; p=none; pct=100702
36v=DMARC1; p=reject; pct=100698
37v=DMARC1;p=quarantine;sp=none;adkim=r;aspf=r;pct=100;fo=0;rf=afrf;ri=86400650
38v=DMARC1; p=quarantine; fo=1; ruf=mailto:dmarc@qiye.163.com; rua=mailto:dmarc_report@qiye.163.com613
39v=DMARC1; p=reject; rua=mailto:mailauth-reports@google.com607
40v=DMARC1; p=reject; fo=1; ri=3600; rua=mailto:ewai10d2@ag.eu.dmarcian.com; ruf=mailto:ewai10d2@fr.eu.dmarcian.com590
41v=DMARC1; p=none; fo=1; ruf=mailto:dmarc@qiye.163.com; rua=mailto:dmarc_report@qiye.163.com582
42v=DMARC1; p=none; sp=none; rf=afrf; pct=100; ri=86400570
43v=DMARC1; p=quarantine; rua=mailto:dmarc_agg@vali.email;509
44v=DMARC1;p=quarantine508
45v=DMARC1; p=none; rua=mailto:mailauth-reports@qq.com478
46v=DMARC1; p=quarantine; pct=100;475
47v=DMARC1;p=reject;sp=reject;adkim=s;aspf=s463
48v=DMARC1; p=reject; pct=100;442
49v=DMARC1; p=reject; rua=mailto:dmarc_rua@onsecureserver.net; adkim=r; aspf=r;437
50v=DMARC1; p=reject; rua=mailto:dmarc_agg@vali.email;434
51v=DMARC1; p=reject; rua=mailto:dmarc_rua@emaildefense.proofpoint.com; ruf=mailto:dmarc_ruf@emaildefense.proofpoint.com; fo=1386
52v=DMARC1; p=reject; adkim=s; aspf=s385
53v=DMARC1; p=reject; adkim=s; aspf=s;377
54v=DMARC1; p=none; sp=none; adkim=r; aspf=r374
55v=DMARC1; p=none; fo=1; rua=mailto:dmarc_rua@emaildefense.proofpoint.com; ruf=mailto:dmarc_ruf@emaildefense.proofpoint.com;357
56v=DMARC1; p=none; adkim=r; aspf=r356
57v=DMARC1;p=reject;fo=1;rua=mailto:dmarc_rua@emaildefense.proofpoint.com;ruf=mailto:dmarc_ruf@emaildefense.proofpoint.com352
58v=DMARC1;p=reject342
59v=DMARC1; p=none; pct=100;336
60v=DMARC1333
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=1323
64v=DMARC1; p=reject; rua=mailto:tnoff9hr@ag.eu.dmarcadvisor.com; aspf=s; adkim=s;317
65v=DMARC1;p=quarantine;312
66v=DMARC1; p=reject; rua=mailto:zsrbf6su@ag.eu.dmarcadvisor.com;288
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.com270
70v=DMARC1;p=reject;sp=none;adkim=r;aspf=r;pct=100;fo=0;rf=afrf;ri=86400270
71v=DMARC1;p=none;sp=none;pct=50;adkim=r;aspf=r;260
72v=DMARC1; p=none; aspf=r; adkim=r250
73v=DMARC1;p=none;rua=mailto:dmarc_report@service.aliyun.com246
74v=DMARC1;p=none;pct=100246
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;228
78v=DMARC1; p=none; rua=mailto:rua-mpse@mpub.ne.jp225
79v=DMARC1; p=reject; rua=mailto:dmarc_rua@onsecureserver.net;222
80v=DMARC1; p=reject; rua=mailto:zicaptxt@ag.dmarcian.com;211
81v=DMARC1; p=quarantine; rua=mailto:rua@dmarc.brevo.com207
82v=DMARC1; p=quarantine; adkim=r; aspf=r201
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;184
88v=DMARC1;""p=none;""rua=mailto:dmarc_agg@vali.email179
89v=DMARC1; p=none; rua=mailto:dmarc@reporting.unisender.com178
90v=DMARC1;p=none;pct=100;aspf=r;adkim=r;176
91v=DMARC1; p=reject; fo=1; ri=3600; rua=mailto:lufthansa@rua.agari.com;176
92v=DMARC1;p=reject;pct=100;174
93v=DMARC1; p=quarantine; fo=1; rua=mailto:dmarc_rua@emaildefense.proofpoint.com; ruf=mailto:dmarc_ruf@emaildefense.proofpoint.com;173
94v=DMARC1;p=none;rua=mailto:rua@dmarc.brevo.com172
95v=DMARC1; p=quarantine; sp=none; pct=100; ri=86400171
96v=DMARC1; p=none; rua=mailto:dmarc.rua@edrone.app; ruf=mailto:dmarc.ruf@edrone.app170
97v=DMARC1; p=reject; pct=100; adkim=s; aspf=s168
98v=DMARC1; p=quarantine; fo=1164
99v=DMARC1; p=quarantine; sp=none; rf=afrf; pct=100; ri=86400161
100v=DMARC1;p=quarantine;pct=100157

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
1nan4 516
2mx-biz.mail.am0.yahoodns.net306
3asapsemi1.mail.protection.office365.us306
4localhost304
5mail282
6mx.services241
7~192
8mx01.1and1.com186
9mx00.1and1.com180
10mail1.sbnation.com172
11zonemx.eu171
12mail.autoline.com.ua171
13mx2.z-ns.net170
14alltheemails.com141
15mx.email-messaging.com138
16offline.iserv.eu126
17relay1.netnames.net123
18relay2.netnames.net123
19uk.mx1.mailanyone.net119
20uk.mx2.mx25.net119
21uk.mx3.mailanyone.net117
22se.mx1.mailanyone.net116
23se.mx2.mx25.net116
24mx1.ticketsinbound.com114
25uk.mx4.mx25.net112
Show rows 26 – 100
#MX targetDomains
26mx2.ticketsinbound.com112
27mxi.alpha-prm.jp112
28se.mx3.mailanyone.net111
29mx.simply.com110
30se.mx4.mx25.net110
31mx240.umbler.co.uk108
32mx364.umbler.com107
33mx00.1and1.co.uk107
34mx1.emailsendhub.com105
35mailin.mx-hub.cz105
36mailin.mx-hub.sk105
37mx01.1and1.co.uk104
38mwpremgw1.ocn.ad.jp104
39mx01.lancloud.ru103
40mx02.lancloud.ru103
41mx04.lancloud.ru103
42mwpremgw2.ocn.ad.jp103
43cloudmail.auto-vision.ru102
44mx1.cleanmx.pt102
45s.mail.dcsaas.net102
46void.blackhole.mx101
47mx2.cleanmx.pt101
48mx03.lancloud.ru101
49mailin.mx-hub.eu101
50mx10.websupport.sk99
51mx20.websupport.sk99
52mx1d10.thinline.cz95
53mx.zoho.com.cn94
54mx1b20.thinline.cz94
55mx2.zoho.com.cn93
56mx.zoho.com.au93
57mx2.zoho.com.au93
58mx01.mailplug.com92
59mx3.zoho.com.au92
60mx02.mailplug.com91
61mx.hetemail.jp89
62amazon-smtp.amazon.com88
63smtp-fwd.wordpress.com87
64mx1.email-cluster.com84
65mx2.email-cluster.com84
66mail.global.frontbridge.com82
67mx4.name.com81
68mx3.name.com81
69mailforward.dnsv.jp81
70mx1.atmosphere.facct.ru81
71failover1.email-cluster.com81
72mx6.name.com80
73mx5.name.com80
74mx8.name.com80
75mx2.atmosphere.facct.ru80
76mx-backup.serveriai.lt80
77mx7.name.com79
78antispam1.ihs.com.tr78
79antispam2.ihs.com.tr78
80smtp.faisco.cn77
81mx.maxns.net77
82mx-proxy501.heteml.jp77
83mx1-dk.centerasecurity.dk76
84mx2-dk.centerasecurity.dk76
85mxint01.1and1.com76
86mxint02.1and1.com76
87mx-01.mail-forwarder.io76
88mx-proxy502.heteml.jp75
89gmail22.gadmail.de75
90gmail23.gadmail.de75
91wmail22.gadmail.de75
92wmail23.gadmail.de74
93mx-02.mail-forwarder.io73
94sitemail.everyone.net72
95mx.vshosting.eu72
96mx6.kvnbw.de72
97mx7.kvnbw.de72
98mx8.kvnbw.de72
99mx9.kvnbw.de72
100mx01.1and1.es70

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
1amazon.com107
2spf.boldem.cz104
3spf.splio.com103
4_spf.exsilia.net103
5spf.pitcom.net103
6_spf.octadesk.com103
7_spf.mail-neoserv.si103
8spf-2248456.jmsend.com102
9spf.kirim.email101
10_spf.armada.it101
11_spf.wpopt.net100
12_spf.localservices.com.br100
13qcloudmail.com99
14gateways.firstdata.com99
15spf.v6send.net99
16spf.betrend.com99
17_pmta2.antevenio.com98
18spf.ssmx.net98
19mlrcloud.com97
20ofsys.com96
21mailing.eqs.com96
22_spf01.mykronos.com96
23outbound.smtp.wisestamp.net95
24relay.thundermail.uk95
25spf.mailcamp.nl95
Show rows 26 – 100
#SPF includeDomains
26spf.spcloud.jp95
27spf.satorimail.net95
28eversrv.com94
29spf.sosafe.de94
30spf-002fa101.pphosted.com94
31spfref.jackhenry.com94
32_spf.ogicom.pl94
33_spf.academicworks.com94
34smtp-cluster.plusvps.com93
35usermail.zohocreator.com93
36mailmailmail.net93
37_spf.simpleviewinc.com93
38spf.cyberimpact.com92
39spf-00181c02.pphosted.com92
40_spf.sendnode.com92
41spf.w4ymail.at92
42_spf.presscloud.com92
43senders.mailmasterplus.net92
44_spf.maileroo.com92
45spf.emailfilter.io92
46mfg.siteprotect.com91
47spf.redpoints.com91
48_spf.sent2email.com91
49_spf.edhost.eu91
50spf.host-ww.net90
51spf.263.net90
52_spf-dc10.sapsf.com90
53spf.qb-feedback.com90
54send.k-crm.jp90
55spf.aams4.jp89
56fmx.etius.jp89
57_spf.aid.no89
58spf.shared.spaceship.host88
59spf.greengeeks.net88
60spf.cesky-hosting.cz88
61ciphr247.com88
62relay.email-cluster.com88
63spf.oximailing.com88
64spf.symplicity.com88
65verifymyfafsa.com88
66_spf.abcp.ru88
67_spf.webglobe.cz87
68spf.remarkety.com86
69no-ip.com86
70_spf.lh.pl86
71_spf.eemsg.mail.mil86
72_spf.yourfilter.nl86
73spf86
74_spf.tld-mx.com85
75mail.zohoanalytics.com85
76spf.esvacloud.com85
77sendgrid.com85
78mail.dms.unileverservices.com84
79spf.icontroller.eu84
80relay.guzelhosting.com84
81spf.sabre.com83
82spf.pantheon.io83
83custmail.vdata.com83
84spf.protection.outlook82
85spf.qboxmail.com82
86spf.protect.kvnbw.de82
87spf.mail-komplet.cz82
88_spf.zorgmail.nl82
89spf.sendios.io82
90universalspf.org82
91x.universalspf.org82
92spf2.nlk2.smtps.jp82
93spf.w2solution.com82
94_spf.ungapped.io81
95spf.form.run81
96spf.squalomail.com81
97spf-00596a01.pphosted.com81
98euromsg.net81
99spf.srv2.de80
100spf.byway.it80

Methodology — how the numbers were produced

1. Data source

The dataset is the daily OpenINTEL forward-DNS Tranco snapshot (University of Twente / SURFnet / SIDN Labs). OpenINTEL queries the entire Tranco top-1M domain list daily for MX, TXT, NS, A, AAAA, SOA, CAA, DNSSEC and other records, publishing the results as Apache Parquet. For pre-2022 history we additionally use OpenINTEL's alexa source (the legacy Alexa top-1M list, retired 2023).

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

2. Sample & cadence

Each report covers a single date — the latest OpenINTEL snapshot with <24h delay, typically ~700 k domains with MX records and ~620 k with SPF. The pipeline runs daily at 23:00 Europe/Moscow; each daily run produces an HTML report, a JSON summary, an updated time-series, and incremental updates to the domain registry (§ 12). No sub-sampling.

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, currently ~310 patterns). 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 for dictionary improvement.

4. ESP / SaaS / forwarder / gateway classification (SPF-based)

For each domain's apex SPF record (TXT starting with v=spf1) we extract every include: and redirect= target and resolve them against open classification dictionaries (ESPs, mailbox-as-sender, anti-spam gateways, forwarders, SaaS senders, DMARC vendors, NS providers, verification tokens).

Resolution order: PURE_ESP → MAILBOX_AS_SENDER → GATEWAYS → FORWARDERS → bare-apex substring fallback → SAAS_SENDERS substring iteration. Bare-apex derivation strips leading _spf., _spf-eu., spf., mail. prefixes from dict keys to catch subdomain variants (e.g. _spf.m1.websupport.sk → matches websupport.sk). Malformed includes (no dot, <4 chars) are filtered.

One domain may use several ESPs simultaneously, so ESP shares sum to more than 100% of SPF-publishing domains. Current SPF-include classification coverage: ~81.5% (up from ~38.5% baseline).

Limitation: "flattened" SPF (where include chains were replaced with raw IP ranges to fit the 10-lookup limit) is not detectable from DNS alone — those domains appear ESP-less even when an ESP is in fact used.

5. DMARC (deep)

For each domain we query the _dmarc.<domain> TXT record. Records starting with v=DMARC1 are parsed for:

  • p= (apex policy): none / quarantine / reject / invalid
  • sp= (subdomain policy)
  • pct= (rollout percentage)
  • rua= aggregate-report destinations → classified into vendor buckets (Postmark DMARC, Valimail, dmarcian, URIports, EasyDMARC, Red Sift, Proofpoint EFD, Agari/Fortra, …) using dictionaries/dmarc_vendors.py

A domain is counted as enforced if p=quarantine or p=reject with pct=100 (or pct absent — defaults to 100).

6. SPF mechanics & health

For every SPF record we additionally extract:

  • Final qualifier on the all mechanism: -all (hard fail), ~all (soft fail), ?all (neutral), +all (pass-everything — broken / dangerous), or missing
  • DNS lookup count (include:, redirect=, a:, mx:, exists:, ptr:) — each mechanism counts as 1 against the spec limit of 10. Records exceeding the limit return PermErr at recipients
  • Mechanism mix: include-only (modern), raw IP4/IP6 ranges only (legacy/flattened), mixed
  • Record byte length: percentiles to flag fragmentation risk (>450 B)

7. Email security maturity

Adoption of modern mail-security TXT records, parsed from the same OpenINTEL parquet:

  • MTA-STS: TXT at _mta-sts.<domain> with v=STSv1 — domain advertises required-TLS to its MX
  • BIMI: TXT at default._bimi.<domain> with v=BIMI1 — brand publishes a verified logo (requires p=reject)
  • TLS-RPT (SMTP TLS Reporting): TXT at _smtp._tls.<domain> with v=TLSRPTv1 — domain monitors TLS-failure reports
  • DKIM selectors: where the OpenINTEL scan includes *._domainkey.<domain> queries, well-known selectors (google, selector1/2, s1/s2, k1/k2/k3, mailo, mte1, …) are mapped to issuing ESPs

8. DNS provider classification

For each domain's NS RRset, every NS hostname is matched against a suffix dictionary (dictionaries/ns_providers.py) with patterns for Cloudflare, AWS Route 53, Azure DNS, Google Cloud DNS, GoDaddy, Akamai, NS1, UltraDNS, Yandex, DNSPod, Aliyun, OVH, Hetzner, Gandi, registrars, and others. A domain is assigned to its dominant NS provider; ties resolve to whichever pattern was matched first.

9. SaaS-via-verification-tokens

Many SaaS apps a domain is connected to never appear in SPF (because the SaaS doesn't send mail FROM the customer domain). To recover this signal we parse apex TXT records for verification tokens — google-site-verification=…, MS=…, atlassian-domain-verification=…, stripe-verification=…, plus ~70 other patterns in dictionaries/verification_tokens.py. This produces a complementary "SaaS density" metric and surfaces apps that the SPF-only view misses.

10. Email infrastructure modernity

Three additional TLS / IPv6 metrics:

  • IPv6-on-MX: MX hostname has at least one AAAA record
  • DANE / TLSA on MX: TLSA record at _25._tcp.<mx_host> (where the parquet includes TLSA queries)
  • CAA: any 0 issue … / 0 issuewild … record at apex; CAs aggregated into a market-share view (Let's Encrypt, DigiCert, Sectigo, …)

11. Cross-tabulations

  • Country × ESP heatmap: top-15 ccTLDs × top-15 ESPs, cell = % of country's SPF-publishing domains using ESP X. Surfaces regional ESP champions (Brevo / FR, Unisender / RU, MailerLite / LT, Akna / BR, Shoptet / CZ).
  • Mailbox × ESP combinations: stacked frequency of common stack pairings (Google Workspace + HubSpot, MS365 + Marketo, …).

12. Domain registry & identifiers

Every domain ever observed across snapshots is assigned a stable integer ID in /var/openintel-cache/registry/domains.sqlite3 (currently ~1.2 M domains). Reports reference domains by ID rather than embedding strings; clients resolve names from a single gzipped registry dump (/email-stats/domains.csv.gz, ~13 MB). This keeps per-report payloads compact, enables fast set-operation diffs across snapshots, and gives every domain a first-seen / last-seen timestamp.

13. Daily change-alerts feed

Each daily run computes a domain-level diff vs the previous scan and emits a change-feed at /email-stats/alerts.html (also as JSON + Atom). Detected events: ESP added/removed in SPF, DMARC policy upgrade/downgrade, primary-mailbox-provider change, SPF strict→soft regression, MTA-STS / BIMI first publication. Severity tag is good / bad / info.

14. Per-entity detail pages

The top-100 ESPs, top-100 SaaS senders and top-80 mailbox providers each have a dedicated detail page at /email-stats/detail/<kind>/<slug>.html showing KPI cards, a Chart.js sparkline (from history.json), TLD distribution and a sample of customer domains.

15. Tier breakdown

Each domain is assigned a tier from its Tranco rank: top-1k / top-10k / top-100k / top-1M / unranked.

16. Reproducibility & data hygiene

Every published report includes the exact OpenINTEL date, dictionary file 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 long-term (per OpenINTEL data agreement). The domain registry stores names but no record-level content.

17. 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. The alexa source used for pre-2022 history has a different composition (~960 k domains, US-heavier).
  • 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 (Mimecast/Proofpoint customers using their own brand) is not detectable from DNS alone.
  • DKIM enumeration is selector-based — only domains whose well-known selectors are scanned by OpenINTEL appear in the DKIM layer.
  • Long-tail unmatched: ~18.5% of SPF includes belong to a long tail of regional hosters (~84 k unique singletons). This is a fundamental ceiling of any dictionary-based method — filling it would require manual research of 1500+ providers.
  • Newly-added dictionary entries have no historical sparkline until ≥ 2 daily scans accumulate, since archived raw parquet is purged after parsing per the OpenINTEL data agreement.

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 — 663 645 MX, 622 920 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 SPF2016-03-01 — 865 090 MX, 456 873 SPF2016-02-01 — 862 585 MX, 450 683 SPF2016-01-22 — 845 356 MX, 440 606 SPF
Data source: https://openintel.nl/data/forward-dns/top-lists/
Generated automatically from OpenINTEL Tranco snapshot 2026-04-29. Aggregates only — raw OpenINTEL data is deleted after analysis per their data agreement.
Last build: 2026-04-30T21:05:20Z.