Who uses what for email DAILY

Mailbox providers and ESPs across the Tranco top-1M — snapshot of 2026-05-01.

664 902
Domains with MX
624 104
Domains with SPF
452 672
Domains with DMARC
664 902
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 →153 46323.08%
2Google Workspace →143 35121.56%
3Microsoft 365 →110 97416.69%
4Unknown / Other →51 5437.75%
5Generic / unmatched (mx*.*) →18 3852.77%
6Proofpoint →13 0221.96%
7Yandex 360 →12 0271.81%
8Generic / unmatched (mail.*) →11 5301.73%
9Mimecast →10 6671.6%
10Cloudflare Email Routing →10 0351.51%
Show rows 11 – 30
#Mailbox providerDomainsShare of MX-having domains
11Hostinger →6 9291.04%
12Zoho Mail →6 6531.0%
13Namecheap Email Forwarding →6 4810.97%
14GoDaddy →4 9140.74%
15QQ Mail (Tencent) →4 8500.73%
16Amazon WorkMail →4 8160.72%
17OVH Mail →4 5100.68%
18Mail.ru for Business →4 0050.6%
19Barracuda →3 7180.56%
201&1 IONOS →3 3200.5%
21Cisco IronPort →2 8730.43%
22Proofpoint Essentials →2 8340.43%
23Jellyfish (Namecheap) →2 3820.36%
24Mailgun (inbound) →2 3790.36%
25Rackspace Email →2 3670.36%
26SpamExperts (SolarWinds) →2 3030.35%
27Beget (RU) →2 2780.34%
28Alibaba Mail (China) →1 8010.27%
29Zoho Mail (EU) →1 7050.26%
30Hosted Email (Rackspace/IONOS) →1 6340.25%
🏠 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
12.41%
82 506 domains
Unique unmatched MX hosts
37 338
individual hostnames in the long tail
Self-hosted
23.11%
153 644 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 1536.11%
2SendGrid (Twilio) →29 8894.79%
3Mailgun →25 3954.07%
4Zendesk →24 3443.9%
5Mailchimp →23 4083.75%
6Mandrill →21 4243.43%
7HubSpot →19 7473.16%
8Salesforce →16 5302.65%
9Mailjet (Sinch) →13 3292.14%
10Cloudflare Email Routing →10 6061.7%
Show rows 11 – 30
#ESPDomainsShare of SPF-publishing domains
11Mimecast →9 3061.49%
12Brevo (ex-Sendinblue) →8 7021.39%
13MailerSend →7 7881.25%
14Namecheap Forwarding →6 7211.08%
15MailChannels →6 6571.07%
16Elastic Email →4 4420.71%
17Unisender (RU) →3 9410.63%
18Constant Contact →3 7340.6%
19Campaign Monitor →3 4340.55%
20Marketo (Adobe) →3 3640.54%
21Zoho Campaigns →3 2110.51%
22Emsd1 (transactional) →3 0790.49%
23SendPulse →2 9790.48%
24Postmark →2 9520.47%
25SparkPost →2 7390.44%
26Exclaimer (signatures) →2 7240.44%
27Zoho ZeptoMail →2 6980.43%
28Help Scout →2 4020.38%
29Barracuda Essentials →2 2810.37%
30Salesforce Marketing Cloud →2 2380.36%
📮 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 1230.82%
2Shopify →5 0650.81%
3CodeTwo Email Signatures 365 →4 5330.73%
4KnowBe4 →3 5210.56%
5Statuspage (Atlassian) →2 1680.35%
6Atlassian (Jira/Confluence) →1 9040.31%
7Trustpilot →1 9030.3%
8Firebase (Google) →1 7340.28%
9BigCommerce →1 2490.2%
10Lark / Feishu →1 2300.2%
Show rows 11 – 30
#SaaS appDomainsShare of SPF-publishing domains
11NetSuite (Oracle) →1 1590.19%
12Qualtrics →1 1250.18%
13Sage Intacct →1 1200.18%
14Oracle Cloud Email →1 0460.17%
15Docebo (LMS) →9390.15%
16WordPress.com / WP Cloud →8990.14%
17Oracle Cloud →8440.14%
18One.com (DK hosting) →7800.12%
19Zoho Books →7380.12%
20AFAS →6610.11%
21Greenhouse →6480.1%
22SAP SuccessFactors →6130.1%
23PayPal Braintree →6020.1%
24ClickDimensions →5940.1%
25UKG / UltiPro →5610.09%
26Autotask (ConnectWise) →5400.09%
27ConnectWise →5170.08%
28TOPdesk →4870.08%
29Freshservice (Freshworks) →4540.07%
30FormAssembly →4400.07%
📧 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▲ +0.32%30d ago▲ +1.10%90d ago▲ +1.95%1y ago▲ +4.37%

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;53 912
2v=DMARC1; p=none31 663
3v=DMARC1; p=none; rua=mailto:rua@dmarc.brevo.com8 065
4v=DMARC1; p=quarantine;4 794
5v=DMARC1; p=quarantine3 922
6v=DMARC1;p=none;3 766
7v=DMARC1; p=reject;3 685
8v=DMARC1; p=reject; fo=1; rua=mailto:dmarc_rua@emaildefense.proofpoint.com; ruf=mailto:dmarc_ruf@emaildefense.proofpoint.com3 294
9v=DMARC1; p=quarantine; adkim=s; aspf=s3 165
10v=DMARC1; p=reject2 885
11v=DMARC1; p=quarantine; adkim=r; aspf=r; rua=mailto:dmarc_rua@onsecureserver.net;2 711
12v=DMARC1; p=quarantine; pct=1002 324
13v=DMARC1; p=none; aspf=r; adkim=r;2 291
14v=DMARC1; p=none; sp=none; rua=mailto:dmarc@mailinblue.com!10m; ruf=mailto:dmarc@mailinblue.com!10m; rf=afrf; pct=100; ri=864002 112
15v=DMARC1; p=reject; sp=reject; adkim=s; aspf=s;1 826
16v=DMARC1; p=none; aspf=r; sp=none1 755
17v=DMARC1;p=none1 727
18v=DMARC1; p=none; adkim=r; aspf=r;1 455
19v=DMARC1;p=quarantine;pct=100;fo=11 370
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;1 313
22v=DMARC1; p=none; rua=mailto:dmarc_agg@vali.email1 300
23v=DMARC1; p=reject; rua=mailto:dmarc_agg@vali.email1 226
24v=DMARC1;p=none;sp=none;adkim=r;aspf=r;pct=100;fo=0;rf=afrf;ri=864001 216
25v=DMARC1; p=reject; sp=reject; rua=mailto:dmarc.report@axa.com;1 064
Show rows 26 – 100
#DMARC recordDomains
26v=DMARC1; p=none; rua=mailto:dmarc_agg@vali.email;1 056
27v=DMARC1; p=reject; adkim=r; aspf=r; rua=mailto:dmarc_rua@onsecureserver.net;1 054
28v=DMARC1; p=none; sp=none1 052
29v=DMARC1; p=none; sp=none;1 026
30v=DMARC1; p=none; fo=1; rua=mailto:dmarc_rua@emaildefense.proofpoint.com; ruf=mailto:dmarc_ruf@emaildefense.proofpoint.com1 003
31v=DMARC1; p=reject; sp=reject; adkim=s; aspf=s907
32v=DMARC1; p=reject; rua=mailto:report@dmarc.amazon.com; ruf=mailto:report@dmarc.amazon.com889
33v=DMARC1; p=reject; rua=mailto:dmarc.report@axa.com;870
34v=DMARC1; p=quarantine; rua=mailto:dmarc_agg@vali.email794
35v=DMARC1; p=none; pct=100703
36v=DMARC1; p=reject; pct=100693
37v=DMARC1;p=quarantine;sp=none;adkim=r;aspf=r;pct=100;fo=0;rf=afrf;ri=86400659
38v=DMARC1; p=reject; fo=1; ri=3600; rua=mailto:ewai10d2@ag.eu.dmarcian.com; ruf=mailto:ewai10d2@fr.eu.dmarcian.com624
39v=DMARC1; p=quarantine; fo=1; ruf=mailto:dmarc@qiye.163.com; rua=mailto:dmarc_report@qiye.163.com614
40v=DMARC1; p=reject; rua=mailto:mailauth-reports@google.com609
41v=DMARC1; p=none; fo=1; ruf=mailto:dmarc@qiye.163.com; rua=mailto:dmarc_report@qiye.163.com583
42v=DMARC1; p=none; sp=none; rf=afrf; pct=100; ri=86400566
43v=DMARC1; p=quarantine; rua=mailto:dmarc_agg@vali.email;512
44v=DMARC1;p=quarantine506
45v=DMARC1; p=none; rua=mailto:mailauth-reports@qq.com480
46v=DMARC1; p=quarantine; pct=100;477
47v=DMARC1;p=reject;sp=reject;adkim=s;aspf=s469
48v=DMARC1; p=reject; pct=100;444
49v=DMARC1; p=reject; rua=mailto:dmarc_rua@onsecureserver.net; adkim=r; aspf=r;442
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=1388
52v=DMARC1; p=reject; adkim=s; aspf=s379
53v=DMARC1; p=reject; adkim=s; aspf=s;378
54v=DMARC1; p=none; sp=none; adkim=r; aspf=r372
55v=DMARC1; p=none; fo=1; rua=mailto:dmarc_rua@emaildefense.proofpoint.com; ruf=mailto:dmarc_ruf@emaildefense.proofpoint.com;356
56v=DMARC1; p=none; adkim=r; aspf=r355
57v=DMARC1;p=reject;fo=1;rua=mailto:dmarc_rua@emaildefense.proofpoint.com;ruf=mailto:dmarc_ruf@emaildefense.proofpoint.com352
58v=DMARC1;p=reject344
59v=DMARC1; p=none; pct=100;334
60v=DMARC1; p=none; rua=mailto:dmarc@smtp.mailtrap.live; ruf=mailto:dmarc@smtp.mailtrap.live; rf=afrf; pct=100329
61v=DMARC1; p=reject; sp=none; rf=afrf; pct=100; ri=86400328
62v=DMARC1326
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;283
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=1275
69v=DMARC1; p=none; rua=mailto:mailauth-reports@google.com274
70v=DMARC1;p=reject;sp=none;adkim=r;aspf=r;pct=100;fo=0;rf=afrf;ri=86400265
71v=DMARC1;p=none;sp=none;pct=50;adkim=r;aspf=r;261
72v=DMARC1; p=none; aspf=r; adkim=r251
73v=DMARC1;p=none;rua=mailto:dmarc_report@service.aliyun.com246
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; adkim=s; aspf=s;231
77v=DMARC1; p=quarantine; fo=1; rua=mailto:dmarc_rua@emaildefense.proofpoint.com; ruf=mailto:dmarc_ruf@emaildefense.proofpoint.com224
78v=DMARC1; p=none; rua=mailto:rua-mpse@mpub.ne.jp223
79v=DMARC1; p=reject; rua=mailto:dmarc_rua@onsecureserver.net;220
80v=DMARC1; p=quarantine; rua=mailto:rua@dmarc.brevo.com215
81v=DMARC1; p=reject; rua=mailto:zicaptxt@ag.dmarcian.com;211
82v=DMARC1; p=quarantine; adkim=r; aspf=r199
83v=DMARC1; p=reject; sp=reject195
84v=DMARC1;p=none;sp=none;adkim=r;aspf=r;pct=100189
85v=DMARC1;""p=none;""rua=mailto:dmarc_agg@vali.email188
86v=DMARC1; p=none; sp=none; rua=mailto:dmarc-raports@dhosting.pl188
87v=DMARC1; p=quarantine; pct=100; rua=mailto:61e7fc8674b33@ag.eu.dmarcly.com; ruf=mailto:61e7fc8674b33@fo.eu.dmarcly.com; sp=quarantine; fo=1;186
88v=DMARC1; p=none; pct=100; rua=mailto:dmarc@fbl.optin.com;185
89v=DMARC1; p=none; rua=mailto:dmarc@reporting.unisender.com184
90v=DMARC1;p=none;pct=100;aspf=r;adkim=r;180
91v=DMARC1; p=quarantine; fo=1; rua=mailto:dmarc_rua@emaildefense.proofpoint.com; ruf=mailto:dmarc_ruf@emaildefense.proofpoint.com;176
92v=DMARC1;p=none;rua=mailto:rua@dmarc.brevo.com175
93v=DMARC1; p=none; rua=mailto:dmarc.rua@edrone.app; ruf=mailto:dmarc.ruf@edrone.app173
94v=DMARC1;p=reject;pct=100;172
95v=DMARC1; p=reject; pct=100; adkim=s; aspf=s169
96v=DMARC1; p=reject; fo=1; ri=3600; rua=mailto:lufthansa@rua.agari.com;168
97v=DMARC1; p=quarantine; sp=none; pct=100; ri=86400168
98v=DMARC1; p=quarantine; fo=1163
99v=DMARC1; p=quarantine; sp=none; rf=afrf; pct=100; ri=86400160
100v=DMARC1;p=reject;pct=100160

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 621
2localhost364
3mx-biz.mail.am0.yahoodns.net307
4asapsemi1.mail.protection.office365.us302
5mail279
6mx.services238
7~197
8mx01.1and1.com188
9mx00.1and1.com182
10mail.autoline.com.ua173
11mail1.sbnation.com172
12mx2.z-ns.net172
13zonemx.eu167
14alltheemails.com140
15mx.email-messaging.com139
16offline.iserv.eu131
17relay1.netnames.net122
18relay2.netnames.net122
19uk.mx1.mailanyone.net119
20uk.mx2.mx25.net119
21mx1.ticketsinbound.com118
22se.mx1.mailanyone.net117
23se.mx2.mx25.net117
24uk.mx3.mailanyone.net117
25mx2.ticketsinbound.com116
Show rows 26 – 100
#MX targetDomains
26mx.simply.com113
27se.mx3.mailanyone.net112
28uk.mx4.mx25.net112
29mxi.alpha-prm.jp112
30se.mx4.mx25.net111
31mx240.umbler.co.uk108
32mx364.umbler.com107
33mx00.1and1.co.uk106
34mx1.emailsendhub.com105
35mwpremgw1.ocn.ad.jp104
36cloudmail.auto-vision.ru103
37mx01.1and1.co.uk103
38mailin.mx-hub.cz103
39mailin.mx-hub.sk103
40mwpremgw2.ocn.ad.jp103
41mx1.cleanmx.pt102
42s.mail.dcsaas.net102
43mx01.lancloud.ru102
44mx02.lancloud.ru102
45mx04.lancloud.ru102
46mx2.cleanmx.pt101
47void.blackhole.mx100
48mx03.lancloud.ru100
49mx10.websupport.sk99
50mx20.websupport.sk99
51mailin.mx-hub.eu99
52mx1d10.thinline.cz98
53mx1b20.thinline.cz97
54mx01.mailplug.com94
55mx.zoho.com.au94
56mx2.zoho.com.au94
57mx02.mailplug.com93
58mx3.zoho.com.au93
59mx.zoho.com.cn91
60mx2.zoho.com.cn90
61mx.hetemail.jp88
62amazon-smtp.amazon.com88
63smtp-fwd.wordpress.com85
64mx1.email-cluster.com85
65mx2.email-cluster.com85
66failover1.email-cluster.com82
67mx4.name.com81
68mx3.name.com81
69mailforward.dnsv.jp81
70mx1.atmosphere.facct.ru81
71mx6.name.com80
72mx5.name.com80
73mx8.name.com80
74mx2.atmosphere.facct.ru80
75mx7.name.com79
76mail.global.frontbridge.com79
77antispam1.ihs.com.tr78
78antispam2.ihs.com.tr78
79gmail22.gadmail.de78
80gmail23.gadmail.de78
81wmail22.gadmail.de78
82mx.maxns.net77
83mx-01.mail-forwarder.io77
84mx-backup.serveriai.lt77
85wmail23.gadmail.de77
86mxint01.1and1.com76
87mxint02.1and1.com76
88mx-proxy501.heteml.jp76
89sitemail.everyone.net74
90mx-proxy502.heteml.jp74
91mx-02.mail-forwarder.io74
92mx1-dk.centerasecurity.dk73
93mx2-dk.centerasecurity.dk73
94smtp.faisco.cn73
95mx6.kvnbw.de73
96mx7.kvnbw.de73
97mx8.kvnbw.de73
98mx9.kvnbw.de73
99mx.vshosting.eu72
100rmail22.gadmail.de72

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
2_spf.exsilia.net105
3spf.pitcom.net103
4spf.boldem.cz103
5_spf.octadesk.com103
6_spf.mail-neoserv.si102
7spf-2248456.jmsend.com102
8qcloudmail.com102
9spf.splio.com102
10spf.kirim.email101
11gateways.firstdata.com101
12_spf.localservices.com.br100
13_spf.armada.it100
14_pmta2.antevenio.com99
15_spf.wpopt.net99
16spf-00181c02.pphosted.com98
17spf.ssmx.net98
18spf.v6send.net98
19outbound.smtp.wisestamp.net98
20spf.betrend.com98
21_spf01.mykronos.com97
22mlrcloud.com97
23ofsys.com96
24spf.mailcamp.nl96
25spf.spcloud.jp96
Show rows 26 – 100
#SPF includeDomains
26relay.thundermail.uk95
27mailing.eqs.com95
28spf.squalomail.com95
29spf.satorimail.net95
30eversrv.com94
31spf.sosafe.de94
32spfref.jackhenry.com94
33mfg.siteprotect.com93
34spf.w4ymail.at93
35_spf.presscloud.com93
36mailmailmail.net93
37spf-002fa101.pphosted.com93
38_spf.ogicom.pl93
39_spf.simpleviewinc.com93
40_spf.academicworks.com93
41spf.emailfilter.io92
42spf.cyberimpact.com92
43_spf.sendnode.com92
44usermail.zohocreator.com92
45senders.mailmasterplus.net92
46spf.host-ww.net91
47_spf.maileroo.com91
48smtp-cluster.plusvps.com91
49_spf.sent2email.com91
50spf.qb-feedback.com90
51spf.redpoints.com90
52send.k-crm.jp90
53spf.cesky-hosting.cz90
54_spf.edhost.eu90
55spf.greengeeks.net89
56spf.shared.spaceship.host89
57relay.email-cluster.com89
58fmx.etius.jp89
59spf.aams4.jp89
60verifymyfafsa.com89
61_spf.aid.no89
62_spf.abcp.ru88
63_spf.lh.pl88
64spf.263.net88
65_spf-dc10.sapsf.com88
66spf.oximailing.com88
67spf.symplicity.com88
68ciphr247.com87
69spf86
70_spf.webglobe.cz86
71no-ip.com86
72spf.esvacloud.com85
73_spf.yourfilter.nl85
74sendgrid.com85
75spf.remarkety.com85
76_spf.tld-mx.com84
77spf.icontroller.eu84
78_spf.eemsg.mail.mil84
79relay.guzelhosting.com84
80mail.zohoanalytics.com83
81spf.protect.kvnbw.de83
82spf.pantheon.io83
83custmail.vdata.com83
84spf.sabre.com83
85mail.dms.unileverservices.com82
86spf.qboxmail.com82
87spf.protection.outlook82
88universalspf.org82
89x.universalspf.org82
90_spf.ungapped.io82
91_spf.zorgmail.nl82
92spf2.nlk2.smtps.jp82
93spf.sendios.io82
94spf.w2solution.com82
95_spf.we.wedos.net81
96spf.mail-komplet.cz81
97spf.filteredmx.net81
98_spf.paytsoftware.com81
99euromsg.net81
100spf-00596a01.pphosted.com81

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.

2026-04-30 — 665 325 MX, 624 448 SPF2026-04-29 — 665 578 MX, 624 625 SPF2026-04-28 — 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 2026-05-01. Aggregates only — raw OpenINTEL data is deleted after analysis per their data agreement.
Last build: 2026-05-02T21:05:41Z.