Who uses what for email DAILY

Mailbox providers and ESPs across the Tranco top-1M — snapshot of 2026-05-14.

654 606
Domains with MX
614 742
Domains with SPF
448 141
Domains with DMARC
654 606
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 →149 69722.87%
2Google Workspace →142 30821.74%
3Microsoft 365 →109 18316.68%
4Unknown / Other →50 2557.68%
5Generic / unmatched (mx*.*) →18 2402.79%
6Proofpoint →12 6811.94%
7Yandex 360 →11 4421.75%
8Generic / unmatched (mail.*) →11 3131.73%
9Mimecast →10 3241.58%
10Cloudflare Email Routing →10 0401.53%
Show rows 11 – 30
#Mailbox providerDomainsShare of MX-having domains
11Hostinger →7 4051.13%
12Namecheap Email Forwarding →6 8621.05%
13Zoho Mail →6 6741.02%
14GoDaddy →5 0100.77%
15QQ Mail (Tencent) →4 8240.74%
16Amazon WorkMail →4 8130.74%
17OVH Mail →4 4010.67%
18Mail.ru for Business →3 8190.58%
19Barracuda →3 5710.55%
201&1 IONOS →3 2660.5%
21Cisco IronPort →2 8220.43%
22Proofpoint Essentials →2 7660.42%
23Jellyfish (Namecheap) →2 6070.4%
24SpamExperts (SolarWinds) →2 3990.37%
25Mailgun (inbound) →2 3220.35%
26Rackspace Email →2 2940.35%
27Beget (RU) →2 1540.33%
28Alibaba Mail (China) →1 7790.27%
29Zoho Mail (EU) →1 7090.26%
30Hosted Email (Rackspace/IONOS) →1 6730.26%
🏠 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
12.35%
80 824 domains
Unique unmatched MX hosts
36 615
individual hostnames in the long tail
Self-hosted
22.9%
149 878 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 →37 9436.17%
2SendGrid (Twilio) →29 4844.8%
3Mailgun →25 1464.09%
4Zendesk →24 0203.91%
5Mailchimp →22 8393.72%
6Mandrill →20 9613.41%
7HubSpot →19 4213.16%
8Salesforce →16 2262.64%
9Mailjet (Sinch) →13 0632.12%
10Cloudflare Email Routing →10 6131.73%
Show rows 11 – 30
#ESPDomainsShare of SPF-publishing domains
11Mimecast →9 0111.47%
12Brevo (ex-Sendinblue) →8 5851.4%
13MailerSend →7 7281.26%
14Namecheap Forwarding →7 1071.16%
15MailChannels →6 5611.07%
16Elastic Email →4 3800.71%
17Unisender (RU) →3 7300.61%
18Constant Contact →3 5400.58%
19Campaign Monitor →3 3750.55%
20Marketo (Adobe) →3 2990.54%
21Zoho Campaigns →3 1750.52%
22Emsd1 (transactional) →3 0300.49%
23SendPulse →2 9510.48%
24Postmark →2 8810.47%
25Zoho ZeptoMail →2 6580.43%
26SparkPost →2 6510.43%
27Exclaimer (signatures) →2 6320.43%
28Help Scout →2 3670.39%
29Salesforce Marketing Cloud →2 1980.36%
30Barracuda Essentials →2 1760.35%
📮 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
1Shopify →5 0950.83%
2Pardot (Salesforce) →4 9530.81%
3CodeTwo Email Signatures 365 →4 3640.71%
4KnowBe4 →3 4620.56%
5Statuspage (Atlassian) →2 1440.35%
6Trustpilot →1 8890.31%
7Atlassian (Jira/Confluence) →1 8650.3%
8Firebase (Google) →1 7180.28%
9Lark / Feishu →1 2490.2%
10BigCommerce →1 2150.2%
Show rows 11 – 30
#SaaS appDomainsShare of SPF-publishing domains
11NetSuite (Oracle) →1 1340.18%
12Sage Intacct →1 1000.18%
13Qualtrics →1 0990.18%
14Oracle Cloud Email →1 0450.17%
15Docebo (LMS) →9190.15%
16WordPress.com / WP Cloud →8830.14%
17Oracle Cloud →8320.14%
18One.com (DK hosting) →7860.13%
19Zoho Books →7140.12%
20AFAS →6350.1%
21Greenhouse →6280.1%
22PayPal Braintree →5900.1%
23SAP SuccessFactors →5880.1%
24ClickDimensions →5770.09%
25UKG / UltiPro →5520.09%
26Autotask (ConnectWise) →5150.08%
27ConnectWise →4910.08%
28TOPdesk →4760.08%
29Freshservice (Freshworks) →4430.07%
30Shoptet →4390.07%
📧 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▼ -0.05%

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;54 514
2v=DMARC1; p=none31 795
3v=DMARC1; p=none; rua=mailto:rua@dmarc.brevo.com8 178
4v=DMARC1; p=quarantine;4 758
5v=DMARC1; p=quarantine3 821
6v=DMARC1; p=reject;3 746
7v=DMARC1;p=none;3 715
8v=DMARC1; p=reject; fo=1; rua=mailto:dmarc_rua@emaildefense.proofpoint.com; ruf=mailto:dmarc_ruf@emaildefense.proofpoint.com3 217
9v=DMARC1; p=quarantine; adkim=r; aspf=r; rua=mailto:dmarc_rua@onsecureserver.net;3 138
10v=DMARC1; p=quarantine; adkim=s; aspf=s3 066
11v=DMARC1; p=reject2 834
12v=DMARC1; p=none; aspf=r; adkim=r;2 339
13v=DMARC1; p=quarantine; pct=1002 289
14v=DMARC1; p=none; sp=none; rua=mailto:dmarc@mailinblue.com!10m; ruf=mailto:dmarc@mailinblue.com!10m; rf=afrf; pct=100; ri=864002 037
15v=DMARC1; p=reject; sp=reject; adkim=s; aspf=s;1 864
16v=DMARC1;p=none1 684
17v=DMARC1; p=none; aspf=r; sp=none1 671
18v=DMARC1; p=none; adkim=r; aspf=r;1 480
19v=DMARC1;p=quarantine;pct=100;fo=11 361
20v=DMARC1; p=reject; sp=reject; rua=mailto:dmarc.report@axa.com;1 328
21v=DMARC1; p=reject; fo=1; rua=mailto:dmarc_rua@emaildefense.proofpoint.com; ruf=mailto:dmarc_ruf@emaildefense.proofpoint.com;1 316
22v=DMARC1; p=none; rua=mailto:dmarc_agg@vali.email1 294
23v=DMARC1;p=reject;1 247
24v=DMARC1; p=reject; rua=mailto:dmarc_agg@vali.email1 205
25v=DMARC1;p=none;sp=none;adkim=r;aspf=r;pct=100;fo=0;rf=afrf;ri=864001 196
Show rows 26 – 100
#DMARC recordDomains
26v=DMARC1; p=reject; adkim=r; aspf=r; rua=mailto:dmarc_rua@onsecureserver.net;1 107
27v=DMARC1; p=none; sp=none1 057
28v=DMARC1; p=none; sp=none;1 007
29v=DMARC1; p=none; rua=mailto:dmarc_agg@vali.email;1 003
30v=DMARC1; p=none; fo=1; rua=mailto:dmarc_rua@emaildefense.proofpoint.com; ruf=mailto:dmarc_ruf@emaildefense.proofpoint.com956
31v=DMARC1; p=reject; sp=reject; adkim=s; aspf=s904
32v=DMARC1; p=reject; rua=mailto:report@dmarc.amazon.com; ruf=mailto:report@dmarc.amazon.com870
33v=DMARC1; p=quarantine; rua=mailto:dmarc_agg@vali.email769
34v=DMARC1; p=reject; pct=100683
35v=DMARC1; p=none; pct=100683
36v=DMARC1;p=quarantine;sp=none;adkim=r;aspf=r;pct=100;fo=0;rf=afrf;ri=86400645
37v=DMARC1; p=quarantine; fo=1; ruf=mailto:dmarc@qiye.163.com; rua=mailto:dmarc_report@qiye.163.com619
38v=DMARC1; p=reject; rua=mailto:mailauth-reports@google.com600
39v=DMARC1; p=none; fo=1; ruf=mailto:dmarc@qiye.163.com; rua=mailto:dmarc_report@qiye.163.com558
40v=DMARC1; p=none; sp=none; rf=afrf; pct=100; ri=86400557
41v=DMARC1; p=reject; rua=mailto:dmarc_rua@onsecureserver.net; adkim=r; aspf=r;508
42v=DMARC1;p=quarantine491
43v=DMARC1; p=quarantine; rua=mailto:dmarc_agg@vali.email;488
44v=DMARC1; p=quarantine; pct=100;480
45v=DMARC1; p=none; rua=mailto:mailauth-reports@qq.com478
46v=DMARC1; p=reject; fo=1; ri=3600; rua=mailto:ewai10d2@ag.eu.dmarcian.com; ruf=mailto:ewai10d2@fr.eu.dmarcian.com457
47v=DMARC1; p=reject; pct=100;449
48v=DMARC1;p=reject;sp=reject;adkim=s;aspf=s448
49v=DMARC1; p=reject; rua=mailto:dmarc_rua@emaildefense.proofpoint.com; ruf=mailto:dmarc_ruf@emaildefense.proofpoint.com; fo=1433
50v=DMARC1; p=reject; rua=mailto:dmarc_agg@vali.email;430
51v=DMARC1; p=none; sp=none; adkim=r; aspf=r373
52v=DMARC1; p=reject; adkim=s; aspf=s;372
53v=DMARC1; p=none; fo=1; rua=mailto:dmarc_rua@emaildefense.proofpoint.com; ruf=mailto:dmarc_ruf@emaildefense.proofpoint.com;345
54v=DMARC1; p=none; adkim=r; aspf=r344
55v=DMARC1; p=none; pct=100;335
56v=DMARC1;p=reject334
57v=DMARC1;p=reject;fo=1;rua=mailto:dmarc_rua@emaildefense.proofpoint.com;ruf=mailto:dmarc_ruf@emaildefense.proofpoint.com333
58v=DMARC1324
59v=DMARC1; p=none; rua=mailto:dmarc@smtp.mailtrap.live; ruf=mailto:dmarc@smtp.mailtrap.live; rf=afrf; pct=100322
60v=DMARC1; p=reject; sp=none; rf=afrf; pct=100; ri=86400321
61v=DMARC1; p=reject; rua=mailto:tnoff9hr@ag.eu.dmarcadvisor.com; aspf=s; adkim=s;319
62v=DMARC1; p=none; fo=1313
63v=DMARC1;p=quarantine;300
64v=DMARC1; p=reject; sp=reject; pct=100; fo=1; ri=3600; rua=mailto:dmarcrecord@gmail.com; ruf=mailto:dmarcrecord@gmail.com;300
65v=DMARC1; p=reject; adkim=s; aspf=s289
66v=DMARC1; p=none; rua=mailto:mailauth-reports@google.com270
67v=DMARC1; p=none; aspf=r; adkim=r264
68v=DMARC1; p=reject; rua=mailto:dmarc_rua@emaildefense.proofpoint.com; ruf=mailto:dmarc_ruf@emaildefense.proofpoint.com;fo=1259
69v=DMARC1;p=reject;sp=none;adkim=r;aspf=r;pct=100;fo=0;rf=afrf;ri=86400258
70v=DMARC1;p=none;pct=100254
71v=DMARC1;p=none;sp=none;pct=50;adkim=r;aspf=r;248
72v=DMARC1;p=none;rua=mailto:dmarc_report@service.aliyun.com240
73v=DMARC1; p=reject; fo=1; ri=3600; rua=mailto:dmarc_rua@emaildefense.proofpoint.com; ruf=mailto:dmarc_ruf@emaildefense.proofpoint.com236
74v=DMARC1; p=reject; rua=mailto:dmarc_rua@onsecureserver.net;228
75v=DMARC1; p=none; rua=mailto:rua-mpse@mpub.ne.jp228
76v=DMARC1; p=quarantine; adkim=s; aspf=s;227
77v=DMARC1; p=quarantine; fo=1; rua=mailto:dmarc_rua@emaildefense.proofpoint.com; ruf=mailto:dmarc_ruf@emaildefense.proofpoint.com211
78v=DMARC1; p=reject; rua=mailto:zsrbf6su@ag.eu.dmarcadvisor.com;209
79v=DMARC1; p=reject; rua=mailto:zicaptxt@ag.dmarcian.com;208
80v=DMARC1; p=none; rua=mailto:dmarc.rua@edrone.app; ruf=mailto:dmarc.ruf@edrone.app202
81v=DMARC1; p=quarantine; rua=mailto:rua@dmarc.brevo.com200
82v=DMARC1;""p=none;""rua=mailto:dmarc_agg@vali.email200
83v=DMARC1; p=reject; sp=reject196
84v=DMARC1; p=quarantine; adkim=r; aspf=r196
85v=DMARC1; p=none; sp=none; rua=mailto:dmarc-raports@dhosting.pl190
86v=DMARC1; p=quarantine; pct=100; rua=mailto:61e7fc8674b33@ag.eu.dmarcly.com; ruf=mailto:61e7fc8674b33@fo.eu.dmarcly.com; sp=quarantine; fo=1;187
87v=DMARC1;p=reject;pct=100;182
88v=DMARC1; p=quarantine; fo=1; rua=mailto:dmarc_rua@emaildefense.proofpoint.com; ruf=mailto:dmarc_ruf@emaildefense.proofpoint.com;179
89v=DMARC1; p=quarantine; pct=100; adkim=r; aspf=r178
90v=DMARC1;p=none;rua=mailto:rua@dmarc.brevo.com177
91v=DMARC1; p=none; pct=100; rua=mailto:dmarc@fbl.optin.com;176
92v=DMARC1; p=none; rua=mailto:dmarc@reporting.unisender.com176
93v=DMARC1;p=none;sp=none;adkim=r;aspf=r;pct=100175
94v=DMARC1;p=none;pct=100;aspf=r;adkim=r;171
95v=DMARC1; p=reject; pct=100; adkim=s; aspf=s169
96v=DMARC1; p=quarantine; sp=none; pct=100; ri=86400165
97v=DMARC1; p=quarantine; fo=1158
98v=DMARC1; p=quarantine; sp=none; rf=afrf; pct=100; ri=86400158
99v=DMARC1;p=reject;pct=100157
100v=DMARC1; p=quarantine; adkim=r; aspf=r;156

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
1nan3 982
2localhost421
3mx-biz.mail.am0.yahoodns.net310
4asapsemi1.mail.protection.office365.us291
5mx.services272
6mail249
7mx1.emailsendhub.com186
8mx01.1and1.com184
9mx00.1and1.com178
10mail.autoline.com.ua171
11mail1.sbnation.com169
12mx2.z-ns.net169
13zonemx.eu166
14~165
15mx.email-messaging.com142
16alltheemails.com126
17uk.mx1.mailanyone.net119
18uk.mx2.mx25.net119
19s.mail.dcsaas.net118
20uk.mx3.mailanyone.net117
21mxi.alpha-prm.jp114
22relay1.netnames.net112
23relay2.netnames.net112
24uk.mx4.mx25.net112
25mx.simply.com111
Show rows 26 – 100
#MX targetDomains
26mx240.umbler.co.uk111
27se.mx1.mailanyone.net111
28se.mx2.mx25.net111
29mx364.umbler.com110
30se.mx3.mailanyone.net106
31se.mx4.mx25.net105
32mx1d10.thinline.cz105
33mx1.ticketsinbound.com104
34mx1b20.thinline.cz104
35mwpremgw1.ocn.ad.jp103
36mwpremgw2.ocn.ad.jp103
37mx2.ticketsinbound.com102
38mx10.websupport.sk102
39mx20.websupport.sk102
40mx00.1and1.co.uk101
41mailin.mx-hub.cz101
42mailin.mx-hub.sk101
43cloudmail.auto-vision.ru100
44mx01.1and1.co.uk98
45mx01.lancloud.ru98
46mx02.lancloud.ru98
47mx04.lancloud.ru98
48mailin.mx-hub.eu97
49mx03.lancloud.ru96
50offline.iserv.eu96
51mx.zoho.com.au95
52mx2.zoho.com.au95
53mx1.cleanmx.pt94
54mx3.zoho.com.au94
55mx01.mailplug.com93
56mx2.cleanmx.pt93
57mx02.mailplug.com92
58void.blackhole.mx91
59mx.zoho.com.cn90
60mx2.zoho.com.cn89
61mailforward.dnsv.jp87
62amazon-smtp.amazon.com85
63mx.hetemail.jp82
64mail.global.frontbridge.com82
65mx-backup.serveriai.lt82
66mx4.name.com81
67mx3.name.com81
68mx6.name.com80
69mx5.name.com80
70mx8.name.com80
71mx1.atmosphere.facct.ru80
72mx2.atmosphere.facct.ru80
73mx7.name.com79
74mx-01.mail-forwarder.io79
75antispam1.ihs.com.tr78
76antispam2.ihs.com.tr78
77mx-proxy501.heteml.jp78
78mx.aams4.jp78
79mx1.email-cluster.com78
80mx2.email-cluster.com78
81mx-proxy502.heteml.jp76
82smtp-fwd.wordpress.com76
83mx-02.mail-forwarder.io76
84mxint01.1and1.com75
85mxint02.1and1.com75
86mx.maxns.net75
87mx-0.aams4.jp75
88mx-1.aams4.jp75
89failover1.email-cluster.com75
90sitemail.everyone.net74
91mx6.kvnbw.de73
92mx7.kvnbw.de73
93mx8.kvnbw.de73
94mx9.kvnbw.de73
95mx.vshosting.eu72
96mx1-dk.centerasecurity.dk71
97mx2-dk.centerasecurity.dk71
98q01es.mail.s-web.de70
99q02es.mail.s-web.de70
100r01es.mail.s-web.de70

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
1spf.kirim.email112
2spf.pitcom.net110
3_spf.mail-neoserv.si107
4spf.shared.spaceship.host107
5_pmta2.antevenio.com105
6_spf.armada.it104
7spf.boldem.cz103
8_spf.octadesk.com103
9spf.emailfilter.io102
10qcloudmail.com102
11spf.mailcamp.nl101
12gateways.firstdata.com101
13spf-2248456.jmsend.com100
14spf.aams4.jp100
15senders.mailmasterplus.net100
16spf.ssmx.net99
17spf.splio.com99
18spf.betrend.com99
19_spf.wpopt.net98
20spf.satorimail.net98
21_spf.localservices.com.br98
22amazon.com97
23_spf.maileroo.com97
24spf.squalomail.com97
25spf.cesky-hosting.cz97
Show rows 26 – 100
#SPF includeDomains
26mlrcloud.com96
27_spf.exsilia.net96
28outbound.smtp.wisestamp.net96
29_spf.presscloud.com95
30_spf01.mykronos.com95
31relay.thundermail.uk95
32spf-002fa101.pphosted.com94
33mailing.eqs.com94
34spf.v6send.net94
35spf.spcloud.jp94
36ofsys.com93
37mailmailmail.net93
38_spf.ogicom.pl93
39send.k-crm.jp93
40_spf.academicworks.com92
41no-ip.com92
42fmx.etius.jp92
43_spf.webglobe.cz92
44_spf-dc10.sapsf.com91
45spfref.jackhenry.com91
46spf.redpoints.com91
47_spf.lh.pl91
48spf.w4ymail.at91
49spf.cyberimpact.com90
50_spf.edhost.eu90
51eversrv.com90
52spf.host-ww.net90
53spf.remarkety.com90
54_spf.sent2email.com90
55spf.shopserve.jp90
56_spf.aid.no90
57_spf.sendnode.com89
58spf.sosafe.de89
59_spf.simpleviewinc.com89
60spf.qb-feedback.com89
61usermail.zohocreator.com89
62smtp-cluster.plusvps.com88
63spf.symplicity.com88
64mfg.siteprotect.com87
65_spf.tld-mx.com87
66_spf.abcp.ru86
67ciphr247.com86
68_spf.yourfilter.nl86
69spf.263.net86
70spf.w2solution.com86
71verifymyfafsa.com86
72relay.email-cluster.com85
73sendgrid.com84
74spf.greengeeks.net84
75spf.mijndomeinhosting.nl84
76spf.sendios.io84
77_spf.we.wedos.net84
78spf.icontroller.eu83
79spf.oximailing.com83
80_spf.eemsg.mail.mil83
81mail.dms.unileverservices.com82
82spf.protect.kvnbw.de82
83spf82
84euromsg.net82
85spf2.nlk2.smtps.jp82
86spf.esvacloud.com82
87spf.protection.outlook81
88spf-00596a01.pphosted.com81
89_spf.ungapped.io81
90mail.feedblitz.com81
91spf.mail-komplet.cz81
92custmail.vdata.com81
93relay.guzelhosting.com81
94spf.qboxmail.com81
95mail.zohoanalytics.com80
96spf.pantheon.io80
97_spf.criaenvio.com80
98_spf.explore-blue.com79
99spf.gansend.com79
100spf.byway.it79

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.

2026-05-13 — 654 450 MX, 614 641 SPF2026-05-12 — 654 613 MX, 614 806 SPF2026-05-11 — 654 275 MX, 614 529 SPF2026-05-10 — 654 198 MX, 614 496 SPF2026-05-09 — 654 965 MX, 615 249 SPF2026-05-08 — 664 721 MX, 624 279 SPF2026-05-07 — 662 493 MX, 622 130 SPF2026-05-06 — 661 868 MX, 621 451 SPF2026-05-05 — 662 628 MX, 622 150 SPF2026-05-04 — 662 839 MX, 622 414 SPF2026-05-03 — 671 505 MX, 630 301 SPF2026-05-02 — 666 074 MX, 625 213 SPF2026-05-01 — 664 902 MX, 624 104 SPF2026-04-30 — 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 2026-05-14. Aggregates only — raw OpenINTEL data is deleted after analysis per their data agreement.
Last build: 2026-05-15T21:05:18Z.