What this analysis does
This tool combines public authentication configuration, discoverable signing evidence, campaign source analysis, unsubscribe signals and stated volume while keeping DNS configuration separate from receiver-confirmed message authentication.
A campaign fails compliance in one of two places: the domain configuration or the message itself. Auditing them separately means each review misses the conditions created by the other. This compiles both into one report bounded by the evidence supplied.
Domain and message are evaluated together
The domain side covers authentication, policy and the transport posture a receiver can observe before the message body is considered. The message side covers unsubscribe mechanisms, payload size, tracking surface and structural markup. Provider requirements draw from both, which is why a single report is more useful than two.
Volume is the parameter that changes which requirements apply. The same domain and message can be compliant at low volume and non-compliant above the bulk threshold, so supplying a realistic figure materially changes the result.
- Authentication and policy are assessed from the domain.
- Unsubscribe, size and tracking are assessed from the message.
- The volume figure determines which tier of requirements applies.
The failures that recur most often
The most frequent gap is a one-click unsubscribe header that is present but not functional — an endpoint that errors, requires authentication, or does not accept the required POST. The header appears correct in a template review and fails the first time a provider exercises it.
The second most frequent is authentication that passes without aligning. SPF and DKIM succeed for a platform-owned identity while DMARC fails for the visible From domain, which satisfies a naive check and not the actual requirement.
Validate the unsubscribe implementationConfirm alignment, not just authentication
Compile before the send window, not during it
Authentication changes take time to propagate and unsubscribe endpoints take time to fix. Running the audit far enough ahead that remediation can complete is what makes it useful; running it an hour before dispatch converts findings into a choice between delay and known non-compliance.
Re-run after any change to the sending domain, the platform or the template. Compliance is a property of a specific combination, and a template that passed on one platform can fail on another that injects different headers.
Example: authenticated but non-compliant
Evidence supplied
A domain with valid SPF, DKIM and DMARC, sending above the bulk threshold, with HTML that has no List-Unsubscribe-Post header.
How to read the result
The report marks authentication as satisfied and the unsubscribe requirement as failed. At that volume the missing one-click mechanism is a requirement gap regardless of how sound the authentication is.
Known limits
- Requirements change; the report reflects published guidance at the review date shown above.
- Message-side analysis inspects the HTML supplied, which may differ from what the platform finally transmits.
- Compliance with published requirements does not guarantee inbox placement.
Common questions
Which HTML should I supply?
The final rendered version from your sending platform, not the source template. Platforms inject tracking, links and headers that change the result.
What volume figure should I enter?
Your realistic peak to a single provider over their measurement window, not your total across all recipients.
Does a passing report guarantee delivery?
No. It indicates eligibility against published requirements. Placement depends additionally on reputation and engagement.