Churnkey uses Postmark as their primary email service provider. They rank #31,784 in the Tranco list of most-popular domains. Their email authentication setup is good (score 73/100). Missing: DMARC enforcement.
Authentication signals observed in this brand's emails. SPF, DKIM and DMARC are the standard sender-authentication stack — see the DMARC policy below for whether spoofing is actually blocked or just monitored. One-click unsubscribe meets Google & Yahoo's bulk-sender requirements.
SPF / DKIM / DMARC above reflect the last 1 email we've observed. DMARC policy is read live from DNS.
DMARC published as p=none with no rua= reporting — monitor-only, and the sender isn't collecting reports either.
SPF alignment: all 3 observed emails use a return-path aligned with churnkey.co (outbound.intercom.churnkey.co, bounces.churnkey.co). SPF authenticates the visible From — supports DMARC directly.
DKIM alignment: all 3 observed emails sign with a domain aligned with churnkey.co (churnkey.co). DKIM authenticates the visible From — supports DMARC directly.
Brands often use multiple ESPs (e.g. one for marketing, another for transactional/notifications).
Intercom 2ESPs we've seen sending email for this brand. Green = confirmed by SPF, sender IP rDNS, or known infra pairing (label shows the source). Grey = observed but not yet confirmed by SPF or PTR.
ESPs this brand has authorized in their SPF record. We confirm them with a green ✓ only after seeing recurring use (3+ emails across 2+ days). Until then they stay here — either we haven't observed any email yet, or we've seen a handful but not enough to call them a regular sender for the brand.
Probed: churnkey.co, outbound.intercom.churnkey.co, bounces.churnkey.co
Folder distribution across all emails from this brand observed in Gmail inboxes. High inbox % = good deliverability; spam appearances are the headline signal.
| Folder | Count | Share |
|---|---|---|
| inbox | 3 | 100.0% |
Which ESP's emails are landing where. Sorted by spam % so problem senders surface first. Brands using one ESP for marketing and another for transactional often see very different placement profiles per ESP. Per-ESP folder data only started being captured recently — counts here may be smaller than the total above until backfill catches up.
| ESP | Emails | Placement | Inbox % | Tabs % | Spam % |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Intercom | 2 | 100.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | |
| Postmark | 1 | 100.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% |
Daily observations per ESP. Brands often run multiple ESPs concurrently — marketing on one, transactional on another — so this chart shows usage rather than switches.
IP addresses churnkey.co has been observed sending from, and where their mail landed in Gmail.