Epcnetwork uses Iterable for marketing email and Mailgun for transactional/notifications. We've also observed sends via SendGrid. Email goes out from 2 different subdomains. Their email authentication setup is incomplete (score 50/100). Missing: DMARC, 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 8 emails we've observed. DMARC policy is read live from DNS.
No DMARC record published. Domain is not protected against spoofing.
SPF alignment: observed emails use a third-party return-path (mailv2.ruzuku.com) — SPF passes there but doesn't align with epcnetwork.io, so DMARC has to rely on DKIM alignment.
DKIM alignment: observed emails sign with a third-party DKIM key (mailv2.ruzuku.com, epcnetwork-io.20251104.gappssmtp.com) — DKIM passes there but doesn't align with epcnetwork.io, so DMARC has to rely on SPF alignment.
TLS: 15% TLS 1.3, 85% TLS 1.2 (across 13 sends).
Delivery: fast — 83% of emails in the last 7 days arrive in under 10 seconds (across 6 sends).
Brands often use multiple ESPs (e.g. one for marketing, another for transactional/notifications).
SendGrid 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: epcnetwork.io, mailv2.ruzuku.com, learning.epcnetwork.io
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 | 34 | 91.9% |
| spam | 3 | 8.1% |
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 % |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Iterable | 4 | 50.0% | 0.0% | 50.0% | |
| Mailgun | 23 | 95.7% | 0.0% | 4.3% | |
| SendGrid | 2 | 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 epcnetwork.io has been observed sending from, and where their mail landed in Gmail.
| IP | Hostname | Obs | Placement | Reputation |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 159.112.245.216 | v5216.v5c003fb2.use4.send.mailgun.net |
24 | 4 | Check → |