Merit uses Smaily for marketing email and SendGrid for transactional/notifications. They rank #484,454 in the Tranco list of most-popular domains. Their email authentication setup is incomplete (score 58/100). Missing: DMARC enforcement, one-click unsubscribe.
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 6 emails we've observed. DMARC policy is read live from DNS.
DMARC reports sent to merit.ee. Policy
p=none is monitor-only — receivers won't act on spoofing yet.
SPF alignment: 74% of observed emails use an aligned return-path (em8668.merit.ee, em7615.merit.ee, outbound-eu.intercom.merit.ee); the rest use third-party paths (smlydlv1.net) where DMARC has to rely on DKIM alignment.
DKIM alignment: all 17 observed emails sign with a domain aligned with merit.ee (merit.ee). DKIM authenticates the visible From — supports DMARC directly.
TLS: 63% TLS 1.3, 38% TLS 1.2 (across 8 sends).
Delivery: fast — 100% of emails in the last 7 days arrive in under 10 seconds (across 5 sends).
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: merit.ee, smlydlv1.net, em8668.merit.ee, em7615.merit.ee, outbound-eu.intercom.merit.ee, ptr3856.merit.ee, ptr3008.merit.ee
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 | 17 | 94.4% |
| spam | 1 | 5.6% |
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 % |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Smaily | 5 | 80.0% | 0.0% | 20.0% | |
| Intercom | 2 | 100.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | |
| SendGrid | 11 | 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 merit.ee has been observed sending from, and where their mail landed in Gmail.