Zapier uses Iterable for marketing email and Mailgun for transactional/notifications. They rank #2,774 in the Tranco list of most-popular domains. We've also observed sends via SparkPost. Email goes out from 3 different subdomains. Their email authentication setup is solid (score 95/100). We've recorded 9 ESP changes since first observing this brand.
Non-ESP tools detected in this brand's emails. Independent of who sends — a brand can use any combination.
| HTML builder |
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 10 emails we've observed. DMARC policy is read live from DNS.
DMARC reports sent to Postmark DMARC. Policy
p=reject means receivers actively block or quarantine spoofed mail.
SPF alignment: 30% of observed emails use an aligned return-path (bounces.zapier.com); the rest use third-party paths (flowium.com, moengage.com, gmail.com) where DMARC has to rely on DKIM alignment.
DKIM alignment: all 168 observed emails sign with a domain aligned with zapier.com (zapiermail.com, mail.zapier.com, send.zapier.com). DKIM authenticates the visible From — supports DMARC directly.
TLS: 1% TLS 1.3, 99% TLS 1.2 (across 69 sends).
Delivery: fast — 95% of emails in the last 7 days arrive in under 10 seconds (across 21 sends).
Dynamic content: NiftyImages — real-time/personalised email content layered on top of the ESP.
Brands often use multiple ESPs (e.g. one for marketing, another for transactional/notifications).
SparkPost 6ESPs 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: zapier.com, flowium.com, moengage.com, bounces.zapier.com, gmail.com, red-robot.net, send.zapier.com, zapiermail.com, mail.zapier.com
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 | 143 | 96.0% |
| promotions | 5 | 3.4% |
| spam | 1 | 0.7% |
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 | 22 | 81.8% | 18.2% | 0.0% | |
| Mailgun | 113 | 100.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | |
| SparkPost | 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 zapier.com has been observed sending from, and where their mail landed in Gmail.
| IP | Hostname | Obs | Placement | Reputation |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 161.38.195.157 | relay1.mail.zapier.com |
20 | 7 | Check → |
| 161.38.195.160 | relay2.mail.zapier.com |
14 | 1 | Check → |
| 192.174.82.153 | mta-174-82-153.send.zapier.com.sparkpostmail.com |
8 | 2 | Check → |
| 192.174.82.232 | mta-174-82-232.mail.zapier.com.sparkpostmail.com |
8 | — | Check → |
| 192.174.82.152 | mta-174-82-152.send.zapier.com.sparkpostmail.com |
7 | 2 | Check → |