Email Marketing & Newsletter
Campaign Monitor
Provenance unknown Report an error0–5 in half steps. 5 means the rubric's top anchor is met on the evidence.
by Campaign Monitor · www.campaignmonitor.com
Report an error on this page Is this your product? →
Link to this page
Add ?theme=dark to the image address for dark backgrounds.
The badge shows the category and the month of the latest evaluation, and EU-Made where
that is the product’s provenance. It never shows a score.
Campaign Monitor at a glance
- Vendor
- Campaign Monitor
- Headquarters
- Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 20 Oct 2026
- Data hosting
- Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 20 Oct 2026
- Free plan
- Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 20 Oct 2026
- Panel verdict
- The AI panel rates Campaign Monitor 2/5, the mean of 6 judges. On the captured pages, Campaign Monitor is strongest at campaign and automation and integrations, and weakest at sovereignty, pricing transparency (1), deliverability and consent and proof; the judges' weighted verdicts spanned 2.3 to 4.9. how scores are made
- As of
- Vendor pages captured 20 Oct 2026; evaluated by the panel 21 Oct 2026. all sources
Read this page as one judge. Each weighs the same scores by what they care about.
The panel's verdict
On the captured pages, Campaign Monitor is strongest at campaign and automation and integrations, and weakest at sovereignty, pricing transparency (1), deliverability and consent and proof; the judges' weighted verdicts spanned 2.3 to 4.9. The strength is concrete: a visual journey designer with conditional paths and journeys triggered by specific actions, milestones and behaviours, segmentation on purchase frequency, product preferences and browsing history, a Shopify integration syncing purchase data, and a documented API at version 3.3 (updated from 3.2) covering campaigns, journeys, subscribers, transactional sending and webhooks. The weakness is silence: jurisdiction, ownership, data residency and subprocessor exposure are all recorded as unknown — the only legal fact shown is the brand owner, Campaign Monitor by Marigold — and deliverability and consent evidence stops at help-centre article titles whose contents were not captured. The captured pricing signals are 'Get started for free', 'Try it free' and a Contact Sales channel; no tier price, send limit or overage rate was captured. Scores on every criterion sat within a single point.
Speaks for it
- A visual journey designer with conditional paths, custom journeys triggered by specific actions, milestones and behaviours, and prebuilt journeys (welcome journey, anniversary offer, thank-you) alongside build-from-scratch
- Segmentation on purchase frequency, product preferences and browsing history fed in from integrated tools, including a Shopify integration that syncs customer purchase data to trigger targeted campaigns
- A documented, versioned API at 3.3 (previous version 3.2) covering campaigns, journeys, lists, segments, subscribers, templates, transactional sending and webhooks, with TLS 1.2 the current supported protocol
- Drip campaigns scheduled in advance, RSS-to-email at daily, weekly or monthly cadences, and transactional emails for order confirmations, shipping notices and password resets
- Free signup ('Sign up for free', 'Try it free') with realtime dashboards across campaigns, journeys and transactional emails before any paid conversation
Held against it
- Sovereignty scored 0-1, with jurisdiction, ownership, data residency and subprocessor exposure all recorded as unknown — the only legal fact on the pages is the brand owner, Campaign Monitor by Marigold
- Deliverability evidence stops at help-centre article titles for email authentication and high bounce rates — we found no public information on SPF, DKIM or DMARC coverage, dedicated sending options, warm-up or complaint handling
- Consent and proof rests on an opt-in switching setting and a GDPR FAQ — we found no public information on the default opt-in mode, what the consent record stores, or whether open and click tracking can be switched off
- The subscriber exit is half documented — import and export help articles exist, but we found no public information on exporting engagement history or unsubscribe state, or on deletion across records
- We found no public information on API rate limits, a sandbox, webhook retries or a deprecation policy, and the integrations catalogue runs a partner-submission programme
Best for
- You need a visual, behaviour-triggered journey builder with purchase-based segmentation for a lifecycle email programme — campaign and automation and integrations are the product's strongest criteria, both scored 6-7
- You run an e-commerce store and want Shopify purchase data synced in to trigger targeted campaigns from shopping behaviour
- You build your own tooling and want a versioned, documented API with webhooks and transactional sending in public
Avoid if
- You must verify where subscriber data is hosted, which subprocessors touch the send, or the contracting entity's jurisdiction before signing — sovereignty scored 0-1 with jurisdiction, ownership, data residency and subprocessor exposure all recorded as unknown
- Your compliance review needs evidence of what a stored consent record contains, or that open and click tracking can be limited — ask the vendor: the public pages we read do not show it
- You need deliverability commitments documented up front, such as DMARC guidance, dedicated sending options or bounce suppression — deliverability scored 2-3 on help article titles alone
- You need a fully documented exit — export of engagement history and unsubscribe state, and deletion across all records; list data control scored 3-4 with the exit route only half documented
The scores
| Criterion | Panel median |
|---|---|
| Campaigns & automation | 3.5 of 5 |
| Deliverability infrastructure | 1 of 5 |
| Consent, proof & tracking limits | 1 of 5 |
| List ownership, import & exit | 1.5 of 5 |
| Integrations & API | 3.5 of 5 |
| European sovereignty | 0 of 5 |
Campaigns & automation
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Building the mail and the journey around it: editor, templates, segmentation, triggered sequences, A/B testing.
0 — One-off broadcasts from a fixed template; no segmentation and no automation of any kind.
3 — A drag-and-drop editor and simple list segmentation, but automation is a single welcome mail and there is no testing.
5 — Reusable templates, attribute and behaviour segmentation, multi-step automations on common triggers, and subject-line A/B testing.
8 — A visual journey builder with branching on behaviour and data, dynamic content per segment, send-time optimisation, and testing that reports significance rather than raw counts.
10 — Journeys treat the whole lifecycle: event-driven entry from other systems, branching on any attribute or event, holdout groups for measurement, and automations a marketer can read months later without a diagram.
The CRM Manager
A visual journey designer with conditional paths, custom triggers on actions, milestones and behaviours, and segmentation on real signals like purchase frequency and browsing history is a genuine lifecycle tool rather than a mailing list with invoicing. What holds it below the top band is testing: the captured pages point to a help article on A/B testing campaigns but record nothing on whether results are reported with significance, and we found no public information on send-time optimisation or holdout groups for measurement. 1 2 3 11
The Deliverability Engineer
A visual journey designer with conditional paths, behaviour-triggered entry and prebuilt journeys, plus drip campaigns, RSS-to-email and segmentation on purchase and browsing signals, is genuinely capable mid-table automation. A help article on A/B testing campaigns appears in the capture, but we found no public information on send-time optimisation or testing that reports significance. 1 2 3 11
The Data Protection Officer
The captured pages document a visual journey designer with conditional paths and personalised content, journeys triggered by specific actions, milestones and behaviours, and segmentation on purchase and browsing signals fed by integrated tools — real journey-building. We found no public information on send-time optimisation, holdout measurement, or what the A/B testing actually reports, which keeps this short of the top of the range. 1 2 11 3
The Shop Owner
The visual journey designer with conditional paths, journeys triggered by specific actions or behaviors, prebuilt welcome journeys, and segmentation on purchase frequency and product preferences cover most of what my shop needs; a help article on testing email campaigns also exists. We found no public information on send-time optimisation, holdout groups, or whether testing reports significance — and no abandoned-cart or post-purchase marketing flow is named anywhere on the captured pages. 1 2 3 11
The Integrator
A visual journey designer with conditional paths, triggers on specific actions, milestones and behaviours, prebuilt journeys plus from-scratch builds, personalised content, and segmentation on purchase and browsing signals from connected tools clears the middle of the scale and most of the way to the top. We found no public information on send-time optimisation, holdout groups, or whether A/B testing reports significance rather than raw counts — the captured material includes a help-centre page for A/B testing campaigns by title only. 1 2 3 11
The Skeptic
The captured pages show a visual journey designer with conditional paths and personalised content, prebuilt journeys alongside build-from-scratch, drip campaigns scheduled in advance, RSS-triggered sends, and segmentation on behavioural signals fed in from integrated tools. We found no public information on send-time optimisation, holdout groups or significance reporting; a help article on A/B testing campaigns appears in the captured pages, but no public information on its contents. 1 2 3 11
Deliverability infrastructure
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Whether the mail arrives — authentication, sending reputation, bounce and complaint handling — judged on what the vendor documents rather than the inbox rate it advertises.
0 — No documentation of authentication or bounce handling; deliverability appears only as a marketing number.
3 — SPF and DKIM setup documented, but no DMARC guidance, no stated bounce policy and shared sending only.
5 — SPF, DKIM and DMARC documented with a custom sending domain, automatic hard-bounce suppression, and complaint-loop handling stated.
8 — The above plus dedicated-IP options with a documented warm-up, seed or inbox-placement testing, engagement-based sunsetting, and published guidance on list hygiene.
10 — Deliverability is operated as a service: reputation monitoring surfaced to the customer, per-domain and per-ISP diagnostics, enforced authentication before first send, and postmaster or blocklist handling the vendor documents doing on the customer's behalf.
The CRM Manager
The captured pages list help articles on email authentication and high bounce rates, but nothing was captured from them — no SPF, DKIM or DMARC setup, no bounce suppression policy, no complaint-loop handling. We found no public information on dedicated IPs, warm-up or reputation monitoring, so only the existence of those help pages lifts this off the floor. 4 5
The Deliverability Engineer
Help articles titled for email authentication and high bounce rates exist, which is more than a bare marketing number, but their contents are not quoted so I cannot confirm SPF, DKIM or DMARC coverage or any bounce-suppression policy. We found no public information on dedicated IP options, warm-up, complaint-loop handling or engagement-based sunsetting, so the reputation story stops at the documentation titles. 4 5
The Data Protection Officer
Help articles on email authentication and on high bounce rates exist, but no content from either was captured, and we found no public information on SPF, DKIM or DMARC guidance, custom sending domains, bounce suppression or complaint-loop handling. Judged on what the pages actually document rather than advertise, article titles alone will not carry the mail to the inbox. 4 5
The Shop Owner
The help centre lists articles on email authentication and on high bounce rates, and that is the entire deliverability story the captured pages tell. We found no public information on which authentication standards are documented, DMARC guidance, dedicated sending options, warm-up, or complaint handling, so I can only judge that the topics exist, not what they commit the vendor to. 4 5
The Integrator
Help-centre pages exist titled for email authentication and for high bounce rates, but nothing captured names which authentication protocols are documented, and we found no public information on DMARC guidance, a stated bounce policy, custom sending domains, dedicated IPs or warm-up. Reputation monitoring, placement testing and hygiene guidance are likewise absent from the captured pages. 4 5
The Skeptic
The only deliverability evidence is the existence of two help articles — one on email authentication, one on high bounce rates — and we found no public information on their contents or on SPF, DKIM, DMARC, custom sending domains, bounce suppression or complaint handling. What the product pages show instead are realtime dashboards and industry benchmark comparisons, which measure results rather than document how mail arrives. 1 4 5
Consent, proof & tracking limits
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
How subscribers arrive and what the sender can prove afterwards: double opt-in, logged consent, unsubscribe handling, and whether open and click tracking can be limited or switched off.
0 — Single opt-in with no consent record; tracking is always on and cannot be disabled.
3 — Double opt-in available but not the default, and the consent record is a timestamp without the source, IP or the wording consented to.
5 — Double opt-in as the documented default with a stored consent record including source and timestamp, one-click unsubscribe, and tracking that can be turned off per campaign.
8 — Consent is reproducible as evidence: the confirmation mail and form wording versioned and retrievable per subscriber, unsubscribe honoured across lists, tracking off-by-default available, and retention rules for inactive subscribers.
10 — Built for the burden of proof: a per-subscriber consent history an authority would accept, documented handling of Art. 15 access and Art. 17 erasure requests, pixel-free and link-tracking-free sending as a supported mode, and preference-centre granularity rather than all-or-nothing.
The CRM Manager
A help page on switching between single and confirmed opt-in suggests confirmed opt-in exists as a setting, and a GDPR FAQ page exists, but nothing captured describes what the consent record contains, how unsubscribes are handled, or how tracking can be limited. We found no public information on consent history retrievable per subscriber, retention rules, or tracking off by default. 6 7
The Deliverability Engineer
A help article on switching between single and confirmed opt-in, alongside a GDPR FAQ, tells me consent modes exist and are configurable. We found no public information on what the consent record stores, whether confirmed opt-in is the default, how unsubscribes are honoured, or whether open and click tracking can be limited. 6 7
The Data Protection Officer
A help article on switching between single and confirmed opt-in and a GDPR FAQ exist, but we found no captured wording on which mode is the default, what the consent record stores, or whether open and click tracking can be limited or switched off. I sign off on tools whose consent proof survives a complaint, and here I cannot even confirm the pixel can be turned off. 6 7
The Shop Owner
The help centre shows an article on switching between single and confirmed opt-in plus a GDPR FAQ, which tells me opt-in modes are configurable. We found no public information on the default opt-in mode, what a stored consent record contains, one-click unsubscribe, or whether open and click tracking can be limited or switched off. 6 7
The Integrator
A help-centre page on changing between single and confirmed opt-in indicates both modes exist as a setting, though nothing shows confirmed opt-in as the default. We found no public information on what the consent record stores, how unsubscribes are honoured, or whether open and click tracking can be limited or switched off — for a buyer under GDPR scrutiny that silence decides the score. 6 7
The Skeptic
The captured pages point to a help article on switching between single and confirmed opt-in and a GDPR FAQ, and we found no public information on either's contents. There is no public information on what the consent record stores, whether double opt-in is the default, unsubscribe handling, or whether open and click tracking can be limited or switched off. 6 7
List ownership, import & exit
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Whether the list and its history remain the sender's: import with attributes intact, full export including engagement history, deletion that executes, and no metering that prices leaving out of reach.
0 — Export is addresses only; engagement history, segments and automations cannot leave.
3 — CSV import and export of subscriber fields, but engagement history and unsubscribe state are not exportable.
5 — Full subscriber export including custom attributes, subscription status and unsubscribe state, plus API access sufficient to sync elsewhere.
8 — Everything exportable in open formats — subscribers, engagement history, campaigns and templates — with documented deletion of a subscriber across all records, and no export throttling.
10 — Exit is a documented feature: full-fidelity export of the whole account, contractual data return, deletion that is evidenced rather than asserted, and migration tooling in both directions.
The CRM Manager
Help pages exist for importing subscribers from a file and exporting subscribers, and the API documents subscribers and segments endpoints, so basic list ownership is plausible. Nothing captured shows engagement history or unsubscribe state leaving the account, and we found no public information on documented deletion of a subscriber across all records or on any account-exit tooling. 8 9 10
The Deliverability Engineer
Help articles cover importing subscribers from a file and exporting subscribers, which maps to basic list movement in open CSV form. We found no public information on exporting engagement history or unsubscribe state, on documented deletion across records, or on export throttling, so exit fidelity rests on nothing shown. 8 9
The Data Protection Officer
Help pages cover importing subscribers from a file and exporting subscribers, and the API documentation includes lists, segments and subscribers, so the basic subscriber fields can move. We found no public information on exporting engagement history or unsubscribe state, on deletion that executes across records, or on export throttling — the exit route is only half documented. 8 9 10
The Shop Owner
Help articles on importing subscribers from a file and exporting subscribers are listed, and the documented API covers subscribers, lists and segments, which suggests I could sync elsewhere. We found no public information on whether export carries engagement history and unsubscribe state, on deletion that executes across all records, or on any export throttling — the exit story is untested on these pages. 8 9 10
The Integrator
Import from a file and subscriber export are documented as help-centre articles, and the API's documented topics include lists, segments and subscribers — enough surface to attempt a sync elsewhere. We found no public information on whether export carries custom attributes, subscription and unsubscribe state, or engagement history, and nothing on documented deletion across records or export throttling. 8 9 10
The Skeptic
Help articles on importing subscribers from a file and exporting subscribers appear in the captured pages, consistent with CSV import and export of subscriber fields, and the documented API carries a Subscribers topic that could support syncing elsewhere. We found no public information on whether custom attributes, engagement history and unsubscribe state are exportable, or on how subscriber deletion executes. 8 9 10
Integrations & API
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
The connection surface a newsletter lives on: shop and CRM systems, events in and out, webhooks, and an API somebody can build against without a partner agreement.
0 — No API and no named integrations; the list is maintained by CSV upload.
3 — A handful of native integrations and a read-mostly API, with no webhooks and no documented rate limits.
5 — Named integrations for common shop and CRM systems, a documented REST API with keys, and webhooks for the core subscriber events.
8 — Maintained bidirectional integrations with named systems including at least one major shop platform, event webhooks with retries, documented rate limits, and a sandbox.
10 — The tool is a component rather than a destination: transactional and marketing sending on one API, events flowing both directions, versioned API with a deprecation policy, and integrations the vendor maintains rather than lists.
The CRM Manager
A versioned API covering campaigns, journeys, segments, subscribers, transactional sending and webhooks, plus a named Shopify integration feeding purchase data into behavioural segmentation, is a surface a lifecycle programme can actually build on. Against the top band we found no public information on documented rate limits, a sandbox, webhook retries, or a deprecation policy for the API. 1 10 11
The Deliverability Engineer
A documented, versioned API updated from 3.2 to 3.3 covering webhooks and transactional sending, plus named integrations including Shopify with purchase-data sync feeding behavioural segments, is a real connection surface a builder can use. We found no public information on rate limits, webhook retries or a sandbox, which keeps it below the top band. 10 11
The Data Protection Officer
A documented API at version 3.3 covering campaigns, journeys, transactional sending and webhooks, plus a named Shopify integration that syncs purchase data in to trigger targeted campaigns, gives this a genuine connection surface. We found no public information on rate limits, webhook retries, a sandbox, or a deprecation policy beyond the update from 3.2 to 3.3. 10 11
The Shop Owner
The Shopify integration syncing customer purchase data to trigger targeted campaigns is exactly the shop connection I buy an email tool for, and webhooks, transactional sending on the same documented API, and a versioned API updated from 3.2 to 3.3 are all evidenced. We found no public information on documented rate limits, a sandbox, or webhook retries, and no cart-abandonment connection is named. 1 10 11
The Integrator
This is a real API, not a partner-form fig leaf: documentation covers campaigns, journeys, subscribers, transactional sending and webhooks, the current version is published with a recent bump from the previous one, and Shopify is a named integration syncing purchase data in. What I cannot see anywhere: documented rate limits, a sandbox, webhook retry behaviour and a published deprecation policy — the version bump is lifecycle awareness, not a policy — and the integrations page runs a partner-submission programme, which tells me part of that catalogue is maintained by others. 1 10 11
The Skeptic
Named pre-built integrations across analytics, project management, CRM and advertising include Shopify with purchase-data sync, the API is documented with webhooks and transactional sending alongside campaigns, and version 3.3 is published with its predecessor 3.2. The partner-program language — "Submit your integration" — reads as a marketplace others build into, and we found no public information on rate limits, a sandbox, webhook retries or a deprecation policy. 10 11
European sovereignty
panel opinion
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Where subscriber data and behavioural tracking live, who the contracting entity is, and which subprocessors touch the send. Independently sourced by the sovereignty pipeline; scored here as this buyer weighs it — which in this category is heavily.
0 — US vendor and contracting entity, US hosting, subprocessors unnamed; subscriber behaviour leaves the EU with no stated basis.
3 — EU hosting offered as an option or for storage only, while sending, tracking or support access remains non-EU, or the subprocessor list is absent.
5 — EU hosting as standard and an EU contracting entity, but parts of the chain — sending infrastructure, analytics, support tooling — are non-EU without an explained safeguard.
8 — EU or DACH hosting with a named data-centre provider, EU contracting entity, complete subprocessor list published, and any non-EU processing named with its legal basis.
10 — Sovereign end to end and evidenced: vendor, entity, hosting, sending and every subprocessor in the EU, certification published, and no transfer that needs a Schrems II argument to survive.
The CRM Manager
The captured pages state only the brand — Campaign Monitor by Marigold — and we found no public information on the contracting entity's jurisdiction, where subscriber data or behavioural tracking is hosted, or which subprocessors touch the send. For a buyer who weighs this heavily, a vendor publishing nothing on residency or subprocessors is unusable, and this lands at the bottom of the scale. 1
The Deliverability Engineer
Jurisdiction, ownership, data residency and subprocessor exposure are all marked unknown, and the only entity fact anywhere on the page is the brand line "Campaign Monitor by Marigold". A buyer weighing where subscriber data and tracking live has nothing here to underwrite, so this sits at the floor. 1
The Data Protection Officer
Contracting entity, ownership, data residency and subprocessor exposure are all unknown on these captures; the only legal fact on the table is the brand owner, Campaign Monitor by Marigold. I found no public information on where subscriber or behavioural data is stored or processed, so there is no answer to the transfer question at all — not even one I would have to argue about. 1
The Shop Owner
We found no public information on where subscriber data is hosted, the contracting entity's jurisdiction, ownership, or a single named subprocessor — only the brand owner 'Campaign Monitor by Marigold'. For a channel that carries my customer list and their purchase behaviour, that silence decides it; nothing here lets me answer a customer asking where their data sits. 1
The Integrator
We found no public information on the contracting entity's jurisdiction, ownership, data residency or subprocessors — the brand line "Campaign Monitor by Marigold" names a parent, not a jurisdiction. I weigh this heavily in this category, and with nothing published there is no evidenced basis for placing any subscriber data or behavioural tracking in the EU, which lands at the bottom of the scale. 1
The Skeptic
The captured pages leave every sovereignty attribute unrecorded — contracting entity, ownership, data residency and subprocessors — and the only corporate fact shown is the brand line "Campaign Monitor by Marigold". A buyer who weights where subscriber data and behavioural tracking live has nothing here to verify in either direction. 1
Pricing transparency
not rated — the vendor publishes no price
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Whether a sender can compute the real invoice for their list size and send volume — including overage, extra domains and automation limits — from public pages alone.
0 — No public prices at all; every tier is a sales conversation.
3 — A headline price per contact tier exists, but send limits, overage rates or the tier where automation begins are not stated.
5 — Contact-tier prices public with the billing period stated and send limits given, but at least one commonly needed capability sits in an unpriced tier or add-on.
8 — Every tier priced publicly with contact and volume limits, overage rates, feature boundaries and VAT treatment stated; only genuinely custom volume lacks a number.
10 — Complete price computability: a calculator producing the annual invoice for a given list size and send frequency, including overage, additional domains and dedicated IPs.
The CRM Manager
The only pricing-adjacent information captured is a free sign-up and a Contact Sales channel; no price figure, send limit, billing period or overage rate was captured. We found no public information on tier prices, so a real invoice cannot be computed from these pages. 1 2
The Deliverability Engineer
Free signup and a Contact Sales channel are the only pricing signals on the captured pages. We found no public information on tier prices, send limits, overage rates or VAT treatment, so a sender cannot compute anything resembling an invoice. 1 2
The Data Protection Officer
The captured pages show a free sign-up and a Contact Sales channel, and nothing priced in between: no tier prices, no contact or send limits, no overage rates, no VAT treatment. A sender cannot compute any invoice for their list size and send volume from these pages. 1 2
The Shop Owner
The only pricing signals on the captured pages are 'Get started for free', a free trial, and a Contact Sales channel. We found no public prices for any tier, no send limits and no overage terms, so I cannot begin to compute the invoice for a list of my size — price against contribution is a conversation I cannot prepare for. 1 2
The Integrator
The captured pages show a free start and a Contact Sales channel, and nothing else: we found no public information on any tier price, billing period, send limits, overage rates or where automation begins. No real invoice for any list size can be computed from public pages alone. 1 2
The Skeptic
The captured pages offer "Sign up for free", "Try it free" and a "Contact Sales" channel, and we found no public information on any price figure, contact tier, send limit, overage rate, VAT treatment or where paid features begin. An invoice for a given list size cannot be computed from these pages; every paid question ends in the sales channel. 1 2
European sovereignty — proven facts
0 of 4 dimensions provenBuilt only from facts shown on the vendor's own pages. A dimension we could not prove is left open, not scored as zero.
| Legal entity | Not determined | — | uncited Report an error |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ownership | Not determined | — | uncited Report an error |
| Data residency | Not determined | — | uncited Report an error |
| Subprocessors | Not determined | — | uncited Report an error |
Questions about Campaign Monitor
Is Campaign Monitor European?
Not determined: the vendor’s pages as captured do not say where Campaign Monitor is based.
Where does Campaign Monitor store data?
Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 20 Oct 2026.
Does Campaign Monitor have a free plan?
Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 20 Oct 2026.
What are the best alternatives to Campaign Monitor?
As of 21 Oct 2026, the panel rates Brevo (3/5), CleverReach (3/5) and Mailchimp (3/5) highest among the other 27 Email Marketing & Newsletter products evaluated. Ratings that look equal are rounded to half stars; the order uses the unrounded rating, then the name. The highest-rated European alternative is Brevo (EU-Made). Ratings are the AI panel’s opinion, formed from public evidence: how scores are made. The full list, with European products first: Campaign Monitor alternatives.
Where this could be wrong
- Evidence ages. The oldest capture behind this page is from 20 Oct 2026. Vendors change pricing and policies without notice; every fact reflects its source as of the capture date shown in the registry.
- AI can misread a source. Extraction and judgement are automated; a citation guarantees traceability, not infallibility. If something here is wrong, say so — no account needed, every report is decided within 5 business days, and accepted corrections are published.
What we left out
A claim that does not survive our checks costs us the claim, not the page. This is what was taken off this one.
- We could not confirm any pricing information on the vendor’s own pages as captured, so this page shows none rather than a statement we cannot stand behind. Know more? Tell us
- We could not confirm any compliance information on the vendor’s own pages as captured, so this page shows none rather than a statement we cannot stand behind. Know more? Tell us
- 68 product facts could not be confirmed on the vendor’s page as captured and were left out of this page and of the panel’s material. Know more? Tell us
- 13 integrations facts could not be confirmed on the vendor’s page as captured and were left out of this page and of the panel’s material. Know more? Tell us
- 6 data facts could not be confirmed on the vendor’s page as captured and were left out of this page and of the panel’s material. Know more? Tell us
- 2 support facts could not be confirmed on the vendor’s page as captured and were left out of this page and of the panel’s material. Know more? Tell us
Sources (11)
The pages every claim on this page was read from — each one checked, dated, and kept verifiable.
- 1 Vendor page www.campaignmonitor.com Checked 20 Oct 2026 Details →
- 2 Campaigns & automation — found from sitemap www.campaignmonitor.com Checked 20 Oct 2026 Details →
- 3 Campaigns & automation — found from sitemap help.campaignmonitor.com Checked 20 Oct 2026 Details →
- 4 Deliverability infrastructure — found from sitemap help.campaignmonitor.com Checked 20 Oct 2026 Details →
- 5 Deliverability infrastructure — found from sitemap help.campaignmonitor.com Checked 20 Oct 2026 Details →
- 6 Consent, proof & tracking limits — found from sitemap help.campaignmonitor.com Checked 20 Oct 2026 Details →
- 7 Consent, proof & tracking limits — found from sitemap help.campaignmonitor.com Checked 20 Oct 2026 Details →
- 8 List ownership, import & exit — found from sitemap help.campaignmonitor.com Checked 20 Oct 2026 Details →
- 9 List ownership, import & exit — found from sitemap help.campaignmonitor.com Checked 20 Oct 2026 Details →
- 10 Integrations & API — found from sitemap www.campaignmonitor.com Checked 20 Oct 2026 Details →
- 11 Integrations & API — found from sitemap www.campaignmonitor.com Checked 20 Oct 2026 Details →