Email Marketing & Newsletter

E-goi

Provenance unknown Report an error

Panel rating · 6 judges · How to read the stars

Category median

Sovereignty: not determined

0–5 in half steps. 5 means the rubric's top anchor is met on the evidence.

by E-goi Marketing Technology S.A. · www.e-goi.com

An AI-assisted analysis of public evidence — not a hands-on test.

Every score, rationale and verdict on this page is AI-generated. Every claim cites the source it was read from. Nothing here is a human star review — and no score can be bought. How scores are made →

Method and versions

The CRM Manager v1.0 · The Deliverability Engineer v1.0 · The Data Protection Officer v1.0 · The Shop Owner v1.0 · The Integrator v1.0 · The Skeptic v1.0 · rubric v1 · evaluated 30 Sep 2026

Report an error on this page Is this your product? →

Read this page as one judge. Each weighs the same scores by what they care about.

The Skeptic

Weighted verdict

Has seen every vendor claim 99% deliverability and GDPR compliance on the same page. Reads for the contact-tier staircase, the overage rate, the feature that begins two tiers up, and whether "EU hosting" covers the sending infrastructure or only the database.

Same scores as the panel view — this lens weights them the way this judge cares.

Scored by The Skeptic

Campaigns & automation

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.

Report an error

The Skeptic

The marketing pages show a drag-and-drop editor, free templates, behaviour-based segmentation with tags and custom fields, triggered campaigns for abandoned carts, reminders and sales follow-ups, lead scoring, and A/B testing as a named feature — that is the full mid-level basket. We found no public information on a visual journey builder with branching, dynamic content per segment, send-time optimisation, or test results reported with significance rather than raw counts. 2 4

Report an error

Deliverability infrastructure

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.

Report an error

The Skeptic

The deliverability page documents SPF, SenderID, DomainKeys and DKIM, feedback loops with Gmail, Hotmail and Yahoo that automatically process bounces and complaints, automatic removal of invalid and bouncing addresses, suppression lists, dedicated-IP warm-up across hundreds of IP addresses, and daily human analysis of delivery processes. We found no public information on DMARC, custom sending domains, or seed and inbox-placement testing, which caps this below the fuller stack. 4 5

Report an error

Consent, proof & tracking limits

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.

Report an error

The Skeptic

Opt-in forms and the promise that subscribers "can also edit their subscription or opt out at any time" are documented, and Track & Engage tracking is something you enable rather than something forced on. We found no public information on double opt-in, a stored consent record, one-click unsubscribe mechanics, or any way to limit or switch off open and click tracking per campaign. 5 6

Report an error

List ownership, import & exit

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.

Report an error

The Skeptic

Import is genuinely well covered — API, integrations, Excel spreadsheet, copy and paste, custom fields, tags, and automatic imports from CRM, store or ERP — and behavioural reporting can be exported "with a single click". We found no public information on export of the subscriber list itself, engagement history or unsubscribe state, nor on documented deletion of a subscriber across records, so the exit half of the question rests on nothing published. 2 4 5

Report an error

Integrations & API

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.

Report an error

The Skeptic

Named integrations include WordPress, Salesforce, Magento, Prestashop and WooCommerce, plus Zapier with "more than 1000 apps", webhooks, an API for building custom integrations, email parsers for shopping carts, and an official WhatsApp integration as a Meta Tech Provider. We found no public information on rate limits, webhook retries, a sandbox, or whether the named integrations are maintained and bidirectional. 2 6

Report an error

European sovereignty

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.

Report an error

The Skeptic

The independently sourced sovereignty attributes came back with nothing on record, and the captured pages are silent on hosting location, contracting entity, sending infrastructure and every subprocessor. For a buyer who weighs this heavily, the total absence of any documented EU option or named data-centre provider means this scores by what silence is worth, just above the confirmed-US floor. 1 4

Report an error

Pricing transparency not rated — the vendor publishes no price

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.

Report an error

The Skeptic

The only pricing facts published are a free account with no credit card, a 14-day trial, a "30 day money-back guarantee in any paid plan", and WhatsApp billed at "the direct cost to Meta" with no commissions. We found no public information on tier prices, send limits, overage rates or feature boundaries, so a buyer cannot compute even a rough invoice for their list size from these pages. 1 2

Report an error

Where this could be wrong

Evidence ages. The oldest capture behind this page is from 29 Sep 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 found no public information on compliance on the pages we read (e-goi.com, e-goi.com/marketing-automation, e-goi.com/features/ab-testing-for-email-marketing, e-goi.com/features/deliverability, e-goi.com/features/contact-management, e-goi.com/features/integrations-and-plugins). If the vendor publishes it somewhere else, send us the page. Know more? Tell us
3 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
1 integrations fact could not be confirmed on the vendor’s page as captured and was left out of this page and of the panel’s material. Know more? Tell us

Do you know more about E-goi? Tell us Report an error on this page

Sources (6)

The pages every claim on this page was read from — each one checked, dated, and kept verifiable.

1 Vendor page www.e-goi.com Checked 29 Sep 2026 Details →
2 Campaigns & automation — found from sitemap www.e-goi.com Checked 30 Sep 2026 Details →
3 Campaigns & automation — found from sitemap www.e-goi.com Checked 30 Sep 2026 Details →
4 Deliverability infrastructure — found from sitemap www.e-goi.com Checked 30 Sep 2026 Details →
5 List ownership, import & exit — found from sitemap www.e-goi.com Checked 30 Sep 2026 Details →
6 Integrations & API — found from sitemap www.e-goi.com Checked 30 Sep 2026 Details →