Email Marketing & Newsletter
Kit
Provenance unknown Report an error0–5 in half steps. 5 means the rubric's top anchor is met on the evidence.
by ConvertKit, LLC (d.b.a. Kit) · kit.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.
Kit at a glance
- Vendor
- ConvertKit, LLC (d.b.a. Kit)
- Headquarters
- Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 13 Oct 2026
- Data hosting
- Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 13 Oct 2026
- Free plan
- Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 13 Oct 2026
- Panel verdict
- The AI panel rates Kit 2/5, the mean of 6 judges. Kit, sold by ConvertKit, LLC, is an email marketing and newsletter tool whose strongest judged areas are integrations and list data control; its weakest are deliverability, consent and proof and sovereignty. how scores are made
- As of
- Vendor pages captured 13 Oct 2026; evaluated by the panel 15 Oct 2026. all sources
Read this page as one judge. Each weighs the same scores by what they care about.
The panel's verdict
Kit, sold by ConvertKit, LLC, is an email marketing and newsletter tool whose strongest judged areas are integrations and list data control; its weakest are deliverability, consent and proof and sovereignty. The integrations case rests on a versioned V4 REST API with API keys and OAuth2 including PKCE, documented rate limits, webhooks with retries and signature verification, and an app store third parties can publish to. List export runs through the same API — custom fields, tags, attribution, unsubscribe state and 90-day engagement aggregates — with bulk create for import. Campaign and automation scored 4-6 on a Visual Automation editor with a template library and Liquid dynamic content, though we found no public information on A/B testing or send-time optimisation. Deliverability evidence stops at bounced and complained as recorded states; consent evidence at an unsubscribe endpoint and sign-up attribution. The vendor named is a US LLC and the sovereignty record is empty; scores cluster within two points on every criterion, and no price, tier or send limit appears in any captured page.
Speaks for it
- Versioned V4 REST API with API keys and OAuth2 including PKCE, documented rate limits, and cursor pagination with bulk and async processing
- Webhooks documented with retries and signature verification
- App store that third parties can publish to, with the previous major version deprecated and its sunset announced
- Subscriber export via the API returning custom fields, tags, attribution, unsubscribe state and 90-day engagement aggregates, with bulk create for import
- Visual Automation editor with an automation template library and per-subscriber dynamic content in Liquid
Held against it
- We found no public information on SPF, DKIM or DMARC setup, custom sending domains or a documented bounce-handling policy
- We found no public information on double opt-in, a stored consent record, or any way to switch off the referrer, campaign and engagement tracking the subscriber record carries
- The documented subscriber endpoints include a delete for a subscriber's location only, and we found no public information on deleting a subscriber across all records
- The documented rate limit of 120 requests over a rolling 60 second period for API keys meters a full export
- The vendor named is a US LLC with no sovereignty attributes on record — we found no public information on hosting region or subprocessors
Best for
- You are building a custom integration or internal tool and want a documented, versioned API with OAuth2, webhooks and bulk processing — integrations scored 6-7
- You want your list portable, with subscriber export carrying custom fields, tags and state plus bulk create for moving in
- You are a creator or third-party developer distributing apps and pre-built automation templates through the Kit App Store
- You run tag- and segment-driven newsletter marketing with sequences, broadcasts and dynamic content in Liquid
Avoid if
- Your procurement requires a named hosting region, subprocessor list or EU safeguard — sovereignty scored 0-1 and the vendor named is ConvertKit, LLC
- You need documented deletion of a subscriber across all records — the documented endpoints cover deleting a subscriber's location only
- Your programme depends on documented SPF, DKIM or DMARC setup and bounce handling — deliverability scored 1-2, with the captured pages evidencing only recorded bounce and complaint states
- You must be able to limit or switch off per-subscriber tracking — attribution and engagement data are documented on the subscriber record and we found no public information on switching tracking off
The scores
| Criterion | Panel median |
|---|---|
| Campaigns & automation | 2.5 of 5 |
| Deliverability infrastructure | 1 of 5 |
| Consent, proof & tracking limits | 1 of 5 |
| List ownership, import & exit | 3 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
The developer pages evidence a Visual Automation builder with adoptable templates, dynamic content via Liquid, and segmentation by tags, custom fields and 90-day engagement metrics — more than a broadcast tool. However, we found no public information on branching logic, send-time optimisation or A/B testing of any kind, so significance reporting is out of reach on this evidence. A capable core with the measurement layer unproven. 1 2 3 5
The Deliverability Engineer
The Visual Automation editor with node-level notes, an automation template library, dynamic content via Liquid, sequences and segments are all real and documented, and broadcasts accept subscriber filters. We found no public information on A/B testing, send-time optimisation or holdout groups, so this clears reusable templates and triggered sequences but stops short of full lifecycle journeys. 1 2 5
The Data Protection Officer
A Visual Automation editor with pre-built templates, notes on nodes, per-subscriber dynamic content through Liquid, and sequences, segments and broadcasts all exposed in the API, with subscribers filterable by engagement and tags. We found no public information on A/B testing or send-time optimisation, which keeps this partway up the range. 1 2 5
The Shop Owner
The captured pages show a real automation engine — a Visual Automation builder with pre-built multi-step journeys, node notes, and dynamic content blocks driven by per-subscriber data, plus sequences, segments, broadcast subscriber filters, and filtering by engagement, sign-up date, state and tags. That is well past a welcome mail, but we found no public information on A/B testing or send-time optimisation, and nothing shop-specific like abandoned-cart or post-purchase flows. 1 2 3 5
The Integrator
The API surfaces sequences, segments, tags and email templates, and the Visual Automation editor supports pre-built automations with node notes and dynamic content via Liquid — a real journey surface, not just broadcasts. I found no public information on A/B testing, send-time optimisation or branching logic in the captured pages, which is what separates this band from the next. 1 2 5
The Skeptic
The developer pages show a real journey builder — a Visual Automation editor with nodes and notes, a template library, per-subscriber dynamic content in Liquid, and sequences, segments, tags and broadcasts as first-class API resources. But we found no public information on A/B testing, branching logic, or send-time optimisation in any captured page, and most of the documentation is written for app developers attaching templates rather than for the marketer running the journey. 1 2 3 5
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
We found no public information on SPF, DKIM or DMARC setup, custom sending domains, bounce suppression policy or complaint handling. The only signal is that subscriber states include bounced and complained, which shows the events are recorded without any documented policy around them. 3
The Deliverability Engineer
The only deliverability-relevant facts visible are that bounced and complained are first-class subscriber states and engagement is queryable over a rolling ninety-day window — raw material for list hygiene, not a policy. We found no public information on SPF, DKIM or DMARC setup, custom sending domains, warm-up, dedicated IPs, or any documented bounce and complaint handling, which is what my scoring rests on when nothing is documented. 3
The Data Protection Officer
The subscriber states include bounced and complained, so bounces and complaints are recorded and filterable as suppression states. We found no public information on SPF, DKIM or DMARC setup, custom sending domains, warm-up or list-hygiene guidance, so the rest of the criterion is unevidenced. 3
The Shop Owner
The only deliverability-relevant evidence is subscriber states for bounced and complained addresses with filters and sort options, which at least gives suppression data to work with. We found no public information on SPF, DKIM or DMARC setup, custom sending domains, or a stated bounce policy — for a revenue channel, that silence is close to the bottom of the scale. 3
The Integrator
The only deliverability-relevant material anywhere is that subscriber states include bounced and complained and can be filtered — bounce and complaint visibility, but nothing about handling policy. I found no public information on SPF, DKIM or DMARC setup, custom sending domains, dedicated IPs or warm-up, so this sits just above the floor on the strength of those states alone. 3
The Skeptic
Every captured page is API documentation; we found no public information on SPF, DKIM or DMARC setup, custom sending domains, dedicated IPs, or a stated bounce policy. The only trace is that subscriber states include bounced and complained, which shows the states are tracked but says nothing about how they are handled. 3
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
We found no public information on double opt-in, consent records, preference handling, or any option to limit or switch off open and click tracking. The captured pages do document per-subscriber attribution capture — referrer and five UTM parameters — plus an unsubscribe endpoint, so tracking and exit mechanics exist but nothing evidences proof or limits. 3
The Deliverability Engineer
The captured pages document an unsubscribe endpoint and rich per-subscriber attribution — referrer, UTM parameters, source mechanism — with no documented way to switch tracking off. We found no public information on double opt-in, stored consent records with source and wording, or unsubscribe handling across lists, so nothing here supports proof of consent. 3
The Data Protection Officer
Arrival is evidenced down to the mechanism — referrer, campaign parameters, source form and landing page — and an unsubscribe endpoint exists, which is more than a bare timestamp. But we found no public information on double opt-in, on storing the consented-to wording or IP, or on switching open and click tracking off, while engagement metrics are surfaced throughout the API. 3
The Shop Owner
Unsubscribe is a documented API operation with tracked states, and sign-up attribution — referrer, UTM parameters, form and landing-page source with timestamps — is stored per subscriber. But that is acquisition tracking, and we found no public information on double opt-in, a versioned consent record, one-click unsubscribe behaviour, or any way to limit or switch tracking off. 3
The Integrator
An unsubscribe endpoint and per-subscriber attribution — source type, source name, source mechanism, referrer and UTM parameters — give a partial record of how a subscriber arrived, better than a bare timestamp. I found no public information on double opt-in, versioned consent wording, unsubscribe honoured across lists, or any way to switch open and click tracking off, which keeps this below the mid band. 3
The Skeptic
The API offers an unsubscribe endpoint and records where a sign-up came from, down to the form, landing page and campaign parameters — and that is the entire evidence base. We found no public information on double opt-in, a stored consent record with the wording consented to, or any way to limit or switch off the referrer and campaign tracking the subscriber object carries. 3
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
The subscriber API returns the full record — custom fields, tags, state including cancelled and bounced, attribution, location, and engagement sent/opens/clicks over a 90-day window — with bulk create and cursor pagination, which is enough to sync the list elsewhere. We found no public information on documented deletion of a subscriber across all records or open-format export of campaigns, and the documented rate limit of 120 requests over a rolling 60-second period applies to any full pull. 3 4 6
The Deliverability Engineer
Subscribers export through the API with custom fields, tags, attribution, location and state — including cancelled, bounced and complained — and bulk-create brings them in, which is the full export plus a sync-capable API I look for, with unsubscribe state travelling alongside. The documented endpoint list shows no subscriber deletion, engagement arrives only as ninety-day aggregates, and documented request limits meter the exit, so I stop at this level. 3 4
The Data Protection Officer
Subscribers export with custom fields, subscription state including cancelled and bounced, attribution and tags, over a documented API with bulk create for import and cursor pagination. We found no public information on bulk export of engagement history, on export of past campaigns, or on documented deletion of a subscriber across all records. 3 4 2
The Shop Owner
The list leaves through a proper door: subscribers export via the API with custom fields, tags, subscription state, unsubscribe timestamps and per-subscriber engagement stats, and bulk create plus webhooks make syncing my order-enriched list elsewhere straightforward. What caps it is exit in the other sense — we found no public information on deleting a subscriber across all records; the documented deletion endpoint covers only a subscriber's pinned location. 2 3 4
The Integrator
The subscriber API exports custom fields, state and cancellation timestamp with cursor pagination, exposes per-subscriber engagement metrics over a ninety-day window, and bulk create plus custom-field CRUD make syncing to another system straightforward — the mid band is met comfortably. The documented subscriber endpoints cover deletion of a location only, and I found no public information on deleting a subscriber across all records or on full-fidelity export of campaigns and engagement history beyond what the API returns under its per-minute request limits. 2 3 4 6
The Skeptic
Subscribers export through the API with custom fields, tags, attribution, unsubscribe state and 90-day engagement aggregates, and bulk create brings them in with attributes intact — enough API to sync elsewhere. Short of the exit standard: the captured endpoints show a delete only for a subscriber's location rather than the subscriber across records, template listings return metadata rather than content, and the documented rate limit of 120 requests over a rolling 60 second period applies to the export itself. 2 3 4 6
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
This is the strongest surface: a versioned V4 REST API with API keys and OAuth2 including PKCE flows, documented rate limits, webhooks with retries and signature verification, bulk and async processing, and an app store where third parties publish. We found no public information on a sandbox or on maintained integrations with named shop or CRM systems — the e-commerce reference names no platform. 2 5 6
The Deliverability Engineer
A versioned V4 REST API with OAuth2 and API keys, documented rate limits per authentication type, cursor pagination with bulk and async processing, and webhooks with retries and signature verification — most of the way to a serious connection surface. We found no public information on named shop or CRM integrations, a sandbox, or a deprecation policy beyond the note that V3 is deprecated and will be sunset. 2 5 6
The Data Protection Officer
A documented versioned REST API with key and OAuth authentication including PKCE, explicit rate limits, webhooks with retries and signature verification, an app store third parties can publish to, and a stated sunset path for the previous major version. We found no public information on named bidirectional shop or CRM integrations or on a sandbox, which holds this below the top of the range. 5 6 2
The Shop Owner
This is the strongest area: a versioned API where the older version's sunset is announced, documented rate limits, OAuth with PKCE and refresh flows, cursor pagination, bulk and async processing, and webhooks with retries and signature verification; purchase data can be imported from e-commerce platforms. But we found no public information naming a shop platform or CRM, so wiring my orders, carts and products in means building and maintaining the bridge myself — and we found no public information on a sandbox. 2 5 6
The Integrator
This is an API I could genuinely build against: documented rate limits of 120 requests per rolling sixty seconds on keys and 600 on OAuth, webhooks documented with retries and signature verification, OAuth with PKCE and refresh-token flows, cursor pagination with bulk and async processing, and version three explicitly deprecated in favour of version four. What holds it below the top band is what I could not find: a sandbox environment, any named shop or CRM integration (only "purchase data from your favourite e-commerce platforms"), and transactional sending on the same API. 2 5 6
The Skeptic
This is the strongest surface in the capture: a versioned V4 REST API with keys and OAuth2 including PKCE, documented rate limits, webhooks with retries and signature verification, bulk and async processing, and an app store third parties can publish to, with V3 deprecated and a sunset announced. It stops short of the named-connections standard — no captured page names a single shop or CRM system ("your favourite e-commerce platforms" is as specific as it gets) — and we found no public information on a sandbox. 2 5 6
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
We found no public information on hosting location, contracting entity jurisdiction, certification, or any subprocessor touching the send. Given that subscriber behavioural data and pinned location are demonstrably processed through this platform, the silence on where that happens sits at the floor for a buyer who weights this heavily. 3 5
The Deliverability Engineer
The contracting entity is ConvertKit, LLC and there are no sovereignty attributes on record — no hosting location, no subprocessor list, no stated basis for the location pinning and engagement data the API demonstrably collects. The only named third-party dependency visible is that the developer documentation itself is built and hosted on Mintlify; where subscriber data lives is entirely unevidenced, and I weigh that heavily. 3 5
The Data Protection Officer
No sovereignty attributes are on record: we found no public information on hosting location, contracting entity, data-centre provider or any subprocessor list, and the captured pages are developer documentation only. Behavioural data per subscriber is central to the product, and where it lives is entirely unexplained, so this buyer scores the silence at the bottom. 5 6
The Shop Owner
No sovereignty attributes are on record at all: the vendor named is a US LLC, and we found no public information on hosting location, an EU contracting entity, or any subprocessor list. Per-subscriber behaviour — referrers, campaign attribution, engagement stats — is documented as tracked, and we found no public information on where it is processed or on what legal basis; for a shop whose customer list is the asset, I weigh that silence at the bottom of the scale. 3 5
The Integrator
No sovereignty attributes are on record, and I found no public information on hosting location, an EU contracting entity, or any subprocessor list — the contracting entity shown is a US limited liability company, and even the developer documentation is "built and hosted on Mintlify", a third-party platform in the chain. For a buyer weighting this heavily, silence on every sovereignty question is the bottom band. 5
The Skeptic
The contracting entity is a US LLC and the sovereignty record is empty — no captured page names a hosting region, a data-centre provider, a subprocessor, or any EU safeguard for any part of the chain. Meanwhile the subscriber object documents tracking of referrer, campaign parameters and location, with no stated basis or processing location for any of it. 3 5
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
We found no public information on tier prices, contact limits, send limits or overage rates. The only pricing-adjacent facts are that API eligibility and template adoption depend on the account plan, with no figures attached in the captured pages. 1 5
The Deliverability Engineer
No price of any kind appears in the captured pages — not tiers, not send limits, not overage, not VAT treatment. The only plan-related fact is that API use depends on the authenticated account's plan being eligible, which tells a buyer nothing about the invoice they would face. 5
The Data Protection Officer
The only pricing-adjacent statement in the captures is that a plan must be "eligible" for API use, which gates features without naming tiers. We found no public information on tier prices, contact or send limits, overage rates or VAT treatment, so no invoice can be computed from the evidence. 5
The Shop Owner
None of the captured pages contains a price, a contact tier, or a send limit, so I cannot compute an invoice for my list size and send volume at all. The only pricing-adjacent statement is that API use depends on the account's plan being eligible, and we found no public information on what makes a plan eligible or what any tier costs. 5
The Integrator
No price of any kind appears in the captured material — no tiers, no contact limits, no send limits, no overage rates. The only cost-adjacent statement is that the authenticated account's "plan must be eligible for use with the API", which gates a capability behind an unnamed, unpriced tier. 5
The Skeptic
No captured page states a single price, tier, send limit or overage rate; we found no public information on pricing at all. The only cost-adjacent signal is that API use and template adoption depend on "the creator's plan" — capability gating whose boundaries are themselves unpublished. 1 5
Questions about Kit
Is Kit European?
Not determined: the vendor’s pages as captured do not say where Kit is based.
Where does Kit store data?
Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 13 Oct 2026.
Does Kit have a free plan?
Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 13 Oct 2026.
What are the best alternatives to Kit?
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: Kit alternatives.
Where this could be wrong
- Evidence ages. The oldest capture behind this page is from 13 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 found no public information on compliance on the pages we read (developers.kit.com/kit-app-store/va-templates, developers.kit.com/api-reference/email-templates/list-email-templates, developers.kit.com/api-reference/subscribers/list-subscribers, developers.kit.com/api-reference/custom-fields/list-custom-fields, developers.kit.com/api-reference/overview, developers.kit.com/api-reference/authentication). If the vendor publishes it somewhere else, send us the page. Know more? Tell us
- 5 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
- 1 product 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
- 1 support 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
- 6 of the readings below were written against an earlier fact sheet — a fact has been corrected, added or pulled since. Until the panel next runs on this product you are reading the older judgement. Know more? Tell us
Sources (6)
The pages every claim on this page was read from — each one checked, dated, and kept verifiable.
- 1 Campaigns & automation — found from sitemap developers.kit.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
- 2 Campaigns & automation — found from sitemap developers.kit.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
- 3 List ownership, import & exit — found from sitemap developers.kit.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
- 4 List ownership, import & exit — found from sitemap developers.kit.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
- 5 Integrations & API — found from sitemap developers.kit.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
- 6 Integrations & API — found from sitemap developers.kit.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →