Email Marketing & Newsletter

MailerLite

EU-Made Report an error

Panel rating · 6 judges · How to read the stars

Category median

Sovereignty: 1 of 4 dimensions proven

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

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 three editors, template library and genuinely deep segmentation — engagement, geography, purchase history, signup source, combinable custom fields with auto-updating segments — are publicly documented, and automations go well beyond a single welcome mail with per-form and group triggers plus tiered automation counts. But I found no public information on subject-line A/B testing for senders, journey branching, dynamic content, or significance reporting; the only A/B testing in evidence is the vendor testing its own product through an analytics subprocessor. 2 1 2 6 9

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

Domain authentication is documented down to the record types — DKIM as CNAME, SPF as TXT, domain verification TXT — with an automatic DNS flow and a pending status while records propagate, and the bounce policy is stated precisely: hard bounces auto-removed, three consecutive soft bounces treated as hard. I found no public information on DMARC guidance, complaint-loop handling, warm-up for the Enterprise dedicated IP, or any inbox-placement testing; deliverability support sits inside an unpriced top tier. 2 7 8

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

Double opt-in is on by default, customisable per form, and enforceable for API and integration signups — a documented default, which is more than most show. I found no public information on stored consent proof per subscriber (source, IP, versioned wording), on whether the opt-out link is one-click, on any way to limit or switch off open and click tracking, or on documented handling of access and erasure requests for the customer's subscribers; a preference centre exists but only from the Comfort tier up, and editing the confirmation email is itself paid-only. 3 2 9

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 real work — CSV/TXT, Excel paste, single adds, API, direct from Mailchimp, field mapping and duplicate cleanup — and export covers custom fields via column selection, status segments including unsubscribed, bounced and spam complaints, per-campaign activity export and automation-flow export, with a documented API to sync elsewhere. I found no public information on exporting whole campaigns or templates, on full-account export, or on throttling; deletion is documented at account level within 30 days, but not per subscriber across all records, and the export function is administrators-only. 3 11 12 13

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

Shopify, WooCommerce, WordPress, Zapier and Canva are named with 100+ claimed, and the webhook subsystem is the strongest thing here: fifteen events, full create-update-delete management, HMAC-SHA256 signatures, three retries with stated delays, delivery inspection and batching to respect the rate limits. I found no public information on a sandbox or on the vendor maintaining the shop integrations bidirectionally rather than listing them; API sending is also withheld on the free tier. 1 2 13 14

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

For an EEA buyer the contract lands with an Irish entity and data sits in Germany and the Netherlands — but the infrastructure is Google Cloud Platform, a US-headquartered provider, with the EU-residency claim living in FAQ and trust-page copy rather than contract text. The published subprocessor list names US processors for support (Intercom), AI (OpenAI, Google Vertex AI) and payments (Stripe) without stated hosting regions, and a Delaware entity with a Data Privacy Framework certification serves every billing address outside the EEA, UK and Switzerland. 3 3 4

Report an error

Pricing transparency

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

Tier prices, billing periods, seats and send ceilings are public — "$0" with 250 subscribers and locked sending rather than billed, "$12" list price for Comfort at 5,000 sends with the stated "10× the ceiling of your subscriber tier", "$25" for Power with unlimited sends — and the overage behaviour is stated plainly: the tier auto-upgrades and the card is charged. But Enterprise and its dedicated IP carry no number, VAT treatment is only "All prices may be subject to applicable taxes", and the captured pricing pages show nothing above the 500-subscriber rung of the contact staircase. 2 2 2

Report an error

European sovereignty — proven facts

1 of 4 dimensions proven

Built 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 ⚠ unverified	—	uncited Report an error
Ownership	Not determined	—	uncited Report an error
Data residency	Not determined ⚠ unverified	—	uncited Report an error
Subprocessors	US CLOUD Act reach ⚠ unverified	0/2 pts	3 Report an error

Where this could be wrong

Evidence ages. The oldest capture behind this page is from 30 Aug 2026. Vendors change pricing and policies without notice; every fact reflects its source as of the capture date shown in the registry.
Weak sourcing — Legal entity, Data residency. Not confirmed on the vendor’s own pages as captured.
Weak sourcing — Subprocessors. Intercom is US-headquartered and the policy does not state its hosting region; the policy also names other US-based processors of product data (OpenAI, Google Vertex AI, Stripe for payments), while no subscriber Personal Data goes to Intercom unless the customer uploads it to the live chat.
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.

46 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
27 pricing 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
23 compliance 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
8 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
3 subprocessors 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 legal 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 data 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
2 sovereignty dimensions could not be confirmed on the vendor’s own pages and are shown as unknown. 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
The panel’s written verdict is withheld: our own re-read found claims in it that the evidence does not carry, and a second synthesis did not fix them. The scores and the material below are unaffected. Know more? Tell us

Do you know more about MailerLite? Tell us Report an error on this page

Sources (14)

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

1 Vendor homepage www.mailerlite.com Checked 5 Oct 2026 +3 earlier captures: 28 Sep 2026, 16 Sep 2026, 30 Aug 2026 Details →
2 Pricing www.mailerlite.com Checked 5 Oct 2026 +3 earlier captures: 16 Sep 2026, 15 Sep 2026, 30 Aug 2026 Details →
3 Privacy policy www.mailerlite.com Checked 5 Oct 2026 +1 earlier capture: 16 Sep 2026 Details →
4 Security / trust page www.mailerlite.com Checked 5 Oct 2026 Details →
5 Campaigns & automation — found from sitemap www.mailerlite.com Checked 5 Oct 2026 +1 earlier capture: 30 Sep 2026 Details →
6 Campaigns & automation — found from sitemap www.mailerlite.com Checked 5 Oct 2026 Details →
7 Deliverability infrastructure — found from sitemap www.mailerlite.com Checked 5 Oct 2026 Details →
8 Deliverability infrastructure — found from sitemap www.mailerlite.com Checked 5 Oct 2026 Details →
9 Consent, proof & tracking limits — found from sitemap www.mailerlite.com Checked 5 Oct 2026 Details →
10 Consent, proof & tracking limits — found from sitemap www.mailerlite.com Checked 5 Oct 2026 +1 earlier capture: 30 Sep 2026 Details →
11 List ownership, import & exit — found from sitemap www.mailerlite.com Checked 5 Oct 2026 Details →
12 List ownership, import & exit — found from sitemap www.mailerlite.com Checked 5 Oct 2026 Details →
13 Integrations & API — found from sitemap developers.mailerlite.com Checked 5 Oct 2026 Details →
14 Integrations & API — found from sitemap www.mailerlite.com Checked 5 Oct 2026 Details →