Email Marketing & Newsletter
Mailjet
EU origin, foreign-owned Report an errorPanel 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.
by Mailjet SAS · www.mailjet.com
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 panel's verdict
Mailjet — Mailjet SAS in Paris, owned by US-based Sinch since 2019 — scores highest on campaign automation and integrations, both at 6-7: a no-code visual builder whose Event, Timer, Action and Condition blocks branch on customer behaviour, subject and content A/B testing, and a REST API and SMTP relay carrying marketing and transactional mail with libraries in six languages. Consent and proof scores 5-6 on recipient-level tracking consent, grantable, deniable or withdrawable per contact on every plan including Free. It is weakest on list data control at 3-4, where import and bulk deletion are documented but we found no public information on exporting subscribers, engagement history or unsubscribe state, and on sovereignty at 3-4, where the captured pages give different figures on data residency — the security page says storage exclusively within the EU, the privacy notice a customer-selected United States or Europe region with no stated default — and every named host is US-headquartered regardless of region. Deliverability spans 4-6: higher scores credit the documented dedicated-IP warm-up programme, lower ones the pages' silence on DMARC guidance, bounce suppression and complaint-loop handling.
Speaks for it
- Documented no-code visual builder with Event, Timer, Action and Condition blocks that branch on customer behaviour, plus ready-made workflow templates.
- One REST API and SMTP relay carry both marketing and transactional sending, with libraries in six languages, sandbox mode and per-event webhooks configurable through UI or API.
- Recipients can grant, deny or withdraw open- and click-tracking consent per contact without unsubscribing, on every plan including Free.
- Signup forms come with double opt-in built in, and GDPR consents are stored alongside contact properties.
- Dedicated IPs on Premium and Custom come with a customised warm-up plan plus reputation and blacklist help from support teams and technical account managers.
Held against it
- Import and bulk deletion are documented, but we found no public information on exporting subscribers, engagement history or unsubscribe state.
- The captured pages give different figures on data residency: the security page says storage exclusively within the EU, the privacy notice a customer-selected United States or Europe region with no stated default.
- The named hosts — Google Cloud Platform, AWS, MacStadium, Rackspace — are US-headquartered regardless of region, and the subprocessor chain names US payment providers and a US-based Sinch company.
- We found no public information on DMARC guidance, automatic hard-bounce suppression or complaint-loop handling.
- The captured pricing pages state no actual price figures, send limits, overage rates or VAT treatment.
Best for
- You need marketing and transactional email on one documented API with SMTP relay, per-event webhooks, sandbox mode and libraries in six languages.
- Your team builds no-code journeys that branch on customer behaviour and trigger on contact-property updates like last purchase or loyalty status.
- You need recipients to control open and click tracking per contact, including on the free plan.
- You send more than 100,000 emails a month and can apply for a dedicated IP on Premium or Custom with a customised warm-up plan.
Avoid if
- Your procurement requires EU-resident processing — ask the vendor: the public pages we read do not show it
- Your exit plan depends on product-level export — the pages document import and bulk deletion, and we found no public information on export of subscribers, engagement history or unsubscribe state.
- You rely on prebuilt shop or CRM connectors — the captured pages count over one hundred integrations without naming any shop or CRM system.
The scores
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 drag-and-drop editor with a template library, segment-targeted welcome journeys, triggers on contact-property updates like last purchase, and a visual builder whose Event, Timer, Action and Condition blocks branch on customer behaviour cover most of what a lifecycle programme needs. A/B testing is documented for subject lines and content, but we found no public information on tests reporting statistical significance, on send-time optimisation, or on holdout groups for measurement — a real journey tool, not yet an instrumented one. 2 5 6 11
The Deliverability Engineer
A visual builder with Event, Timer, Action and Condition blocks that branch on customer behaviour, a drag-and-drop editor, subject and content A/B testing, dynamic personalisation and contact-property-triggered mail cover the mid anchor fully and much of the next one up. We found no public information on send-time optimisation, significance reporting for tests, or holdout groups for measurement. 2 5 6 11
The Data Protection Officer
A visual builder with Event, Timer, Action and Condition blocks branches on customer behaviour, backed by a template library, subject and content A/B testing, dynamic-value personalisation and segmentation — most of the way to the top of the range. We found no public information on send-time optimisation or on testing that reports significance rather than raw counts. 2 5 6 11
The Shop Owner
A drag-and-drop editor with template library, subject and content testing, segment-based welcome flows and a no-code builder with Event, Timer, Action and Condition blocks that branch on behaviour are all documented. Property-update triggers such as last purchase or loyalty status suit a shop, but we found no public information on send-time optimisation, test results reported with significance, or cart-abandonment entry from a shop system. 2 5 6 11
The Integrator
The visual builder is documented with event, timer, action and condition blocks that branch on customer behaviour, workflow templates are ready-made, A/B testing covers subject lines and content, and automation can enter on contact-property updates the API can write — so journeys react to data from other systems. We found no public information on send-time optimisation, on testing that reports significance, or on holdout groups, which is what separates this from the top band. 2 5 6 13
The Skeptic
A no-code visual builder with Event, Timer, Action and Condition blocks and branching on customer behaviour is documented, alongside workflow templates, property-update triggers, segmentation and subject/content A/B testing. We found no public information on send-time optimisation or significance reporting for tests, which is what separates this from the top band. 2 5 6 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
SPF and DKIM setup is documented with DNS guidance, dedicated IPs on Premium and Custom come with a customised warm-up plan built with the customer, and support teams and technical account managers are documented to monitor reputation and help avoid blocklists — more than hand-waving. We found no public information on DMARC guidance, complaint-loop handling or automatic hard-bounce suppression, which leaves the documented foundation incomplete despite CSA certification since 2014 and real-time tracking of opens, clicks, bounces and blocks. 7 8 13
The Deliverability Engineer
SPF and DKIM setup is documented and the dedicated-IP programme is genuinely documented — a neutral-reputation IP with a vendor-built warm-up plan, reputation and blacklist help from support teams and technical account managers, automatic spam-list removal, and Certified Senders Alliance status since 2014. But we found no public information on DMARC guidance, a bounce-suppression policy, complaint-loop handling, or engagement-based sunsetting, and for me that silence is what the score rests on. 4 7 8 13
The Data Protection Officer
SPF and DKIM setup is documented step by step, dedicated IPs come with a customised warm-up plan, support teams and technical account managers are documented to monitor reputation and resolve blocklist issues, and automatic spam list removal is stated. We found no public information on DMARC guidance, automatic hard-bounce suppression, seed or inbox-placement testing, or engagement-based sunsetting. 4 7 8 13
The Shop Owner
SPF and DKIM setup is documented with a dedicated-IP option on Premium and Custom plans, a customised warm-up plan and support teams monitoring reputation and blacklists. We found no public information on DMARC guidance, a stated hard-bounce suppression policy or complaint-loop handling, which leaves the documented base thin. 7 8 13
The Integrator
SPF and DKIM setup is documented for custom sending domains, dedicated IPs on Premium and Custom come with a vendor-run warm-up plan, automatic spam-list removal is stated, and support teams plus technical account managers are documented as monitoring reputation and resolving blocklist issues on the sender's behalf. We found no public information on DMARC guidance, an explicit hard-bounce suppression policy, or engagement-based sunsetting, so the evidence lands mid-range. 2 7 8 13
The Skeptic
SPF and DKIM setup is documented, and dedicated IPs with a customised warm-up plan and vendor-side reputation monitoring by support and technical account managers are written down — past the shared-only floor. We found no public information on DMARC guidance, an automatic hard-bounce suppression policy or complaint-loop handling, which the middle band is built on. 7 8 13
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
Double opt-in is integrated into signup forms, GDPR consents are stored alongside contact properties, and the tracking-consent release is genuinely granular — recipients grant, deny or revoke open and click tracking per contact, collected via form opt-in, list import or individual edit, on every plan including Free. A preference centre lets subscribers choose content. We found no public information on whether double opt-in is the documented default, on what the consent record stores beyond the status, or on unsubscribe handling across lists. 2 9 10 12
The Deliverability Engineer
Recipient-level tracking consent — grant, deny or withdraw per contact without unsubscribing, collected via sign-up forms, list imports or the contact profile, on every plan including Free — is more granular than a per-campaign tracking switch, and a preference centre is documented. Double opt-in is documented as integrated rather than the default, and we found no public information on what the stored GDPR consent record actually contains, on versioned consent wording, or on unsubscribe being honoured across lists. 3 2 9 10 12
The Data Protection Officer
Double opt-in is integrated in the signup forms, the tool states it stores GDPR consents with contact properties, and tracking consent lets each recipient grant, deny or withdraw open and click tracking without unsubscribing, on every plan including the free one — a genuine tracking limit. What the stored consent record contains is not documented: we found no public information on source, IP or versioned form wording, on unsubscribe honoured across lists, or on retention rules for inactive subscribers, and that proof is what has to survive a complaint. 2 9 10 12
The Shop Owner
Recipients can grant, deny or revoke open and click tracking per person without unsubscribing, with consent status stored in the contact profile, and double opt-in plus GDPR consent storage are built into the forms — that is ahead of simple per-campaign tracking switches. We found no public information on versioned form wording retrievable per subscriber, tracking off by default, or retention rules for inactive subscribers. 2 9 10 12
The Integrator
Double opt-in is documented in the signup forms, GDPR consents are stored alongside contact properties, and the tracking-consent feature is genuinely granular — recipients grant, deny or withdraw consent to open and click tracking individually, held in the contact profile and available on every plan including free. We found no public information on whether double opt-in is the default, on a consent record carrying source and consented wording, or on unsubscribe honoured across lists, which is what proof-of-consent would rest on. 2 9 10 12
The Skeptic
Double opt-in is built into signup forms, GDPR consents are stored with the contact, and a granular tracking-consent feature lets each recipient grant, deny or withdraw open- and click-tracking on every plan including the free one. We found no public information on whether double opt-in is the default, on consent records carrying source and wording, or on how unsubscribe is honoured across lists. 2 9 10 12
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
Import is well documented — CSV, TXT and XLS upload with automatic error screening and duplicate filtering, plus contact-property updates by API or periodic imports — and bulk review, search and deletion of contacts exists. We found no public information on full export including engagement history and unsubscribe state, on export throttling, or on any migration tooling; portability appears only as a data-subject right in the privacy notice, so exit as a product feature is not evidenced. 5 11 12
The Deliverability Engineer
Import is documented across CSV, TXT and XLS with automatic error screening and duplicate filtering, contacts can be deleted in bulk, and contact properties can be updated by API or periodic CSV import. We found no public information on export of subscriber fields, engagement history or unsubscribe state, or on any account-level export or migration tooling — the exit path is the blank that decides this. 5 11 12
The Data Protection Officer
Import takes CSV, TXT and XLS with automatic error screening and duplicate filtering, contacts can be deleted in bulk, and contact properties can be updated via API or periodic imports. We found no public information on export of engagement history or unsubscribe state, on full-fidelity account export, or on migration tooling in either direction — for a sender whose subscriber history must remain theirs, that silence weighs. 5 11 12
The Shop Owner
Importing CSV, TXT and XLS files with error screening and duplicate filtering, updating contact properties via API, and bulk deletion of contacts are all shipped features. We found no public information on exporting subscribers with engagement history and unsubscribe state, or on export throttling, so I cannot confirm the list leaves in one piece. 5 11 12
The Integrator
Import is fine for my purposes: CSV, TXT and XLS with properties and consents stored natively, error screening, duplicate filtering, property updates via API, and bulk delete of contacts is documented. We found no public information on subscriber export including custom attributes, subscription and unsubscribe state, on engagement-history or template export, or on export throttling — so exit stays unevidenced even though deletion is. 5 11 12
The Skeptic
Import is documented down to file formats, duplicate filtering and error screening, contacts can be reviewed, searched and deleted in bulk, and the API can update contact data. We found no public information on exporting subscribers, engagement history or unsubscribe state, so the exit side of the ledger is unevidenced. 5 11 12
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
Transactional and marketing sending share one REST API with SMTP relay, SDKs in six languages, a sandbox mode, inbound parsing, and per-event webhooks configurable by UI or a single API call, with events pushable into external queuing systems — this is a component, not a destination. Over a hundred pre-built integrations are claimed, but we found no public information naming a specific shop or CRM platform among them, and none on webhook retries or documented rate limits. 1 2 13 14
The Deliverability Engineer
A REST send API with SMTP relay, libraries in six languages, sandbox mode, per-event webhooks configurable by UI or API, inbound parsing, and marketing and transactional sending on one API is a surface a developer can genuinely build against. We found no public information on documented rate limits, webhook retries or API versioning, and the advertised 100+ prebuilt integrations are not named in the captured pages, so shop and CRM coverage is unverified. 1 2 13 14
The Data Protection Officer
One REST API and SMTP relay carry both marketing and transactional sending, libraries exist for PHP, Ruby, Python, C#, Java and Node.js, webhooks are configurable per event type through the UI or a single API call, events push into external queuing systems, and a sandbox mode is documented. The captured pages count over one hundred integrations without naming any shop or CRM system, and we found no public information on webhook retries, documented rate limits or an API deprecation policy. 1 2 13 14
The Shop Owner
A documented REST API and SMTP relay carrying marketing and transactional sends on one platform, real-time event webhooks configurable per event type, sandbox mode, inbound parsing and libraries in six languages give a solid build surface. The claimed 100-plus prebuilt integrations name no shop or CRM system in anything captured, and we found no public information on webhook retries or API rate limits — as a shop owner I cannot see my platform named. 1 2 13 14
The Integrator
This is a real connection surface: a documented send API and SMTP relay covering marketing and transactional mail on one platform, real-time event webhooks configurable per event type through both interface and API, push into external queuing systems, inbound parse, sandbox mode and SDKs in six languages. But we found no public information on rate limits, webhook retry behaviour, API versioning or a deprecation policy, and the captured pages give an integration count of over one hundred while we found no named shop or CRM systems among them — so I would be building against undocumented operational limits. 1 2 13 14
The Skeptic
Marketing and transactional sending run on one API and SMTP relay with libraries in six languages, sandbox mode, per-event webhooks configurable via API and UI, inbound parsing, and push of events into external queuing systems. We found no public information on named shop or CRM systems behind the 'over 100 integrations' claim, on documented rate limits, or on retry behaviour for webhooks. 1 2 13 14
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 give different figures on where data lives: one claims storage exclusively within the EU, the privacy notice says United States or Europe based on customer selection with no stated default, and neither confirms the contracting entity's jurisdiction on the vendor's own pages. Credit for publishing a subprocessor list with purposes — Google Cloud, AWS, Rackspace, Stripe, Zendesk and others — and for naming transfer mechanisms including standard contractual clauses. But US-headquartered hosts in either region, US payment providers and a US-based Sinch company in the chain mean this is not a sovereign answer, and I weigh that heavily. 3 4 13
The Deliverability Engineer
The captured pages give different figures for where data lives — the security page says data centers exclusively within the EU, while the privacy notice says each deployment is customer-selected in the United States or Europe — and the named hosts are US-headquartered regardless of region, with US payment processors and a US-based Sinch entity in the chain. Transfer safeguards (standard contractual clauses, the Data Privacy Framework, binding corporate rules) and a full subprocessor list are published, but the contracting jurisdiction is not confirmed on the captured pages and EU hosting is not stated as the default — and for this buyer that weighs heavily. 3 4 13
The Data Protection Officer
The captured pages give different figures for where data lives: the privacy notice offers a selectable United States or Europe region with no stated default, while the security page claims storage exclusively within the European Union. Hosting runs with US-headquartered providers (Google Cloud Platform, AWS, MacStadium, Rackspace), transfers out of the EEA rest on standard contractual clauses and the data privacy framework, and a US-based group company is certified under that framework — the answer on where behavioural data lives requires exactly the transfer argument I want to avoid. The subprocessor list is published and a group data protection officer is named, but the contracting entity behind the notice is the Swedish-listed parent and its jurisdiction is not confirmed on the vendor's own pages. 3 4
The Shop Owner
The platform region is customer-selected between the United States and Europe, yet every named host — Google Cloud Platform, AWS, MacStadium, Rackspace — is US-headquartered regardless of region, and the published subprocessor chain names US payment and support providers alongside a US-based Sinch company certified under the EU-US Data Privacy Framework. The captured pages give different claims on whether data is stored exclusively in the EU, and we found no public information confirming the contracting entity's jurisdiction on the vendor's own pages. 3 2 4
The Integrator
The server region is customer-selected between the United States and Europe rather than EU-standard, the captured pages give different figures on whether data stays exclusively in the EU, and the contracting entity's jurisdiction is not confirmed on the vendor's own pages while the notice names US-headquartered hosts, US payment providers and a US-based Sinch company in the chain. Credit where due: the subprocessor list is published in detail, transfer mechanisms are stated, and a group data protection officer is reachable — but the chain rests on standard contractual clauses and the Data Privacy Framework rather than staying inside the EU. 3 4
The Skeptic
The contracting entity is Sinch Email / Sinch AB (publ) and a subprocessor list is published, but deployment region is customer-selected between the United States and Europe with no stated default, and the named hosts are US-headquartered regardless of region. The captured pages give different figures for data residency — the security page says data is stored exclusively within the EU while the privacy notice describes US hosting — and the notice's transfer safeguards run through a US-based group entity certified under the EU-US Data Privacy Framework. 3 1 4
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 pricing model is public — volume-based on emails sent per month rather than list size, unlimited contacts on Essential and Premium, a free trial, no setup fees and cancel anytime — but we found no public price figures, per-tier send limits, overage rates or VAT treatment on the captured pricing pages. A sender cannot compute the real invoice from what is published. 1 2 13
The Deliverability Engineer
The model is stated plainly — priced per emails sent per month rather than list size, unlimited contacts on Essential and Premium, no setup fees, cancel anytime — but the captured pages give no actual price figures, no send limits per tier, no overage rates and no VAT treatment. The dedicated-IP add-on on Premium and Custom is described with volume thresholds but without a price, so a sender cannot compute the invoice from these pages. 8 13
The Data Protection Officer
The captured pages describe the model — volume-based on emails sent per month rather than list size, unlimited contacts on the Essential and Premium plans, a free trial without credit card, no setup fees, cancel anytime, and dedicated IPs restricted to Premium and Custom — but no price figure appears in what was captured. We found no public information on tier prices, send limits, overage rates or VAT treatment, so a sender cannot compute a real invoice from these pages. 8 13
The Shop Owner
The model is public — volume-based on emails sent per month, unlimited contacts on the named Essential and Premium plans, a free tier, no setup fees — but the captured pricing pages state no actual price figures, send limits, overage rates or VAT treatment. I cannot compute a monthly invoice for my list from public information, and dedicated IPs sit in Premium and Custom with no price stated. 2 8 13
The Integrator
The billing model is stated — price by emails sent per month, with unlimited contacts on Essential and Premium — and dedicated IPs are placed in Premium and Custom. But we found no public information on tier prices, send limits, overage rates or VAT treatment in the captured pages, so no invoice for any list size and send volume can be computed from public pages alone. 1 2 8 13
The Skeptic
The pricing model is stated — billed by emails sent per month rather than list size, unlimited contacts on Essential and Premium, no setup fees, cancel anytime — and dedicated IPs are tied to Premium and Custom plans. We found no public information on any actual price figure, per-tier send limits, overage rates or VAT treatment, so a buyer cannot compute an invoice from what is published. 8 13
European sovereignty — proven facts
1 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 ⚠ unverified | — | uncited Report an error |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ownership | Publicly listed ⚠ unverified | 1/2 pts | 3 Report an error |
| Data residency | Not determined ⚠ unverified | — | uncited Report an error |
| Subprocessors | Not determined ⚠ unverified | — | uncited 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 — Ownership. Listing is only implied by the Swedish "(publ)" designation in the company name — no stock exchange is named — and the excerpt does not state the parent's country.
- Weak sourcing — Legal entity, Data residency, Subprocessors. Not confirmed on the vendor’s own pages as captured.
- 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.
- 39 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
- 14 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
- 7 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 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
- 4 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 hosting 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 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
- 3 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
Sources (14)
The pages every claim on this page was read from — each one checked, dated, and kept verifiable.
- 1 Vendor homepage www.mailjet.de Checked 5 Oct 2026 +1 earlier capture: 30 Aug 2026 Details →
- 2 Pricing www.mailjet.de Checked 5 Oct 2026 +1 earlier capture: 30 Aug 2026 Details →
- 3 Privacy policy www.mailjet.com Checked 5 Oct 2026 +1 earlier capture: 15 Sep 2026 Details →
- 4 Privacy policy www.mailjet.com Checked 5 Oct 2026 Details →
- 5 Campaigns & automation — found from sitemap www.mailjet.com Checked 5 Oct 2026 Details →
- 6 Campaigns & automation — found from sitemap www.mailjet.com Checked 5 Oct 2026 Details →
- 7 Deliverability infrastructure — found from sitemap www.mailjet.com Checked 5 Oct 2026 Details →
- 8 Deliverability infrastructure — found from sitemap www.mailjet.com Checked 5 Oct 2026 Details →
- 9 Consent, proof & tracking limits — found from sitemap www.mailjet.com Checked 5 Oct 2026 Details →
- 10 Consent, proof & tracking limits — found from sitemap www.mailjet.com Checked 5 Oct 2026 Details →
- 11 List ownership, import & exit — found from sitemap www.mailjet.com Checked 5 Oct 2026 Details →
- 12 List ownership, import & exit — found from sitemap www.mailjet.com Checked 5 Oct 2026 Details →
- 13 Integrations & API — found from sitemap www.mailjet.com Checked 5 Oct 2026 Details →
- 14 Integrations & API — found from sitemap www.mailjet.com Checked 5 Oct 2026 Details →