Which ESPs pay Validity for ARF reports and how is the data used?

Summary

Many ESPs utilize ARF reports (or similar feedback loop data like FBLs) to monitor and manage email deliverability, enabling them to identify and address spam traps, high complaint rates, and other issues impacting sender reputation. While some, like Acoustic, may directly pay Validity for ARF data, many do not. This data provides insights into complaint trends, helps normalize complaint rates based on sending volume, and supports proactive management of email programs. Key uses include identifying sources of abuse, improving email authentication practices, refining targeting and messaging, and taking corrective action against spammers. Mailbox providers also leverage complaint data from feedback loops to inform their deliverability decisions. While ARF data is valuable, alternative metrics may be more effective for pinpointing specific instances of abuse. Processing ARF data manually can be complex, necessitating dedicated tools and services. Monitoring complaint rates and participating in feedback loops are crucial for maintaining a good sender reputation.

Key findings

  • ARF Utility: ARF reports (or similar FBL data) are widely used by ESPs to monitor complaints, improve deliverability, and maintain sender reputation.
  • Data Normalization: Normalizing complaint rates based on sending volume provides a more accurate picture of sender reputation.
  • Proactive Management: ARF data enables proactive management of email programs, including identifying and penalizing abusive senders.
  • Deliverability Impact: Mailbox providers use feedback loop data to inform deliverability decisions, impacting message filtering and blocking.
  • Actionable Insights: Analyzing ARF reports allows senders to identify and address problematic sending practices, refine targeting, and improve messaging.

Key considerations

  • Alternative Metrics: While ARF reports are valuable, other metrics may be more effective for identifying specific instances of abuse.
  • Processing Complexity: Parsing ARF reports manually can be complex, requiring dedicated tools or services for automation and analysis.
  • Feedback Loop Importance: Participating in feedback loops (FBLs) and acting on the data is crucial for maintaining a good sender reputation.
  • Data Aggregation: Data may be aggregated by date and not campaign.

What email marketers say
16Marketer opinions

Many ESPs utilize ARF reports (or similar feedback loop data) to monitor and manage their email deliverability. While some ESPs directly pay Validity for ARF data (Acoustic is mentioned as an example), many others do not. The data from ARF reports and feedback loops is used to identify sources of abuse, improve sender reputation, manage complaint rates, and ultimately maintain the health of outbound email servers. ESPs analyze this data to identify spammers, understand complaint trends, normalize complaint rates based on volume, and take corrective action against abusive sending practices. Aggregate data can be used internally and presented to users to provide context. Normalizing complaint rates is important. It is often aggregated by date not campaign. While ARF data is helpful it's not a particularly good way to find abuse, other metrics are better. Mailbox providers also leverage this complaint data to inform deliverability decisions.

Key opinions

  • ARF Usage: ESPs use ARF reports (or similar FBL data) to monitor complaints and improve deliverability, identifying issues like spam traps and high complaint rates.
  • Data Aggregation: ARF data is often aggregated by date, not campaign, to understand complaint trends.
  • Normalization: Many ESPs normalize complaint rates based on sending volume, providing a more accurate picture of sender reputation.
  • Proactive Management: ARF data enables ESPs to proactively manage their network, penalize abusive senders, and protect overall reputation.
  • Deliverability Decisions: Mailbox providers use complaint data from feedback loops to inform deliverability decisions, impacting whether messages are blocked or filtered.

Key considerations

  • ARF Alternatives: While ARF reports are valuable, other metrics may be more effective for identifying specific instances of abuse.
  • Data Parsing Complexity: Manually parsing ARF reports can be complex, necessitating dedicated tools or services for automation and analysis.
  • Feedback Loop Participation: Participating in feedback loops (FBLs) and acting on the data is crucial for maintaining good sender reputation.
  • Actionable Insights: The value of ARF data lies in taking corrective action based on the insights gained, such as improving email content or adjusting sending practices.
  • Data Accuracy: Validity data is often aggregated by date rather than campaign.
Marketer view

Email marketer from Email Geeks shares that Acoustic is getting ARF report data, so assumes they are paying for it.

April 2021 - Email Geeks
Marketer view

Email marketer from Email Vendor Selection explains that many ESPs subscribe to feedback loop (FBL) reports, which are similar to ARF reports, to monitor complaints and improve deliverability. ESPs use this data to identify and address issues like spam traps and high complaint rates within their client base.

October 2021 - Email Vendor Selection
Marketer view

Email marketer from Reddit user u/EmailExpert responds that having ARF data helps ESPs proactively manage their network and penalize users who generate a lot of complaints, thus protecting their overall reputation and deliverability.

June 2022 - Reddit
Marketer view

Email marketer from Return Path shares that ARF reports are used to identify sources of abuse and improve email authentication practices. By analyzing complaint data, senders can pinpoint specific campaigns or sending practices that are generating negative feedback and take corrective action.

May 2021 - Return Path Blog (via Archive.org)
Marketer view

Email marketer from Email Geeks says that campaign identification can't be done, but it would vary a lot, thus more complicated than they'd expect to be done.

November 2021 - Email Geeks
Marketer view

Email marketer from Email on Acid explains that Monitoring complaint rates and maintaining a good sender reputation are key to deliverability, and feedback loops (similar to ARF) are critical for that. So good ESPs will use this to maintain the health of their outbound servers.

December 2023 - Email on Acid
Marketer view

Email marketer from Email Geeks explains that they aggregate the data they get internally and for users in their interface, so it's helpful to give them some context. They also normalize complaint rates based on the domain volumes they actually get feeds for.

September 2021 - Email Geeks
Marketer view

Email marketer from Stack Overflow explains that parsing ARF reports manually can be complex, so many ESPs and senders use dedicated tools or services to automate the processing of this data. These tools typically provide dashboards and analytics to help users identify trends and take action.

October 2023 - Stack Overflow
Marketer view

Email marketer from Litmus shares that Monitoring and acting upon feedback loops (FBLs) data, similar to ARF reports, is an important practice for email deliverability. This involves identifying the sources of complaints, implementing changes to improve email content, and taking action to stop spam.

August 2021 - Litmus
Marketer view

Email marketer from Email Geeks expects that Validity data aggregation is by date, not campaign. IDing campaigns is too hard for receivers, probably.

January 2024 - Email Geeks
Marketer view

Email marketer from Mailjet shares that participating in feedback loops (FBLs), which generate data similar to ARF reports, helps senders maintain good sender reputations. Mailjet actively uses FBL data to ensure its users follow best practices and avoid being flagged as spammers.

May 2024 - Mailjet Blog
Marketer view

Email marketer from Email Geeks states that many ESPs did not pay for ARF reports.

June 2024 - Email Geeks
Marketer view

Email marketer from Email Geeks mentions that many ESPs don't normalize complaint rates and people are surprised their complaint rates are higher than they thought.

May 2024 - Email Geeks
Marketer view

Email marketer from Email Geeks shares that other than processing unsubs from it, ARF is not a particularly good way to find actual abuse. Other metrics are better.

July 2022 - Email Geeks
Marketer view

Email marketer from Quora User explains that ESPs use ARF to identify spammers and abusive email practices, helping them maintain cleaner IP addresses and better reputations with mailbox providers. They can then take action against offending senders.

May 2024 - Quora
Marketer view

Email marketer from Validity Blog shares that mailbox providers use complaint data from feedback loops to identify senders who are generating unwanted emails and block or filter their messages. So ARF reports help inform deliverability decisions on the receiver side.

April 2021 - Validity Blog

What the experts say
2Expert opinions

Experts from Spam Resource and Word to the Wise explain that ARF reports provide data on recipients marking messages as spam. ESPs use this feedback loop data to identify problematic sending practices and improve filtering, enabling them to refine targeting and messaging, reduce complaints, improve engagement, and maintain a good sender reputation.

Key opinions

  • FBL/CFBL Mechanism: Feedback Loops (FBLs) and Complaint Feedback Loops (CFBLs) provide senders with data on spam complaints.
  • Problem Identification: ARF report data helps identify problematic sending practices and specific campaigns that generate complaints.
  • Targeting and Messaging: Data from ARF reports enables senders to refine targeting and messaging to reduce recipient complaints.

Key considerations

  • Actionable Data: ARF reports supply critical data for maintaining email deliverability and sender reputation.
  • Proactive Improvement: ESPs and senders should proactively use feedback loop data to improve their email programs.
Expert view

Expert from Word to the Wise, Laura Atkins, answers that feedback loop reports (the data from ARF reports) help senders identify specific campaigns, content, or sending practices that lead to recipient complaints. By analyzing this data, senders can refine their targeting and messaging to reduce complaints and improve engagement.

June 2023 - Word to the Wise
Expert view

Expert from Spam Resource, Steve Jones, explains that Feedback Loops (FBLs) and Complaint Feedback Loops (CFBLs) are mechanisms where ISPs provide senders with data about recipients who mark their messages as spam, which is the data that ARF reports provide. By participating in FBLs, ESPs can identify problematic sending practices, improve filtering, and maintain a good sender reputation.

December 2021 - Spam Resource

What the documentation says
4Technical articles

ARF reports provide summarized complaint data that allows senders to understand overall complaint trends and identify potential issues with their email programs. The Abuse Reporting Format (ARF) standardizes email feedback reports. ESPs provide tools to analyze feedback loop data from ARF reports, helping senders understand complaint rates. Google Postmaster Tools allows senders to monitor their spam rates, and these can indicate issues that ARF reports would highlight.

Key findings

  • Summarized Complaint Data: ARF reports provide summarized complaint data from various mailbox providers.
  • Standardized Format: The Abuse Reporting Format (ARF) standardizes email feedback reports.
  • Feedback Loop Analysis: ESPs provide tools to analyze feedback loop data and ARF reports.
  • Spam Rate Monitoring: Tools like Google Postmaster Tools help monitor spam rates, indicating issues similar to ARF reports.

Key considerations

  • Complaint Trend Identification: ARF data assists in identifying overall complaint trends and potential issues affecting email programs.
  • Actionable Information: ARF reports enable senders and ESPs to process and act on complaint data more easily.
  • Complaint Rate Awareness: ARF data helps senders understand and monitor their complaint rates.
  • Corrective Actions: High spam rates, as monitored by Google Postmaster Tools, can indicate the need for corrective actions.
Technical article

Documentation from Google explains that While not directly ARF, Google Postmaster Tools allows senders to monitor their spam rates, which is crucial for understanding how users are marking their emails. High spam rates can indicate issues that ARF reports would also highlight, suggesting similar corrective actions are needed.

January 2025 - Google Postmaster Tools
Technical article

Documentation from SparkPost explains that they provide tools to help senders analyze their feedback loop data, including information derived from ARF reports. This data helps senders understand their complaint rates and identify potential issues affecting deliverability.

January 2025 - SparkPost Documentation
Technical article

Documentation from RFC Editor specifies the 'The Abuse Reporting Format (ARF)'. It standardizes the format for email feedback reports, including complaint data, making it easier for ESPs and senders to process and act on this information.

March 2025 - RFC Editor
Technical article

Documentation from Validity explains that their Aggregate Report Feedback (ARF) provides summarized complaint data from various mailbox providers. This data helps senders understand overall complaint trends and identify potential issues affecting their email programs.

September 2023 - Validity Official Documentation