Why is specifying the return path as the sender's email address a bad practice?

Email marketer from SendPulse explains that specifying the sender's address as the return path can lead to deliverability issues due to the inability to automatically process and remove bounced email addresses from the mailing list, leading to higher bounce rates and potential blacklisting.

Email marketer from Reddit shares that using the sender's address as the return path clutters the inbox making it difficult to organise replies and bounce emails, and is an organizational nightmare, leading to missed communications and poor inbox management.

Email marketer from Email Marketing Forum shares that handling bounces correctly is essential for avoiding spam complaints. If bounces are not processed effectively, non-existent email addresses remain on the list, increasing the likelihood of spam complaints and damaging the sender's reputation.

Email marketer from Moosend explains that a poor sending reputation caused by deliverability issues from using the sender's email as the return path will lead to decreased open and click rates.

Email marketer from HubSpot shares that a high bounce rate, resulting from improper bounce handling (like using the sender's address as the return path), negatively affects deliverability. ISPs use bounce rates as a key metric to assess sender reputation.

Email marketer from Email Geeks points out that the main issue is that the organizational domain is used for the bounce address. If the bounce address would be a subdomain pointing to MX records of the ESP, all bounces can be processed.

Email marketer from Campaign Monitor explains that automatically cleaning email lists of bouncing email addresses requires a system that can identify these bounces, which is impossible to do if the sender's email address is used as the return path.

Email marketer from Litmus explains that effective list hygiene is impossible without a proper bounce management system. Directing bounces to the sender's inbox prevents the automatic identification and removal of invalid email addresses, leading to decreased engagement and increased spam complaints.

Email marketer from Mailjet shares that using the sender's email as the return path can negatively impact sender reputation, as it becomes harder to differentiate between legitimate replies and bounce messages, hindering effective list cleaning.

Email marketer from ActiveCampaign shares that using a dedicated bounce address enables automated list maintenance, which is essential for effective email marketing. Directing bounces to the sender's inbox makes automated maintenance impossible and leads to degraded email performance.

Email marketer from Neil Patel's Blog explains that specifying the sender's email address as the return path leads to the actual sender's inbox receiving bounce messages, cluttering it and making it difficult to manage legitimate replies. Proper bounce handling requires a separate bounce address.

Expert from Email Geeks says that this is a bad setup. It could just be a configuration issue, but it's something to look at and fix.

Expert from Email Geeks confirms that the ESP isn't seeing the async bounces at all.

Expert from Word to the Wise explains the Return-Path: is supposed to be used for automated processing of failures, not to be a human readable address. By putting the sender's address in the return path the automated process is now broken.

Expert from Email Geeks explains that if the ESP is handling 5xx rejections correctly but sending async bounces to the customer, that's really bad because they're not handling bounces properly and the customer gets bounces they can't do anything with.

Expert from Email Geeks shares that generally, not doing bounce management will significantly harm your reputation sooner or later. If they're doing bounce management for synchronous rejections, just not for asynchronous, then it's going to depend more on the details of the mailbox provider. In some cases, it'll be very noticeable to their filters, and in others, not at all.

Expert from Word to the Wise explains that specifying the sender's email address as the return path bypasses automated bounce processing, which is essential for identifying and removing invalid email addresses, leading to degraded list quality and deliverability problems.

Documentation from RFC Editor specifies that the 'Return-Path' header is intended to designate a mailbox to which bounce messages should be sent. Using the sender's actual address can lead to operational issues if the sender's system is not equipped to handle a high volume of bounce messages.

Documentation from Mailgun specifies that dedicated infrastructure for handling bounces and feedback loops is vital for maintaining high deliverability rates. Directing bounces to the sender's inbox bypasses this infrastructure, leading to deliverability issues and potential blacklisting.

Documentation from Amazon Web Services specifies that using a dedicated bounce mailbox is essential for effective bounce management. Directing bounces to the sender's inbox prevents automated processing, making it difficult to comply with anti-spam regulations and maintain a clean sending reputation.

Documentation from SparkPost specifies that proper handling of bounces and feedback loops is crucial for maintaining a positive sending reputation. Using the sender's email as the return path disrupts this process, making it harder to identify and remove problematic email addresses.