Observed SPF/DKIM/DMARC result rate—not the presence of DNS records.
All tools
RECEIVER EVIDENCE / AUTHENTICATION / BEHAVIORReputation is observed.
Reputation is observed.
Not invented.
Combine private receiver telemetry, public identity facts, audience quality, and operating changes into one investigation—without pretending the internet publishes a universal domain grade.
- Explicit unknown states
- Live public evidence
- Prioritized containment
EVIDENCE COVERAGE19/19100% of the investigation fields have observations
FAVORABLE OBSERVED STATE
The supplied evidence is favorable and sufficiently covered.
This state applies only to the represented domain, traffic, receivers, and observation window. It is not a universal inbox-placement promise.
Priority findings00 critical and 0 warning signal(s)
Use receiver-specific denominators and comparable traffic.
180 day(s) since the declared major change.
Synthetic evidence for mail.example.com.
Receiver and behavior lens
Private observations stay separate from public configurationGmail domain gradeHighDirect Postmaster observation, if available
Hard bounces0.40%Comparable-window audience quality
Unknown users0.10%Invalid-recipient and acquisition pressure
Reputation deferrals0Retain exact SMTP responses and receiver
Receiver evidence is represented in this review.
ObservedDNS, WHOIS, and public lists can expose important risks, but they cannot reveal Gmail's, Microsoft's, Yahoo's, or another receiver's complete filtering model.
Public identity evidence
synthetic • Jul 30, 2026, 4:00 PMEvidenceStateObserved valueInterpretation
SPF publication1 raw record(s)Pass
One SPF policySynthetic evidence shows one discoverable policy; authorization still requires evaluation.DMARC publication1 raw record(s)Pass
p=rejectSynthetic enforcing policy; delivered alignment still needs observation.Declared DKIM selector1 raw record(s)Pass
s1 publishedSynthetic key publication; final signature and alignment remain separate.MX routing2 raw record(s)Pass
Two exchangersSynthetic inbound routing context; not an outbound reputation signal.Registration-age context1 raw record(s)Pass
3,420 daysSynthetic established registration; age does not prove sending history.Evidence lanes
No lane is a universal receiver scoreNo material risk is present in the supplied evidence.
2/3 observationsNo material risk is present in the supplied evidence.
4/4 observationsNo material risk is present in the supplied evidence.
5/5 observationsNo material risk is present in the supplied evidence.
4/4 observationsNo material risk is present in the supplied evidence.
3/3 observationsInvestigation findings
8 evidence-backed item(s)ReceiverGmail reports high domain reputation.
This is favorable evidence for eligible Gmail traffic in the observed period.
Keep monitoring direction, complaints, delivery errors, authentication, and volume; do not generalize the grade to other receivers.Public listsNo listing was observed on the checked public lists.
This is bounded evidence, not proof of acceptance or inbox placement.
Retain the checked zones, resolver calibration, timestamp, and raw answers; continue receiver-specific investigation.IdentityObserved authentication is strong.
99.8% passed in the represented evidence.
Keep checking final delivered results; DNS presence alone does not prove passing or aligned authentication.AudienceThe supplied complaint observation is comparatively low.
The represented value is 0.03%, but no universal safe rate is certified.
Monitor absolute complaints, rate, receiver coverage, and cohort concentration.AudienceInvalid-recipient observations are represented.
Continue trending both rates by comparable source and receiver.
Retain exact enhanced status codes and remove permanent failures promptly.PermissionFirst-party permission is declared and purchased data is excluded.
This is an operator attestation, not independently verified consent evidence.
Retain source, form copy, timestamp, policy version, confirmation, and message-purpose evidence.ChangeThe represented volume change is controlled or no longer recent.
The declared change is +8% and 180 day(s) old.
Continue monitoring stream-level volume and receiver response.LinksClick domains align with the represented brand.
Alignment supports recognition but does not make a destination safe or reputable by itself.
Monitor redirect chains, destination ownership, compromise, and domain-list evidence.Ordered response plan
Contain before optimizing- 01
Preserve exact SMTP responses, provider dashboard observations, message samples, timestamps, domain and IP identities, campaign IDs, audience sources, and change history.
- 02
Hold traffic stable, resume with the most wanted engaged cohorts, and define complaint, bounce, authentication, deferral, and volume rollback gates.
- 03
Track recovery separately by receiver and stream; do not treat one provider's improvement as a universal reputation reset.
INVESTIGATION HANDOFF
Keep observations attached to their source.
Export the receiver, DNS, behavior, permission, and change evidence—plus every unknown that still limits the conclusion.
THE REPUTATION INVESTIGATION
A sending domain has many reputations because receivers see different traffic.
Investigate by receiver, domain, stream, infrastructure, audience source, and time window. A public DNS fact can explain an identity failure; it cannot substitute for receiver-owned reputation and complaint telemetry.
The fastest useful response contains harmful traffic, preserves exact evidence, repairs identity and audience causes, and resumes cautiously under measurable gates.
- 01Scope
Name the affected receiver, domain, stream, campaign, IP pool, and first observed time.
- 02Contain
Pause risky sources and sharp volume while protecting necessary transactional mail.
- 03Verify
Inspect delivered authentication, DNS identity, complaints, bounces, deferrals, and URL domains.
- 04Repair
Remove the causal audience, content, identity, infrastructure, or process failure.
- 05Rebuild
Resume with wanted traffic, stable volume, receiver monitoring, and explicit rollback gates.
REPUTATION QUESTIONS
What can a domain reputation checker actually know?
It can organize public identity facts and evidence you supply. Only a receiver can expose its own grade, delivery errors, complaint signals, and filtering decisions.
Does this tool return one universal reputation score?+
No. There is no public universal domain reputation score shared by every mailbox provider. The checker reports a bounded state and evidence coverage instead.
Is passing SPF, DKIM, and DMARC the same as good reputation?+
No. Authentication establishes identity and policy evidence. Wanted mail, low complaints, valid recipients, stable operations, and receiver-specific history still matter.
Does a clean blocklist result prove the domain is healthy?+
No. Public list coverage is partial and resolver results can be inconclusive. Receivers maintain private models and may reject or spam-folder a domain that is absent from checked public lists.
Why does a new domain remain unknown?+
A new or newly used domain may have little receiver history. Strong permission, authentication, controlled volume, and monitoring reduce risk but do not manufacture history.
Should I change domains after a reputation incident?+
Usually not as a first response. Moving without fixing acquisition, complaint, identity, content, or operational causes transfers the problem and can resemble evasion. Contain and repair the causal source.
Where should I investigate Gmail reputation now?+
Use Google Postmaster Tools for eligible traffic and pair compliance, spam-rate, authentication, feedback-loop, and delivery-error evidence with exact SMTP responses. Google's legacy Domain and IP Reputation dashboards are being retired, so do not build the investigation around a single grade.
PRIMARY OPERATING REFERENCES
Use receiver documentation as the changing source of truth.
The thresholds and requirements around this evidence can change. The checker deliberately keeps public configuration, operator declarations, and receiver-owned observations separate.
- Google Postmaster Tools dashboards Coverage, latency, authentication, spam-rate, feedback-loop, and delivery-error context.
- Google Postmaster Tools migration notice Current status of the legacy reputation dashboards and v2 migration.
- Gmail email sender guidelines Authentication, complaints, volume, DNS, unsubscribe, and operating requirements.
- Yahoo Sender Hub best practices Permission, authentication, complaints, stream separation, bounces, and sender operations.
- RFC 9989: DMARC The current DMARC specification and alignment model.