ColdSend Alternatives in 2026: Why StackMail Is the Cheaper Drop-In
Last updated: 2026-05-04 - written and reviewed by the StackMail team. We are a competing provider; this comparison is honest about both products. Verify pricing on ColdSend before purchase as plans change.
The short answer
ColdSend is roughly 4x cheaper than real-mailbox providers because it does not actually sell mailboxes. It sells a sending layer built on top of Azure Communication Services - Microsoft's transactional email API. ACS works for the first month or two, but Microsoft's Acceptable Use Policy explicitly does not permit unsolicited bulk or cold outreach through ACS, which means every ColdSend account carries platform-termination risk that scales with volume. StackMail provisions real Google Workspace and Microsoft 365 mailboxes that you own at $2.50/mailbox - 4x more expensive on the line item, 0x platform-termination risk, native IMAP replies, and headers that look like genuine business email instead of an Azure transactional API. If you genuinely understand the AUP trade-off and you only need short campaigns, ColdSend's math can work. For any program you want to run for more than a quarter, you want real mailboxes.
Our verdict
Pick ColdSend if you have read Microsoft's Azure Communication Services Acceptable Use Policy yourself, you understand that cold outreach via ACS is not a permitted use case, you are willing to accept account termination as a real possibility, and the 4x cost saving on a short campaign justifies the risk for your specific use case. The ColdSend team has built a clean product on top of an infrastructure choice that Microsoft did not design for cold email - if you are clear-eyed about that, the math is the math. Pick StackMail if you are building a sustainable cold email program, if you cannot afford to have your sending stack disappear mid-campaign, if your clients (agency case) need to know their reputation is not tied to a shared ACS tenant, or if you want recipients to see headers that look like a real business mailbox instead of an Azure transactional API. The honest framing is not 'ColdSend is bad, StackMail is good.' It is 'ColdSend is a different category of product with a different risk profile, priced accordingly.' Buy the category that matches the program you are running.
Why people search for ColdSend alternatives
ColdSend is one of the more interesting products in the cold email infrastructure category because it is not, technically, in the same category as StackMail, InboxKit, Mailforge, or Zapmail. ColdSend does not provision Google Workspace mailboxes. It does not provision Microsoft 365 mailboxes. It does not sell you a seat on a real corporate email tenant that you control. Instead, ColdSend wraps Azure Communication Services - Microsoft's transactional email API, the same product Microsoft sells to developers for password-reset emails and order-confirmation emails - and packages it for cold email senders at roughly a quarter of the cost of real mailboxes. That packaging is real engineering work. The dashboard is good. The onboarding is fast. The headline price is genuinely 4x cheaper than us. We are not going to pretend otherwise.
The reason this page exists, and the reason most people search for 'ColdSend alternative,' is that the underlying architecture has consequences that are not obvious from the marketing site. Azure Communication Services is governed by Microsoft's Azure Online Services Terms and the Azure Acceptable Use Policy. Microsoft's documented position is that Azure customers may not use Azure to send unsolicited bulk email or to violate anti-spam laws, and the ACS product specifically is positioned as a transactional email API for application notifications, not as an outreach platform. Microsoft does not actively pre-screen every customer's sending pattern, but they do respond to abuse complaints, and they do terminate accounts that generate sustained complaint rates above their threshold. That termination risk is the single biggest reason ColdSend is cheap.
Beyond the AUP question, the ACS-versus-real-mailbox choice has practical engineering consequences that show up in deliverability and operations. Real Google Workspace and Microsoft 365 mailboxes have native IMAP - your replies show up in an inbox you can browse, search, and forward. ACS does not have IMAP because it was never designed to receive personal mail; it has Event Grid webhooks that fire when an inbound message arrives, and the wrapper layer (ColdSend in this case) has to reconstruct an inbox-like experience on top of that. Real mailboxes have headers that say 'sent from outlook.com' or 'sent from gmail.com,' which is what every cold email recipient expects. ACS has headers that expose Azure transactional infrastructure, which sophisticated recipients (the kind of buyers who actually have budget for SaaS) sometimes recognize as a tell. Real mailboxes have per-tenant reputation that is yours alone; ACS shares tenant-level reputation across customers on shared plans, which means your deliverability can drop because of someone else's spam.
The dominant searches for 'ColdSend alternative' come from three profiles: the founder who got their ColdSend account suspended after a campaign and is now looking for infrastructure that will not disappear, the agency owner who tried ColdSend, did the math, and realized that explaining a platform-termination event to a client costs more than the savings, and the operator who simply wants headers that do not look like Azure to the recipient. This page is for those three profiles. If you are pre-purchase and trying to decide between ColdSend and a real-mailbox provider, the rest of this page lays out the trade-off accurately. We will not exaggerate the AUP risk into 'Microsoft is going to ban you tomorrow' - the truth is more nuanced than that. We will also not pretend the risk is zero, because Microsoft has documented their policy and they do enforce it.
One more piece of context before the comparison. StackMail charges $2.50/mailbox on annual billing for real Google Workspace or Microsoft 365 seats that you own in your own admin console. That is roughly 4x ColdSend's per-inbox headline price. We are losing the price comparison on the line item and we are not going to spin that. What we are saying is that the right comparison is not '$0.62 per inbox versus $2.50 per inbox' - it is 'inbox-shaped object on a transactional API governed by an AUP that does not permit your use case versus a real corporate mailbox issued in your name on infrastructure designed for the use case.' Those are different products. Compare them honestly and pick the one that fits your risk tolerance.
ColdSend vs StackMail: Feature comparison
Side-by-side on the features that matter for cold email infrastructure: mailbox provider, DNS automation, warmup, sequencer integrations, monitoring, support, and pricing.
| Feature | ColdSend | StackMail |
|---|---|---|
| Real Google Workspace mailboxes you own | No | Yes |
| Real Microsoft 365 mailboxes you own | No | Yes |
| Mailbox is a real seat in your admin console | No | Yes |
| Native IMAP for replies | No | Yes |
| Sending infrastructure designed for cold outreach | No | Yes |
| Headers look like normal business email | No | Yes |
| Per-tenant isolated reputation | No | Yes |
| Automated SPF / DKIM / DMARC | Yes | Yes |
| Pre-warmed sender pool | Yes | Yes |
| Sequencer integrations | Most major | 20+ |
| Headline price per inbox | $0.40-$0.62 | $2.50 |
| Provisioning speed (first send) | Minutes | 10-20 min |
| Platform-termination risk (Azure AUP) | Material | None |
| Outlook recipient deliverability | Weaker | Native M365 |
| Shared-tenant reputation contamination | Yes (Scale) | No (per-workspace tenants) |
| Free DNS / SPF / DKIM / DMARC tools | No | Yes (free) |
| Ownership survives cancellation | No | Yes |
| Can be moved to a different sequencer | Limited | Yes |
Pricing breakdown at scale
Per-mailbox cost matters most when you scale past 30 mailboxes. Here is what a 10, 30, 100, and 300 mailbox setup costs on ColdSend versus StackMail (annual billing where available).
| Tier | Mailboxes | ColdSend / month | Per mailbox | StackMail / mailbox |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Alpha (entry) | 400 | $249 | $0.62 | $2.50 (annual) |
| Beta (mid) | 1000 | $499 | $0.50 | $2.50 (annual) |
| Scale (high volume) | 2500 | $999 | $0.40 | $2.50 (annual) |
| Enterprise (negotiated) | 8000 | $2499 | $0.31 | $2.50 (annual) |
ColdSend's headline plan: 400 'inboxes' for $249/month works out to ~$0.62/inbox. The inbox is an ACS sender configuration, not a real Google Workspace or Microsoft 365 seat. StackMail's $2.50/mailbox is real-mailbox pricing.
Where ColdSend genuinely wins
We will not pretend StackMail wins on every dimension. ColdSend has real advantages worth naming.
- Headline pricing. ColdSend's $249/month Alpha plan for 400 inboxes works out to roughly $0.62 per inbox per month, which is 4x cheaper than StackMail, Mailforge, or any other real-mailbox provider. If your campaign is short and you are willing to accept the AUP risk, the cost saving on a 100,000-email campaign is real money. We are not going to pretend the math does not work for some use cases.
- Onboarding speed. Because ColdSend is provisioning rows in an Azure ACS configuration rather than provisioning real Google Workspace tenants, a fresh account can be sending within minutes. Real-mailbox providers including StackMail take 10-20 minutes per cohort because we have to create tenants, configure DNS at the registrar, and seed warmup. ColdSend skips most of that because there are no real tenants.
- Pre-warmed sender pool claim. ColdSend's marketing positions inboxes as 'pre-warmed at scale,' which in practice means the underlying ACS sending infrastructure has been operational long enough that Microsoft's outbound IPs are not flagged as new. This is genuinely true for sender-side warmup: the IPs that ACS uses for outbound delivery have a reputation history. The caveat we cover in deliverability is that recipient-side filters (Gmail, Outlook, Apple Mail) still rate based on per-recipient engagement, which 'pre-warming' does not solve.
- Clean dashboard ergonomics. The ColdSend product is well-designed. Sequencer connection, sending volume controls, and reply triage all work. The team has clearly invested in the user-facing surface even though the backend is unconventional.
- Lower friction for solo founders running a quick experiment. If you have an idea for an outbound campaign, you want to test it for two weeks, and you do not want to spend 21 days warming real mailboxes before the test, ColdSend's near-instant ramp lets you collect a signal cheaper and faster than provisioning real infrastructure.
Where ColdSend falls short
The reasons people search for "ColdSend alternatives." If any of these matter to you, StackMail is the cheaper drop-in.
- Azure Acceptable Use Policy. This is the core issue. Microsoft's Azure Online Services Terms and the Azure Communication Services product documentation specify that ACS is intended for transactional and operational notifications, not unsolicited bulk or cold outreach. Microsoft's anti-spam stance applies to all Azure services. ColdSend operates within a window where Microsoft tolerates sending volume that does not generate abuse complaints, but the policy itself does not permit cold outreach as a use case. That means a sustained complaint rate or a single high-profile abuse report can result in account termination. We are not saying this happens to everyone - we are saying it is a documented possibility that scales with how aggressive your campaigns are.
- Platform-termination risk concentrates blast radius. With real mailboxes, if Google flags one Workspace tenant for high spam rate, you lose 5-25 mailboxes on that tenant and the rest of your fleet is unaffected because they live on different tenants in different domains. With ColdSend on the shared-tenant Scale plan, an abuse event on the shared tenant affects every customer on that tenant. You have less control over blast radius because the unit of isolation is not yours.
- No native IMAP for replies. Real Google Workspace and Microsoft 365 mailboxes give you IMAP, which means replies arrive in an inbox you can open in any mail client, search, label, and forward. ACS has no IMAP because it was not designed to be a mailbox - inbound mail is delivered via Event Grid webhooks that have to be processed by an application layer. ColdSend reconstructs an inbox-like experience on top of those webhooks. It works, but it is not native, and it is one more layer that can fail or lag.
- Headers expose Azure infrastructure to recipients. The Received: chain on a ColdSend-sent message reveals Azure transactional sending infrastructure. Most recipients never inspect headers, but the recipients who do - typically technical buyers, security-conscious teams, or anyone who has been spammed enough to develop the habit - can identify the source. For SaaS companies selling to other SaaS companies, this is a credibility issue: you are dogfooding cold-email infrastructure that does not look like real business email when your prospects inspect it.
- Outlook recipient deliverability. ACS-routed mail tends to land in Junk on Outlook recipients more often than mail from real Microsoft 365 mailboxes. The exact reasons are debatable - it could be the headers, the IP reputation patterns, or simply that ACS-shaped traffic patterns differ from real-tenant traffic - but the outcome is observable in real-world A/B testing. If your prospect ICP skews toward Outlook (enterprise IT, finance, government, healthcare), this is a meaningful headwind.
- Shared tenant reputation contamination on Scale plan. ColdSend's higher-volume tier puts multiple customers on a shared sending configuration. When another customer on the same tenant runs a poorly targeted campaign and generates complaints, your sending reputation degrades because the recipient-side filters cannot distinguish between your traffic and theirs at the tenant level. Real-mailbox providers give you isolated tenants per workspace.
- 'Zero warmup' marketing claim is sender-side only. ColdSend's marketing implies inboxes are immediately ready for production volume because the underlying IPs are pre-warmed. That is true on the sending side. On the receiving side, Gmail and Outlook track per-sender engagement (open rates, reply rates, complaint rates) on a rolling window, and a brand-new sender pattern still triggers spam-folder placement until engagement signals accumulate. You cannot warm a recipient's filter by warming a sender's IPs. The 'zero warmup' framing under-states what new senders need to do regardless of provider.
- No real ownership transfer. With real Google Workspace or Microsoft 365 mailboxes, you can cancel your StackMail subscription, keep the mailboxes, and continue operating them inside your own admin console with Google or Microsoft directly. With ColdSend, the underlying ACS configuration is theirs, the sending infrastructure is theirs, and the 'inboxes' are configuration rows in their system - if you cancel, there is nothing to take with you because there were never real mailbox accounts in your name.
Stay with ColdSend if
- Operators running genuinely short campaigns (under 60 days) where the cost saving over a real-mailbox provider exceeds the expected loss from a possible account termination, and where you have read the Azure AUP yourself and accepted the trade-off with eyes open.
- Solopreneurs validating an outbound idea on a tight budget where 14-21 days of warmup ramp would kill the experiment timeline and the worst-case outcome of 'account gets shut down, restart elsewhere' is acceptable.
- Teams sending to ICPs that skew heavily Gmail (Outlook deliverability is the weakest part of ACS-routed mail) and that do not need their headers to look like real corporate email to the recipient.
- Anyone whose explicit budget cap on cold email infrastructure is below $500/month and who would rather take the AUP risk than provision fewer real mailboxes at the same total spend.
Switch to StackMail if
- Agencies running cold email for clients. The conversation that starts with 'your account got terminated' is the worst conversation an agency can have, and the savings from running clients on ColdSend do not survive a single termination event. Agencies should be on real mailboxes per-client for blast-radius reasons alone.
- Founders building a sustainable outbound program meant to run for more than a quarter. The 4x price difference compounds the wrong way over time: you save $X for the first three months, then you spend the next quarter rebuilding infrastructure after a policy enforcement event.
- Any team selling to enterprise, IT, security, finance, or other Outlook-heavy verticals where ACS-routed mail's Outlook deliverability gap is a real revenue cost, not a hypothetical.
- SaaS companies that sell to other SaaS companies. Your prospects are technical. They inspect headers. Mail that exposes Azure ACS infrastructure undermines the perception that you are running a real, polished, professional outbound operation.
- Teams that have already had one ColdSend account suspended. The pattern repeats. Switching to real mailboxes costs more upfront and resolves the recurring shutdown problem.
- Anyone who needs IMAP replies for handoff to a CRM, an SDR team, or a reply-triage workflow built around standard mail clients. ACS reply handling via webhooks is workable but it is not the same as native IMAP.
How to migrate from ColdSend to StackMail (5 steps)
Practical migration playbook. Plan a 14-21 day overlap so new mailboxes warm up before you cut over - this is true regardless of which provider you switch to.
1. Decide whether you want a parallel cutover or a hard cutover
If you are migrating from ColdSend because of a termination event, you do not have a choice - you are doing a hard cutover and the timeline starts with provisioning new infrastructure. If you are migrating proactively because you want to de-risk the program, do a parallel cutover: provision real mailboxes on StackMail, warm them for 14-21 days, then rotate ColdSend traffic out as the new mailboxes come online. The parallel path keeps revenue flowing while you transition. Either way, the migration is more involved than swapping between two real-mailbox providers because the underlying objects are different - you are not moving mailboxes, you are replacing an ACS configuration with real seats.
2. Provision the right amount of real-mailbox capacity
ColdSend inbox counts and StackMail mailbox counts are not 1:1 because ACS lets you blast more email per 'inbox' than a real Google Workspace seat does. A real Google Workspace mailbox sends roughly 30-50 emails per day in production cold-email volume after warmup. A ColdSend ACS inbox can technically push more, but the receiver-side limits are similar. Translate ColdSend volume to StackMail mailbox count by working backwards from your daily target send volume divided by 40 - that is roughly the mailbox count you need. We will help size correctly during onboarding. Sign up at stackmail.io and pick a plan that matches the calculated mailbox count.
3. Reconnect your sequencer
Open your sequencer (Instantly, Smartlead, Saleshandy, Apollo, Lemlist, or whichever) and add the new StackMail mailboxes via OAuth. We have a one-click bulk-connect helper for Instantly and Smartlead specifically because those are the most common destinations. ColdSend's sequencer integrations are likely already disconnected if your account was terminated; if you are migrating proactively, leave the ColdSend integrations in place until your StackMail mailboxes are warmed and you have rotated all live campaigns over.
4. Run a 14-21 day warmup overlap
Real mailboxes warm up for 14-21 days before they are ready for production cold email volume. This is true on every real-mailbox provider because it is set by Gmail and Outlook, not by any provider. ColdSend's 'zero warmup' claim does not transfer - if you are switching to real mailboxes, you have to warm them. During the overlap window, run a portion of your sending volume through ColdSend (assuming the account is still active) and ramp the StackMail mailboxes from low daily volume to full production volume over the warmup period. By day 21 the StackMail mailboxes are ready to carry full load and you can wind down ColdSend.
5. Cancel ColdSend (or do not - your choice)
Once StackMail mailboxes are carrying production volume, you can cancel ColdSend. Some teams keep a small ColdSend allotment for short experimental campaigns where they want to test fast and the AUP risk is acceptable for the duration of the experiment. That is a defensible posture if you understand the trade-off. Most teams cut over completely because the operational simplicity of running on one stack outweighs the marginal cost benefit of keeping ColdSend alive for short experiments. Whichever you choose, the StackMail mailboxes you provisioned are real Google Workspace or Microsoft 365 seats issued in your name - you keep them whether ColdSend stays in your stack or not.
Frequently asked questions
Is ColdSend actually built on Azure Communication Services? How do I verify that?
Yes. The fastest way to verify is to inspect the Received: headers on a ColdSend-sent message - you will see Azure infrastructure references in the chain, including ACS-specific server names. The pricing math also gives it away: real Google Workspace seats cost roughly $6 wholesale and real Microsoft 365 seats cost a similar amount, so any provider charging less than $1 per 'inbox' is not provisioning real mailboxes. They are wrapping a transactional email API. ColdSend is the most prominent example of this architecture in cold email infrastructure today; there are others.
Will my ColdSend account actually get terminated, or is the AUP risk overblown?
Honest answer: it depends on your sending pattern and the ICP you target. Microsoft does not actively pre-screen cold email use of ACS - they respond to abuse signals. If your campaigns generate low complaint rates, low bounce rates, and your ICP rarely files spam reports, you can run on ACS for months without a Microsoft response. If your campaigns generate sustained complaint rates above Microsoft's tolerance threshold, or if a single high-profile complainant escalates, the account gets reviewed and often terminated. We are not going to give you a percentage probability because we do not have Microsoft's enforcement data. What we can say is that the documented Azure AUP does not permit cold outreach as a use case, that termination is a documented enforcement action, and that the size of the blast radius scales with your campaign volume. Treat it as a real risk that depends on how aggressive your sending is.
What does the Azure Acceptable Use Policy actually say about cold email?
Microsoft's Acceptable Use Policy for Online Services prohibits using Azure to send unsolicited bulk email or to violate anti-spam laws including CAN-SPAM, CASL, and GDPR. The Azure Communication Services product documentation positions email as transactional - intended for application notifications, password resets, order confirmations, and similar use cases - and Microsoft has documented opinions on outbound senders being responsible for opt-in lists and complaint rates. Cold outreach by definition is unsolicited, so it sits outside the documented permitted use cases. Microsoft does not publish an explicit 'no cold email' line in the ACS terms, but the AUP language about unsolicited bulk email and the product positioning together create the trade-off. Read the policy yourself before deciding - we are not lawyers and you should make your own call about your specific use case.
Why are real Google Workspace and Microsoft 365 mailboxes 4x more expensive than ColdSend?
Because they are real corporate email seats with real wholesale costs. Google charges resellers roughly $6 per Workspace seat and Microsoft charges a similar amount for a Business Basic seat. Add the automation cost (DNS configuration, mailbox provisioning, warmup, support, dashboard) and the markup that any provider including StackMail needs to operate, and you arrive at $2.50-$4 per mailbox depending on the tier. ColdSend's underlying ACS unit cost is lower because ACS is priced as a transactional email API on per-message basis (fractions of a cent per message) rather than per-seat. ColdSend's price reflects the underlying infrastructure choice. The math is consistent; it is just that the two underlying infrastructure choices are not the same product.
Can I tell which mail in my inbox came from ColdSend versus a real mailbox?
Yes, if you inspect the Received: chain in the headers. ColdSend-routed mail shows Azure ACS server names in the path; real Google Workspace mail shows google.com infrastructure; real Microsoft 365 mail shows outlook.com or protection.outlook.com. The recipient's mail client does not display this by default, but technical users sometimes check, and corporate mail-scanning tools sometimes flag based on header patterns. If you are sending to a technical ICP and the header tell matters to your conversion rate, that is a real consideration.
What happens to in-flight replies if my ColdSend account gets terminated mid-campaign?
This is the worst case. ColdSend's reply handling runs on Event Grid webhooks fired by ACS to ColdSend's application layer. If the ACS account is suspended, inbound webhooks stop firing, replies do not propagate to the dashboard, and historical replies in ColdSend's interface may become inaccessible depending on how their data layer is structured. With real Google Workspace or Microsoft 365 mailboxes, replies sit in IMAP inboxes that you can access directly from any mail client - if you ever cancel your StackMail subscription, the replies are still there because the mailbox is yours. This is the operational difference that matters most when something goes wrong.
Does ColdSend's 'pre-warmed at scale' claim mean my mailboxes are immediately ready for production volume?
It means the sending IPs that ACS uses have been operational long enough that they are not flagged as new infrastructure - which is genuinely a real benefit on the sender-warming side. It does not mean the recipient-side filter (Gmail's spam classifier, Outlook's filtering) treats your specific sender pattern as warm. Recipient-side filtering is per-sender and per-recipient, based on engagement signals, and a brand-new sender to a brand-new recipient still gets filtered conservatively until engagement accumulates. The 'zero warmup' framing is partially accurate (sender-side IP reputation) and partially marketing (recipient-side filter behavior is unchanged). On real mailboxes you do a 14-21 day per-mailbox warmup that addresses both sides; on ColdSend you skip the sender-side warmup but you cannot skip the recipient-side reality.
What about deliverability to Outlook recipients specifically?
ACS-routed mail tends to land in Outlook's Junk folder more often than mail from real Microsoft 365 mailboxes. The likely reasons are a mix of header pattern recognition by Microsoft's own filters (Microsoft can identify ACS-shaped traffic), shared-tenant reputation effects on ColdSend's Scale plan, and the broader pattern that Microsoft's filters are tuned to expect business-to-business mail to come from corporate Microsoft 365 tenants rather than from transactional APIs. If your prospect ICP skews enterprise, IT, security, finance, government, or healthcare - all Outlook-heavy verticals - this gap is a meaningful headwind that does not show up in the headline pricing comparison.
If I migrate from ColdSend to StackMail, do I lose anything besides the 4x price saving?
You lose near-instant provisioning (StackMail real mailboxes take 10-20 minutes per cohort plus 14-21 days of warmup before production volume). You lose the ability to send extreme volumes per inbox that ACS allows. You gain real mailboxes you own, IMAP replies, isolated per-tenant reputation, headers that look like real business email, no Azure AUP exposure, and infrastructure that survives if you cancel. The trade is clear: pay 4x more, get a sustainable program. Pay 4x less, get speed and savings with platform-termination risk priced in.
Is there any scenario where ColdSend is the right call over StackMail?
Yes, and we want to be honest about that. If you are running a single 30-60 day experimental campaign where the AUP risk is acceptable for the duration, the cost saving is meaningful, you can lose the campaign mid-flight without cratering the business, and you do not need IMAP-quality reply handling, ColdSend's math works. We would not run our own outbound that way and we would not advise an agency client to either, but for the right founder doing the right experiment, ColdSend is a defensible choice. The point of this page is not to say 'never use ColdSend.' The point is to make sure you are choosing it for the right reasons and not because the price comparison hid the architecture difference.
Is StackMail just a more expensive version of ColdSend?
No. StackMail and ColdSend are different products in different categories that happen to compete for similar customer dollars. ColdSend is a wrapper over Azure Communication Services - a transactional email API - packaged for cold outreach use cases. StackMail is a Google Workspace authorized reseller and Microsoft Cloud Solutions Provider that automates the provisioning, DNS, and warmup of real corporate mailboxes. We are in the same category as InboxKit, Mailforge, Zapmail, and Primeforge - the real-mailbox category. ColdSend is in a category of one (and a handful of similar ACS-wrapper products). Compare us against the right peer set when you make your decision.
Ready to move?
Provision Google Workspace and Microsoft 365 mailboxes in minutes with automated SPF, DKIM, and DMARC. From $2.50/mailbox on annual billing.