Email Service Platform Selection for Lead Gen: SendGrid vs SES vs Mailgun vs Postmark

Choosing an email service platform is a deliverability decision, a compliance decision, and a cost-structure decision. In lead gen, those three collapse into one.

---

Selecting an email service platform is not a “tooling” decision. It is choosing which failure modes you want to own.

Email has moved from “deliverability best practices” into enforced infrastructure. Bulk sender requirements, one-click unsubscribe expectations, tightening spam complaint thresholds, and more aggressive provider throttling mean your email platform now determines how quickly you can become compliant (SPF/DKIM/DMARC alignment and identity control), how well you can see problems early (deferrals, rejects, complaint signals), how fast you can recover when something breaks (support, instrumentation, warmup controls), and how much operational debt you accumulate (suppression, bounce handling, domain separation).

In lead generation, the stakes are higher because sending patterns are structurally risky: sequences multiply volume, list sources vary in intent, and reactivation campaigns can blow up complaint rates fast enough to throttle an entire program.

This guide compares the major platforms – SendGrid, Postmark, Mailgun, Amazon SES, SparkPost/Bird, and Mailchimp Transactional (Mandrill) – and then gives a selection framework focused on how lead gen operations actually fail.

---

The Real Cost Model: Email Platforms as Revenue Infrastructure

Most “platform comparisons” focus on price per 100K emails. That’s the easy part.

Operators should model total cost of ownership across three buckets. These aren’t abstract categories – they map to the incidents teams actually suffer when deliverability breaks.

1) Identity and Compliance Control

Identity and compliance control covers domain authentication (SPF/DKIM/DMARC) and alignment, Return-Path/bounce domain customization (where DMARC programs tend to fail), one-click unsubscribe support (RFC 8058 for marketing mail), and suppression list management across systems – unsubscribed needs to mean suppressed everywhere, not “suppressed in one platform while two others keep sending.”

2) Deliverability Operations

Deliverability operations is where you buy visibility and control: deferrals versus rejects by provider, warmup tooling for new IPs and new domains, feedback loop and complaint signal integration where it exists, and segmentation control for high-risk cohorts like reactivation and new acquisition partners.

3) Engineering and Workflow Fit

Engineering and workflow fit includes API ergonomics and webhook reliability, template management and versioning, inbound email processing where it’s part of the product workflow, and data residency requirements such as EU hosting.

In practice, “cheap email” becomes expensive when it forces you to build internal tooling to replace what a higher-tier ESP would have provided.

---

Platform Landscape: Why the Market Consolidated

The email service platform market consolidated because the economics are brutal.

Reliable delivery at scale requires:

• infrastructure capacity (IPs, routing, monitoring)
• compliance and abuse handling
• relationships and feedback channels with mailbox providers
• specialized deliverability expertise

Smaller vendors struggle to sustain that investment. The result is a market dominated by a handful of platforms with different philosophies:

• full-stack (SendGrid)
• transactional specialist (Postmark)
• developer flexibility + inbound processing (Mailgun)
• bare-metal cost efficiency (Amazon SES)
• enterprise analytics/omnichannel positioning (SparkPost/Bird)
• ecosystem convenience (Mandrill for Mailchimp users)

---

SendGrid: The Full-Stack Email Platform

SendGrid is positioned as a unified platform for transactional and marketing email. Twilio’s acquisition gave it scale and distribution, but the operational reality is the same: it’s built for teams that want a single vendor to cover most email needs.

Background and Positioning

SendGrid was founded in 2009 and scaled into one of the largest email platforms in the market. Twilio acquired SendGrid for $3B in 2019, positioning it inside a larger communications portfolio.

SendGrid’s headline scale claims (tens of billions of emails monthly; examples typically include large consumer brands) matter less as marketing and more as operational signal: mature infrastructure, established deliverability workflows, and tooling built for “real program” complexity.

Authentication and Identity Control

SendGrid’s authentication workflow is DNS-driven and designed for setup speed:

• automated domain authentication using CNAME records
• DKIM selectors commonly managed as two keys to support rotation
• support for custom Return-Path / bounce domains to satisfy strict DMARC alignment requirements
• link branding for click tracking domains (reducing the risk of “tracking domain mismatch” issues)

Operator note: the big win here is that SendGrid makes it hard to stay misconfigured for long. You can still break things, but you get guardrails.

Deliverability Operations

SendGrid is strong when you need operational features without building them yourself:

IP pools separate transactional and marketing reputation, dedicated IP options exist with warmup tooling, and dashboards provide visibility into bounce and complaint patterns as well as suppression outcomes.

Where teams get burned is not “SendGrid is bad at deliverability.” It’s that teams treat SendGrid like a “send API” and never build the list discipline and monitoring cadence required for lead gen.

Pricing Structure (What Teams Actually Pay)

SendGrid pricing is tiered and can be confusing when teams need both API sending and marketing features.

A representative structure looks like:

Typical add-ons:

• extra dedicated IPs (often priced per-IP per-month)
• extended activity history / logs
• marketing campaigns (often separate subscription)
• email validation credits

Operator rule: if you need marketing + transactional from one vendor, model the combined cost before you commit. Many teams are surprised later by the “two subscriptions” reality.

Pricing Reality

SendGrid’s pricing is rarely the cheapest at scale, but it buys you operational tooling and time:

• per-email pricing tiers
• additional costs for dedicated IPs and higher support tiers

SendGrid can be the right choice when the cost of engineering your own deliverability ops is higher than the platform delta.

Developer Experience

SendGrid’s developer surface area is mature:

• REST API + official SDKs across major languages
• SMTP relay for legacy integration
• event webhooks for delivery and engagement events
• a large integration ecosystem (CRMs, marketing tools, dev tools)

In lead gen, the webhook story matters as much as sending: if you don’t ingest bounces/complaints/unsubs reliably, you can’t protect reputation.

Strengths and Limitations (Lead Gen View)

Strengths:

• broad feature coverage across transactional and marketing
• deliverability infrastructure with reputation tooling
• large ecosystem and long-term stability

Limitations:

• pricing/packaging complexity when you need both product lines
• support quality varies by tier (cheap plans often mean slow incident response)
• feature breadth creates UI complexity (teams “click wrong settings” more often)

Ideal Use Cases

SendGrid is a fit when:

• you want one vendor to cover most email streams
• you need dedicated IP options and warmup assistance
• you need a robust webhook pipeline without building everything yourself

---

Postmark: The Transactional Specialist

Postmark is a transactional email specialist. That focus is valuable in lead gen because the emails that matter most financially are often transactional or near-transactional:

• confirmation links
• quote follow-ups
• appointment reminders
• “your lead is ready” notifications

If those fail, revenue leaks immediately.

Background and Positioning

Postmark launched with a narrow focus: transactional email. It was later acquired by ActiveCampaign (but continues to operate as a distinct service).

The product promise is speed and reliability. Time-to-inbox claims often land around “under 10 seconds” on average, with many messages delivering faster – useful when your confirmation step is part of conversion.

Why Transactional Specialization Matters

Transactional programs win on three qualities:

• speed to inbox
• predictable performance
• tight identity and suppression behavior

Postmark’s positioning is built around those characteristics. It is not trying to be a full marketing suite, which avoids the “one platform does everything” temptation that often leads teams to mail risky segments too aggressively.

Authentication and Deliverability

Postmark generally makes it straightforward to:

• authenticate domains
• control From identity consistently
• keep suppression behavior sane

Its limitation is also its clarity: if you need high-volume marketing features, you will add another tool. That’s not necessarily a negative. It can be a deliberate separation of blast radius.

Deliverability Infrastructure (What Makes Postmark Different)

Postmark runs separate “message streams” so broadcast-like mail doesn’t contaminate transactional reputation. It also enforces strict sender policies. That strictness is annoying when you trip it, but it’s one reason shared IP quality stays high.

Dedicated IPs exist, but they are intentionally not the default. Typical guidance: use shared infrastructure unless you have high volume and a clear reason to own reputation.

Pricing and Fit

Postmark pricing is competitive for transactional volumes and often feels “worth it” when you consider the opportunity cost of missed confirmations and broken customer comms.

The decision is not “Postmark vs SendGrid.” The decision is whether you want transactional email to live in a system that is insulated from marketing volatility.

Pricing Structure (Representative)

Postmark is volume-priced, with overage rates. At scale, you commonly see numbers like:

• ~100,000 emails/month: roughly $75/month
• ~300,000 emails/month: roughly $245/month
• ~1,000,000 emails/month: roughly $650/month

Dedicated IP add-on pricing is typically a fixed monthly fee. Also notable: unused volume generally doesn’t roll over, which matters for seasonal programs.

Developer Experience

Postmark is known for:

• clean API design (predictable request patterns)
• high-quality SDKs
• unusually strong technical support
• good template tooling (layouts, versioning)

In lead gen, the support quality matters during incidents. “2-hour response time” is not a marketing line when you’re losing confirmation emails.

Strengths and Limitations

Strengths:

• fast, reliable transactional delivery
• strong shared IP reputation due to strict policies
• developer ergonomics and support quality

Limitations:

• not a marketing platform (by design)
• per-email economics can be higher at very large volumes
• data hosting options may be more limited than some competitors

Ideal Use Cases

Postmark fits when:

• transactional delivery is mission-critical and you want predictable behavior
• you prefer separating transactional from marketing blast radius
• you value technical support and clarity over “feature breadth”

---

Mailgun: Developer Flexibility and Inbound Processing

Mailgun is a classic developer-facing platform. The differentiator is control and features that matter when email is part of your product, not just your marketing.

Background and Positioning

Mailgun started as a developer platform and grew into large-scale infrastructure (often cited in the hundreds of billions of emails annually). It has changed hands (Rackspace era, then acquisition into a larger communications portfolio), but the product still leans developer-first.

Where Mailgun Fits in Lead Gen

Mailgun is a strong fit when you need:

• inbound routing (parse inbound emails, route replies)
• programmatic control over sending streams
• data residency options (EU infrastructure)
• more flexible workflows than “marketing automation with an API”

Mailgun’s tradeoff is that operator maturity matters. If you don’t have disciplined monitoring and list hygiene, flexibility turns into fragility.

Authentication and Deliverability Features

Mailgun supports standard domain authentication (SPF/DKIM) plus:

custom tracking domains (click/open tracking under your domain), dedicated IP pools at higher tiers, send time optimization in some packages (timing mail to when recipients engage), built-in inbound parsing and routing, and optional email validation APIs.

For lead gen, inbound processing is the sleeper feature: reply handling, routing, and parsing are often harder than sending.

Deliverability Operations

Mailgun can support serious programs, but you must build the operating layer:

• configure authentication and alignment correctly
• instrument bounces/deferrals/rejects
• manage suppressions centrally across systems

If your team is engineering-driven and you want control, this can be a feature. If your team wants “email to just work,” it can become a hidden cost.

Pricing Structure (Representative)

Mailgun is typically tiered. A representative model:

• mid-tier plans around $35/month for ~50K
• scale plans around $90/month for ~100K (often with dedicated IP and validation features)
• enterprise custom

Exact packaging shifts over time. The operator takeaway: the “developer flexibility” features often land in higher tiers. Model the tier you actually need, not the entry plan.

Developer Experience

Mailgun’s API and webhooks are strong. Documentation is usually good, but can be uneven across endpoints. If you choose Mailgun, plan to invest in:

• a clean internal “email abstraction” layer (don’t spread vendor details everywhere)
• robust webhook ingestion and retry logic
• a suppression system that survives vendor changes

Strengths and Limitations

Strengths:

• developer-first workflows and inbound processing
• EU data residency options (useful for some programs)
• flexible routing and optimization features

Limitations:

• complexity can exceed what non-technical teams can safely operate
• support quality can vary by tier
• requires disciplined internal ops to avoid self-inflicted deliverability issues

Ideal Use Cases

Mailgun fits when:

• you need inbound email parsing/routing as a product feature
• you have engineering resources and want control
• you care about data residency and more complex workflows

---

Amazon SES: Maximum Value, Minimum Hand-Holding

Amazon SES is the cost leader. It’s also the “bring your own operations” option.

Background and Positioning

SES is raw email infrastructure inside AWS. It’s priced like infrastructure and behaves like infrastructure: powerful, cost-effective, and mostly indifferent to whether you assembled it correctly.

The SES Advantage

SES is brutally cost-effective at volume. The raw economics are hard to beat.

For operators, SES is attractive when:

• cost per email matters at scale
• you already operate heavily in AWS
• you can invest engineering time into sending infrastructure

Authentication Setup (What You Actually Configure)

SES supports:

• managed DKIM (“Easy DKIM”) via multiple CNAME records
• bring-your-own DKIM (if you need key control)
• custom MAIL FROM domains to control the envelope sender and improve alignment options
• account-level suppression lists for bounces and complaints

Deliverability Infrastructure (The Parts People Miss)

SES has operational constraints that matter for go-live:

• new accounts start in a sandbox (sending only to verified addresses) until you request production access
• initial production quotas (daily limits, per-second rate limits) often require increases over time

SES also offers optional deliverability tooling (paid add-ons) that begins to close the “visibility gap,” but you still own most of the workflow.

The SES Tax (What You Have to Build)

SES forces you to own the boring but essential pieces:

• template management and sending workflows
• event ingestion (bounces, complaints, delivery)
• suppression management
• warmup tooling (IP/domain) and pacing logic
• dashboards and alerting

AWS provides primitives. You assemble the system.

This is not “bad.” It is a maturity test. If you already run production infrastructure with on-call discipline, SES can be the most rational choice. If you want a vendor to catch mistakes early, SES is the wrong philosophy.

Pricing Structure (The Numbers That Drive SES Adoption)

Representative economics:

• sending: $0.10 per 1,000 emails
• dedicated IPs: roughly $25/month per IP (plus optional managed warmup add-ons)
• optional deliverability tooling add-ons priced per 1,000 emails

At scale, SES is dramatically cheaper:

• 100,000 emails/month: roughly $10 (vs. ~$75+ on many managed providers)
• 1,000,000 emails/month: roughly $100 (vs. ~$500+ on many managed providers)

This is why SES is tempting. You’re swapping platform spend for engineering spend.

Developer Experience

SES feels like AWS:

• APIs through AWS SDKs
• heavy use of IAM and configuration objects
• dense documentation

If your team is already fluent in AWS, it’s normal. If not, it can slow you down.

Strengths and Limitations

Strengths:

• lowest cost and high reliability
• excellent fit inside AWS ecosystems
• maximum configurability for technical teams

Limitations:

• “you own the ops”: instrumentation, dashboards, suppression workflows
• sandbox/quota processes can delay launches
• support is gated by AWS support plans (not “email support” by default)

Ideal Use Cases

SES fits when:

• cost efficiency matters and you have scale
• you already have engineering resources and AWS maturity
• you can build monitoring and incident response internally

---

SparkPost / Bird: Enterprise Scale and Analytics Positioning

SparkPost historically positioned around analytics and deliverability intelligence. Under Bird (formerly MessageBird), the story expands into omnichannel messaging and enterprise integrations.

Background and Positioning

SparkPost built a reputation around massive email scale (figures often cited in the trillions annually). It was acquired into Bird’s portfolio, shifting positioning toward omnichannel and enterprise CRM packaging.

That matters for operators: platform packaging, pricing, and product direction can change post-acquisition. If you choose this route, you’re implicitly choosing enterprise vendor dynamics.

In lead gen, SparkPost/Bird becomes interesting when:

• you operate at large scale across multiple streams
• analytics-driven routing and predictive tooling prevents costly incidents
• you need enterprise support and SLAs

The tradeoff is often complexity and commercial structure. It can be right for very large operators; it’s overkill for most early-stage lead gen stacks.

Differentiator: Predictive Deliverability Analytics

SparkPost historically emphasized predictive signals (health alerts, engagement scoring, spam trap monitoring). That kind of tooling matters at scale because:

• your “incident response” window is measured in hours, not days
• small complaint spikes can have large business impact
• early detection is cheaper than recovery

What You’re Really Buying (And What You’re Accepting)

When teams choose this class of platform, they’re usually buying:

• deep analytics (by provider/ISP, time-series, cohort breakdowns)
• predictive alerting that catches reputation drift early
• enterprise support models and account management

They’re also accepting:

• packaging changes over time (post-acquisition product direction)
• more complicated sales and onboarding processes
• higher operator overhead to keep multiple channels and streams coherent

For lead gen, it tends to be rational when email is one component of an omnichannel engine and deliverability incidents have high financial impact.

---

Mailchimp Transactional (Mandrill): Ecosystem Convenience

Mandrill is best understood as “transactional email inside the Mailchimp ecosystem.”

Background and Packaging Reality

Mandrill used to be standalone. It is now an add-on gated by a Mailchimp subscription. That bundling is the point: ecosystem lock-in in exchange for convenience.

It makes sense when:

• you already run marketing in Mailchimp
• you want unified template branding
• you want a single-vendor workflow and you accept the constraints

In lead gen, Mandrill can be “good enough” for smaller programs, but the risk is that ecosystem convenience becomes vendor lock-in while your deliverability complexity grows.

Pricing (Representative)

Mandrill is sold in “blocks” on top of a Mailchimp plan. A common model:

• Mailchimp Standard subscription baseline
• Mandrill transactional blocks (e.g., 25K emails per block)

At ~100K emails/month, a representative total cost is around $100/month once you include the Mailchimp plan plus blocks.

Capabilities

Mandrill’s value is operational simplicity:

• template syncing between marketing and transactional
• unified analytics inside one ecosystem
• “good enough” performance for many small programs

The risk is that simplicity can hide real operational requirements (suppression propagation, identity separation, monitoring), which don’t disappear just because the UI is friendly.

---

Platform Comparison Matrix (Operator View)

This table is intentionally opinionated: it reflects what matters in lead gen operations, not feature checklists.

---

Cost at Scale: The 100K vs 1M Reality Check

If you only look at “cost at 100K,” many platforms look similar. The separation happens at million-scale sending.

Representative monthly economics:

• Managed providers often land around $75–$100 at ~100K/month, then scale toward $500+ at ~1M/month.
• SES is the outlier: roughly $10 at 100K and $100 at 1M (plus whatever you spend on dedicated IPs and visibility tooling).

This is why mature operators gravitate toward SES over time: the unit economics become compelling once you have enough volume and enough operational discipline to own the tooling.

The trap is migrating too early. If you choose SES before you can operate it safely, you pay the savings back through outages and reputation damage.

---

Selection Framework: How Operators Decide

Most teams pick platforms based on price and brand familiarity. Operators pick based on failure modes and blast radius.

1) Separate Transactional from Marketing (When It Matters)

If transactional mail is revenue-critical, isolate it from marketing volatility:

• transactional stream on Postmark or a dedicated SendGrid stream
• marketing on a separate platform or separate IP/domain strategy

The goal is to avoid a reactivation campaign damaging the domain reputation that your confirmation emails depend on.

2) Match Platform Philosophy to Team Maturity

• If you have strong engineering and on-call discipline, SES becomes rational.
• If you have mixed ownership and frequent “new tool” additions, a platform with guardrails reduces self-inflicted outages.

The platform won’t save you from bad lists, but it can save you from configuration drift and visibility gaps.

3) Decide Whether You Need Inbound Email as a Product Feature

Many lead gen programs need inbound parsing for:

• reply handling (“STOP”, “unsubscribe”, support replies)
• routing buyer/seller communications
• ingesting inbound lead delivery confirmations

If inbound email matters, Mailgun often fits better than platforms that treat email as outbound-only.

4) Optimize for Complaint Risk, Not Vanity Volume

If you operate in a vertical with high complaint propensity, your platform choice should bias toward:

• strong suppression tooling
• warmup control
• clear bounce/deferral visibility
• a disciplined segmentation workflow

The platform can’t fix acquisition, but it can prevent your systems from continuing to mail people who opted out.

---

Scenario Playbook: Which Platform Fits Which Operator Stage

Picking the “best” provider is the wrong mental model. Pick the provider that matches your stage, your team maturity, and the failure modes you can afford.

Stage 1: Early Operator, Mixed Ownership, Minimal Engineering Time

If you’re running lead gen with a small team and email ownership is spread across marketing + ops + “whoever can ship,” your biggest risk is self-inflicted misconfiguration:

• DMARC alignment breaks after a vendor change.
• suppression doesn’t propagate across tools.
• warmup gets rushed because someone needs volume “today.”

Platforms that reduce risk at this stage:

• SendGrid for full-stack coverage + guardrails.
• Postmark for transactional isolation when “critical email must land.”

The cost premium is often cheaper than the opportunity cost of a deliverability outage.

Stage 2: Engineering-Driven Lead Gen (You Build Systems, Not Just Campaigns)

If email is embedded in your product workflow (lead delivery notifications, buyer routing, reply handling, inbound parsing), you should optimize for API ergonomics and control.

Platforms that fit:

• Mailgun when inbound processing and developer workflows are part of the product.
• SES when you have AWS maturity and you’re willing to build monitoring and suppression systems.

This stage is where teams start benefiting from owning their own event pipeline and centralized suppression logic.

Stage 3: High-Volume / Multi-Stream Programs (You Have “Email Ops” Whether You Admit It or Not)

Once you run multiple streams (transactional, nurture, reactivation, multiple brands, multiple verticals), the question is not “which ESP.” It is “how do we control blast radius.”

Patterns that work:

• transactional isolation (separate stream/IP pool/domain)
• marketing segmentation with hard sunset policies
• controlled warmup and rate limits during new source rollouts
• DMARC reporting with new-sender alerts

Platforms that commonly appear here:

• SendGrid (or equivalents) with dedicated IP pools and operational tooling
• SES when cost is driving internal platformization
• SparkPost/Bird when enterprise analytics and SLAs justify the complexity

The “right answer” is often two platforms: one for transactional, one for marketing risk.

---

Evaluation Checklist (What to Ask Before You Choose)

If you ask vendors about “deliverability,” every vendor will say yes. Operators ask questions that force concrete answers:

Identity and Alignment

• Can we set a custom Return-Path/bounce domain to control DMARC alignment?
• How is DKIM managed (single selector, dual selectors, rotation process)?
• How do we separate tracking domains (link branding) by brand/stream?

Suppression and Compliance

• How do bounces/complaints/unsubs enter the suppression list?
• Can we export/import suppression easily (vendor switching happens)?
• Does the platform support RFC 8058 one-click unsubscribe for marketing mail?

Monitoring and Operations

• What does the platform expose for deferrals vs rejects (4xx vs 5xx)?
• How reliable are webhooks, and what retry guarantees exist?
• Do we get provider-domain segmentation (gmail vs yahoo vs outlook outcomes)?
• What is support response time during an incident (and is it contractual)?

Warmup and Reputation

• Are dedicated IPs available, and is warmup guided/automated?
• Can we separate transactional and marketing reputation via IP pools or streams?
• What is the recommended minimum volume for a dedicated IP to be rational?

If you cannot answer these before you migrate, you’re choosing blind.

---

Migration and Vendor Risk (The Hidden Part of “Platform Choice”)

Email platforms feel interchangeable until you try to switch.

The technical migration (change API keys, swap SMTP endpoints) is the easy part. The hard parts are operational:

• identity migration: new tracking domains, new bounce domains, DKIM selectors, and DNS propagation windows
• suppression migration: preserving unsub/complaint lists so you don’t re-mail opt-outs
• reputation migration: new IPs/domains behave like “new credit” and require warmup
• template migration: versioning, rendering differences, and link rewriting changes

Operator rule: treat vendor switching as a deliverability event. Plan a 2 – 4 week transition window, run streams in parallel where possible, and monitor daily until signals stabilize.

This is where “cheaper per email” vendors become expensive. A platform that reduces migration risk can be worth paying for even if the unit cost is higher.

---

Common Failure Modes (and What Platform Choice Changes)

Failure Mode 1: DMARC Alignment Breaks During a Vendor Change

Symptoms:

• sudden provider-specific rejects
• Postmaster compliance flips
• DMARC reports show a new sender failing alignment

Platform leverage:

• platforms with opinionated domain authentication flows tend to reduce accidental misalignment
• bare-metal setups (SES) require tighter change control and testing discipline

Failure Mode 2: Unsubscribe Stops Propagating Across Systems

Symptoms:

• unsub rate spikes
• complaint proxies rise
• recipients complain because the “unsubscribe” didn’t work

Platform leverage:

• marketing suites often handle one-click headers, but suppression across systems is still on you
• you need a shared suppression list if multiple systems can send

Failure Mode 3: Warmup Gets Rushed and You Get Throttled

Symptoms:

• deferrals rise (4xx)
• spam placement increases
• recovery takes weeks

Platform leverage:

• platforms with warmup tools reduce operator error
• SES requires you to build pacing and segmentation logic

The point is not “buy the most expensive ESP.” The point is to understand which parts you want a vendor to handle versus what you will own internally.

---

Frequently Asked Questions

Is Amazon SES always the best choice because it’s cheapest?

SES is cheapest on paper. It is not cheapest if it forces you to build a deliverability operations stack you weren’t planning to build.

If you already have engineering discipline and you want maximum control, SES is often the best long-term economic choice. If you need email to work reliably with minimal internal tooling, a managed platform is usually cheaper in total cost.

Do we need dedicated IPs?

Dedicated IPs can be valuable when you have stable volume and you want full control of reputation. They can also make things worse if you don’t have the volume to build reputation and the discipline to warm properly.

If you are on shared IPs with a strong provider, you can often get excellent deliverability – if list quality and complaint rates are controlled.

Do we need inbound email processing?

If you route replies, parse inbound emails, or run mailbox-driven workflows, “inbound” becomes a real product requirement. Many lead gen stacks discover this late (when replies matter) and then retrofit.

If inbound processing is a requirement, it should influence platform selection early because it affects:

• routing and parsing capabilities
• compliance and data handling
• how you unify “reply handling” with suppression and consent controls

Should we separate transactional and marketing email?

If transactional mail is critical to conversion, yes – either via separate streams, separate IP pools, or separate domains/subdomains. The goal is blast radius control.

The caveat: fragmentation without volume can leave you with “no reputation signal” anywhere. Separation is only useful if you can manage it.

What’s the biggest mistake teams make after choosing a platform?

Treating the platform as a set-and-forget commodity and then mailing risky segments without instrumentation.

Lead gen programs live or die on list discipline and monitoring cadence. Your platform choice determines how easy that discipline is to implement, but it can’t replace it.

Should we pay for SES deliverability tooling (VDM) if we choose SES?

If you choose SES specifically to reduce platform spend, paid deliverability tooling can feel like “defeating the point.” But the operator question is different: what does it cost you to be blind?

If you don’t have an internal monitoring stack (events + dashboards + alerting), adding deliverability visibility can be cheaper than losing weeks to diagnosis. SES is still typically cost-efficient at volume even with paid add-ons – what changes is whether you’re outsourcing some visibility versus building it.

What about “marketing email” features like drag-and-drop builders?

Lead gen operators often overvalue builders and undervalue suppression and identity control.

If your marketing platform makes it easy to send but hard to control identity and suppression across systems, you will eventually pay for it in complaint rates and deliverability incidents. Builders matter for speed. Controls matter for survival.

The cleanest pattern is:

• keep marketing tools for content and automation
• keep an ESP layer that is instrumented and aligned, with centralized suppression

---

Key Takeaways

• Platform choice is selecting failure modes: identity control, monitoring visibility, warmup tooling, and suppression behavior matter more than marginal per-email cost.
• SendGrid is strong for full-stack programs that want guardrails and operational features without building everything.
• Postmark is a clean transactional choice when “critical email must land” and you want insulation from marketing volatility.
• Mailgun fits engineering-driven stacks and inbound email workflows, but requires mature monitoring discipline.
• SES wins on cost and control, but you pay an engineering tax to build the operating layer (events, suppression, warmup, dashboards).
• In lead gen, your platform won’t save you from bad lists. It will determine how quickly you notice you’re in trouble and how cleanly you can recover.