Credentials
Topics I cover
When I conduct a hands-on review, I document the access level, workflow exercised, and date. Vendor claims remain vendor claims unless the article identifies a separate test and its limits.
Questions for a hands-on review
This checklist can be used when hands-on access is part of an article. The specific page should state which checks were completed, the review date, and any access limitations.
- Document access. State whether the evidence came from a public page, trial, paid seat, demo, or provider response.
- Review configuration. Check SPF, DKIM, DMARC, inbox connections, tracking domains, and warmup behavior where relevant.
- Exercise the workflow. Build a representative sequence and note personalization, branching, fallback values, and setup friction.
- Define measurements. If messages are sent, disclose the sample, period, audience, and metrics rather than presenting an unexplained benchmark.
- Check edge cases. Review pricing scenarios, support behavior, DPA, subprocessors, processing regions, and contract terms that matter to the buyer.
- Label the verdict. Separate documented facts from editorial fit judgments and name the contributors to that edition.
Recent comparisons I tested
A sample of tool comparisons where I ran the deliverability and sequence testing. See our full methodology for the protocol.
Why I write hands-on reviews
What I look for in a deliverability test
When deliverability is in scope and hands-on access is available, these are the checks I consider. The article should state which checks were completed and should not turn a vendor-reported rate into an independent result.
- Seedlist coverage across providers. Gmail consumer + Workspace, Outlook consumer + Microsoft 365, GMX, Free.fr, Libero, Tiscali, plus a long-tail mix of corporate domains. A tool that aces Gmail and flunks Outlook is a tool I cannot recommend to an enterprise buyer.
- Warmup quality, not warmup presence. Most platforms now ship "warmup". Few do it well. I watch the warmup behaviour for a week before sending, then for two weeks during the campaign. Reputation drift is what kills SDR teams in month two - that is what the test catches.
- Bounce typology. Hard vs soft, syntactic vs SMTP vs greylisting, catch-all behaviour. I segment the bounce data because a 5% bounce on hard rejections is fine while a 5% bounce on greylisting tells you the tool is hitting your IP reputation.
- Sending IP behaviour. Shared vs dedicated, rotation logic, IP reputation across major blocklists (Spamhaus, SURBL, Barracuda). I check before, during, and after the test.
- SPF / DKIM / DMARC handling. Some tools quietly bypass SPF alignment. Some misconfigure DKIM rotation when you connect a Workspace tenant. These are the bugs that wreck deliverability silently.
How I work with Nicolas and Nathalie
I am one third of the review pipeline on this blog. The other two:
- Nicolas Finet - CEO Sortlist + Overloop. Brings product context, pricing analysis, and a European regulatory lens.
- Nathalie Saikali - Head of Sales Overloop. Operator pass. The "would I actually run this on my pipeline next Monday" sanity check that keeps theoretical wins from becoming published wins.
The byline and methodology note on each article identify its contributors and evidence. See the broader editorial criteria for how to interpret those disclosures.
Get in touch
Tool you want me to test? Pricing change you spotted in our comparisons? LinkedIn DM works. For factual corrections, email corrections@overloop.com with the URL and a source.